|
Sure... once in a while, by well known stakeholders is completely understandable and great. Who wouldn't want to see a soccer match with the best of the best stacked against each other on each team?
However, the recent trend for tournaments posted on the Team Liquid SC2 Tournament forum is completely ridiculous. Almost every tournament that I have participated in so far, has a degree of 'invitational' in it.
I do understand, however, that its a free world out there, and if you had enough money and wanted to make a tournament exclusively for pro-scene and only wanted to exclusively watch those players play, nothing is stopping you. However, it shouldn't be a trend that the rest of the community should follow, because thats not how competition is born. Has anybody ever asked the obvious question here? How did these players get famous in the first place? Obviously, someone somewhere, gave them a chance, watched them participate in the beginning of SC1 or WC3 or whatever game they played at, got really good without the help of invitationals. I'm sure there were a few invitationals back in the day too, but the # has simply gone too large to notice that invitationals are now the norm, and not the exception (which they should be).
A couple examples: Gosu Gamers SC2 Invitational
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=130944
I'm currently competing in the Gosu Gamer SC2 Invitational. To get to the final Ro16, I need to "qualify" to reach there. I'm not knocking the people that are already auto-qualified, they are all fine playered and most are well mannered, but honestly, who qualified them? Results from tournaments that they won in the past in which they were invited to? Yeah, results are results, and winners are winners, however, I look on the ladder everyday and Idra's record is just as imperfect as the next person under him. He still has losses even though he is #1 Diamond (doesn't mean anything btw), he also plays 8 hours a day, something most players don't have the time for.
To say that those 12 players that are automatically qualified were the best players and better than anybody else that signed up for this massive tournament, would be an insult to all those who signed up and a false. This wasn't a statement made by the tournament organizers, but it is implying something.
SC2 tournaments should be 60-80% or even more non-invitational, meaning, completely open. Instead, we are seeing more tournaments than ever with reserved spots for players and very few tournaments that have all their spots given in a free-for-all. If you are going to have qualifiers for a tournament, thats fine... just make sure that everyone has to qualify for it, not just the "lowly unknown uninvited scrubs that should be thankful they even got a spot, but won't even be casted until the ro16 b/c apparently nobody gives a shit about them" <-- Really, that is the type of message that you are sending to the masses, at least that is what I hear.
Global Gamer Invitational Response:
+ Show Spoiler +On July 13 2010 09:16 Saechiis wrote:Well I guess I'll explain for my part how the Global Gamers Invitational became how it is today. Please note that it's the GGI, the GGI2 hasn't been announced yet  So, JMS and I both had some extra money and we wanted it to go into eSports. We both loved Starcraft 2 and so we decided to team up and start a tournament. We had seen a lot of the great US and EU players, but knowledge of the Asian scene was limited to the 17173 SC2 WC and Tester in the Altitude Invitational. So we decided upon doing a global tournament, hence the Global Gamers Invitational name. Next step was deciding upon a format and we decided that in order to make a name for our tournament we would have to invite some great players. No-one would care about an unknown open tournament by two unknown people in the community. But then again, we were also hoping to give some no-name players a chance to prove themselves and so we invited 12 players and kept the remaining 4 spots open for qualifiers. The qualifiers kept growing until we had 128 people, which in retrospect ofcourse is a lot for only 4 spots. But we weren't planning on excluding any players that might be the next TLO (so to speak). The main purpose for new TO's like us is to make a name for ourselves and our tournament. If we had kept an all open tournament all the invited players probably wouldn't have participated, meaning our tournament would have created little buzz and would have died silently because no sponsor cares about tournaments that don't have huge buzz/ viewercounts. You have to realise that most tournaments aren't organised on behalf of the player, they are organised to give the viewers some spectacle. Viewers simply like seeing players that they know and most of these players have deserved it. The 12 invited players are all highly skilled SC2 players and I think all of them have a shot at winning. None of them got invited purely because they are a familiar face, they got invited because we think they are the best and will provide some epic matches. That said, when our tournament runs smoothly and gets good viewercounts it will be MUCH easier for us to 1. get sponsors 2. get players 3. organise more of an open tournament. It's not just the players that have to get known before they can get things done Seriously Paramore, the entire oGs team is playing in the qualifiers and we all know that at least half of them have a good chance at winning the whole thing. Even though they weren't seeded they said "ok" and are starting from step 1, just like you. If you manage to beat Cool in the Ro16 of the qualifiers, or even if you take 1 game off him, people will remember that and say "hmmm, he's pretty good, we should invite him for a showmatch". All our matches, even the qualifiers, are being commentated and distributed so you have a good chance of proving yourself.
Example 2: Wolf Cup 2
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=133169
I talked to the organizer of this tournament. He's a really nice guy and hell, I'd even say we were friends after a few conversations. His tournament, is not very wide known, certainly not as large as GosuGamers SC2 invitational and only had a $50 prize pool out of his own pocket as opposed to a $1500 with t-shirts and hardware sponsors etc....
Even then, he still reserved the last few spots for well-knowns and put a "star" beside the names of those that "deserved" it. I have no hard-feelings, I didn't even get a star beside my name until I pmed him... I really didn't care whether or not I had a star or not, to be honest, I think every single person that signed up for that tournament deserved a star...
If this is the trend that is going to be for the new SC2 scene, its going to be alot harder for really talented players to become competitive. After a grueling ro128 I will face in Gosu Gamer SC2, if I somehow make it to the ro4 which qualifies me, I have to face another ro16. Its like I basically fought ro 256 or ro 512, it really makes no difference since I have to face that many more opponents. Meanwhile, the comfortable 12, get to sit back... and when the time comes, will fight ro16 from ro16 without ever having to go through the trouble of organizing with other players, casting their own games or finding casters willing to cast them or lifting a finger to work hard to become "known" or "good". They didn't ask to be invited, but yeah, they were just invited, and that was that...
I'm not saying invitationals are bad, but too many are not good for the community and do more harm than good. This can't be the norm and shouldn't be. Competition is born from grass-roots, not from the top-down. People that aren't known, deserve a fair chance.
Anybody that plays poker, which this site obviously is dedicated to, knows that its alot harder to win a 10 million player tournament than it is to win 10-handed right off the start. Event he world-series of poker doesn't save seats for the "pros", they have to tirelessly work themselves up every single year. Its no different when it comes to SC2. If I have to play ro512 (or its equivalent, because playing Ro128--> ro4 and then reverting back to ro16 is actually the exact same amount of opponents as starting off the whole tournament ro512, my chances are basically 1/512 to win the tournament. As opposed to the player that started at ro16 being invited, his chances were 1/16. Its not complete luck, and SC2 has less deviation of odds than poker does, but the concept is the same. Skill can only take you so far sometimes, you need a little luck, whether its in poker or SC2.
Not to name drop to those that I beat in Wolf Cup, but the only person I lost to in that tournament was Morrow, who won that tournament. On my way to defeat, I defeated someone who was invited to Gosu Gamers SC2. Does that mean I should have been invited instead? No. Who decides? No matter how you put it, its not how good you are, its who you know. This is wrong.
What does the community think? Should invitationals be the exception or should they be the norm? How should we define our competition? Should they fight for it, or should they be spoon fed? Those that aren't known would have to fight so much harder.
Poll: InvitationalsThe Exception (289) 85% The Norm (50) 15% 339 total votes Your vote: Invitationals (Vote): The Exception
(Vote): The Norm
EDIT: I know how this thread can sound, that I'm just another player who is jealous of the pro-scene and whining about it, however, that is not what this is about. This is about there being too many invitationals. Like I said, nothing wrong with invitationals, they exist, fine, just don't let them be the main part of our community. I'll openly admit right now, I'm envious of those that don't have to fight it out in a huge tournament just to get "qualified" among a peer of "better known" players. I really wish I had that edge on opponents, I'd definitely win more tournaments on average. Wouldn't you?
I can say this because I have held my own against "well-known" players. Being well-known has nothing to do with how good you are at this game and I hope people continue to try hard so that they become well-known the harder way, cause those are the players that are worth cheering for.
As mentioned in this thread, HuK made his way up like that, but not many others did, yet are still invited.
EDIT 2: I'm really glad that this thread happened and that there was discussion for both sides of the point. Obviously I'm on the side that there shouldn't be as many invitationals (not that they shouldn't exist). We've learned alot of for and against for tournament organizers and our community:
Invitational/Reserve Pros
Easy to make and saves time
Viewers care more
Draws sponsorship (well, honestly, big tournaments draw sponsorships... PERIOD)
Prestige
Cons
Blocks out competition,
Odds are stacked against non-invitees and decent players kind of get shafted
Elitism and skewed beliefs about skill levels
Non-systematic decisions on who is invited
Unfair/Non-equal opportunity
|
I completely agree, invitationals are cool and all but i would love to see a HUGE bracket of people to see the best that are not even pros. I bet an unknown would win.
|
US.CraftCup.com and DigitalFightClub.com will be organizing a league that involves weekly games ... a points system for wins... and is completely open to any one living in north america...
each week they'll give away ~$100 and then the best players (by points) meet at the end of the month and ~$1,000 will be given away for that....
so don't sweat it dude.. there is at least one decent "open" tournament/league/event series on the way...
|
I absolutely agree with this post 
Even though I probably will never compete in SC2 due to, well, aiming for a regular boring 9-5 job.
However, I don't think it's fair to those individuals who actually want to be competetive at the highest level to just see their opportunities handed out to other people because of reputation.
But, Invitationals I guess is sort of like a "safe card" for the sponsors since they know the names will attract attention. Would you rather see the champion league final or me and my buds playing soccer behind the supermarket? That sort of mentality..
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
I agree that invitations shouldn't be the norm. It certainly makes it harder for lesser known players to win tournaments.
I think invitationals are more popular because its easier to organize and many tournaments are run with few organizers which is more incentive to run invitationals instead.
|
On July 13 2010 03:27 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
US.CraftCup.com and DigitalFightClub.com will be organizing a league that involves weekly games ... a points system for wins... and is completely open to any one living in north america...
each week they'll give away ~$100 and then the best players (by points) meet at the end of the month and ~$1,000 will be given away for that....
so don't sweat it dude.. there is at least one decent "open" tournament/league/event series on the way...
Yes, I'm not saying they don't exist, but there are more invitationals on this site than there should be, thats all.
|
On July 13 2010 03:27 Bob300 wrote:
I completely agree, invitationals are cool and all but i would love to see a HUGE bracket of people to see the best that are not even pros. I bet an unknown would win.
wut
there is a reason people get invited. its not like they're at the top because they've "broken the system".
It'd be nice if we could always have a qualifiers round like in TSL2 where people play for a certain amount of time to try and make the cutoff with their ranking, and then the tournament continues on from there.
unfortunately thats not always logistically possible so some tourneys are invi and some are open. I think it should be about 50/50 for both.
|
The problem is a tournament without having some big names in it will do nothing and not be worth a cent to potential sponsors. It's all about the name value. It's the same reason a ITL with LzGaMeR or TLO headlining it will outdraw one with a no name like Avilio in it.
You want $ and potential sponsors you do things like invitationals. if you want to have lame tournaments that no one cares about, you do no names.
It's all about the $
Also do not forget about the HDH/Day9 effect. About 70% of the SC fans I have talked with don't know someone exists if they have not seen them in the HDH or on Day's stream...
|
Another problem is that people are oftentimes invited out of popularity rather than skill. It sucks to see lesser players get invited over more deserving ones just because they are more well known and popular.
But, such is life!
|
I agree do a degree
For the time being while the game is still rising in popularity and no good ways of hosting tournaments has been given by blizzard, small scale invitationals are just that much easier to get together.
|
also you come off whiney in this.
its not like the people who get auto invites just get them because they're attractive or good at making hamburgers. its cuz they did what you're doing now: grinding their way through shitty tourneys and slowly making a name for themselves.
I had never heard of sheth or slush or kiwikaki or qxc until SC2 beta, so its not like they became famous just because of some inate random luck factor. they had to play a lot.
|
On July 13 2010 03:37 mOnion wrote:
also you come off whiney in this.
its not like the people who get auto invites just get them because they're attractive or good at making hamburgers. its cuz they did what you're doing now: grinding their way through shitty tourneys and slowly making a name for themselves.
I had never heard of sheth or slush or kiwikaki or qxc until SC2 beta, so its not like they became famous just because of some inate random luck factor. they had to play a lot.
This is a very good point. I remember a time when HuK did not get invited to the HDH. He was PISSED, btu at that point he did not have a big name. So he went out and whored himself out to every tournament in the world he could find and the ITL and is now regarded as one of the best on the planet. I guarantee he will not be skipped for HDH #2 or ANY major tournament.
|
Jimmy that sounds like a very cool manner in which to run a league and help people to establish themselves. Immediate reward weekly and the chance to become well known in an open league should be a lot of fun to play in and to watch.
And on topic, Paramore, you make a great point here. Fans enjoy seeing players whom they are familiar with playing in games they watch. It's, well I'd say a quality control mechanism and is much more of an incentive for said players to participate in a tournament since they will not have to play another eight games to have a shot at the prize pool. With this trend of tournaments paying thousands of dollars in beta, there is already enough incentive and seeing the known players work through many games with lesser known players seems like a great opportunity to grow the community.
|
On July 13 2010 03:33 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
The problem is a tournament without having some big names in it will do nothing and not be worth a cent to potential sponsors. It's all about the name value. It's the same reason a ITL with LzGaMeR or TLO headlining it will outdraw one with a no name like Avilio in it.
You want $ and potential sponsors you do things like invitationals. if you want to have lame tournaments that no one cares about, you do no names.
It's all about the $
Also do not forget about the HDH/Day9 effect. About 70% of the SC fans I have talked with don't know someone exists if they have not seen them in the HDH or on Day's stream...
While it is true that no names don't bring the $$$. Great Gameplay will always excel in tournaments. Such as the Open Wolf Cup 2 game between Zelniq and CheAse. Everyone knows Zelniq, and not many know my own teammate CheAse, hell even I don't know him that well. But that game will go down as one of the intense multitasking games in recent memory.
Invitationals should be the exception. However as more money is pumped into the sport, it will be more frequent. While I believe qualifiers should be setup like OSL or MSL, that may not be the norm for a while. Until then, players like MSV, Avilio or CheAse, will be left out until some major league team recognizes them.
|
The biggest and most enjoyable tournaments around have everyone start at the same point, that way the 'invitees' can show that they actually are the best there is, it also allows people to come through the scene and become 'names' should they play well enough to make it deep. It also is great for the spectators imo when upsets occur, yes you don't want every big name to get knocked out because they do attract viewers and attention, but people love underdogs, you just gotta look at things like the world cup, or even evo 2010(so many are now gamerbee fanboys)
|
On July 13 2010 03:33 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
You want $ and potential sponsors you do things like invitationals. if you want to have lame tournaments that no one cares about, you do no names.
It's all about the $
If this is the way things are heading I don't think SC2 will really last long. I don't think you can quantify saying that no one cares about "no names" because really what at least some people that watch SC2 care about is the level of games. I'm sure many would take an insanely good game over some of these "big names" that produce horrible games.
It's a matter of balance. Good players can't get big names if everything is invite only. All that happens is the scene stagnates because the "big names" land up being further and further from the top over time.
|
As a viewer I would like to see more variety in the tournaments. I also don't like how so many of them are invitationals. Perhaps this will change after beta?
I don't watch sports, but tell me, are not 99% of them NOT INVITATIONAL? As in, the players or teams play all year to COMPETE to get into said finals and such?
|
On July 13 2010 03:43 Dr.Smoke wrote:
I don't watch sports, but tell me, are not 99% of them NOT INVITATIONAL? As in, the players or teams play all year to COMPETE to get into said finals and such?
I know in football the only real "invitationals" are pre-season warmup type stuff.
|
there are many tourneys that aren't invitational only, you just don't realize it because its a heuristic. you only recognize the big names and then go "psh invite only" but then when you see a tourney that is open you dont commit it to memory.
|
while I do wish there were less invitationals A don't know what your talking about saying Idra's record is like the guy below him. The difference is last I checked I believed he was 65 and 19. how many players can do that? Haven't really seen anyone that can. I know Dimaga went like 23-0 when beta came back or someone said. Now I do agree though that inviationals they are fine every once in awhile but it seems there are too many atm.
|
On July 13 2010 03:23 Paramore wrote:
Meanwhile, the comfortable 12, get to sit back... and when the time comes, will fight ro16 from ro16 without ever having to go through the trouble of organizing with other players, casting their own games or finding casters willing to cast them or lifting a finger to work hard to become "known" or "good". They didn't ask to be invited, but yeah, they were just invited, and that was that...
This is unbelievable arrogance. Who are YOU to judge how hard other people have worked to get to the point where they are? Yes, it's a matter of recognition, and moreover it's a matter of consistency. You beat someone who was invited somewhere else? Go do it again until you're known. People will just write you off as a fluke win until you stop whining about the situation and start posting consistent results.
But I guess that's not the point of this post. The tournament structure IS what it is, and until there's signs point to a lot more background talent out there consistently taking invite-onlys out in tournaments the issue isn't worth discussing.
|
I don't know how much the poker analogy works here because of how much luck is involved in poker. In poker you can play perfect and lose. RTS's are a different beast, yeah you maybe able to sneak a game in and beat Idra (maybe), but the reality is in a best of 3 or more, the better player should win. So I doubt there will be an abundance of amateurs beating pros in SC2 tournaments like we see often in poker. My guess is if you made Idra play through a round of 128 he'd still make it to the round of 16 almost every time.
Think of it more like golf, most SC tourneys are like the Masters where the consensus top players get to play (because people know they are good, they've paid their dues and proven they belong). While less often there are Open tourneys where anyone can qualify to participate, and maybe an amateur can pull a Rocky and topple a pro.
|
On July 13 2010 03:45 mOnion wrote:
there are many tourneys that aren't invitational only, you just don't realize it because its a heuristic. you only recognize the big names and then go "psh invite only" but then when you see a tourney that is open you dont commit it to memory.
Actually, i have been constantly rolling around multiple websites and signing up for tournaments that I can make, most, have "reserve seating" for those people they want to invite later...
|
On July 13 2010 03:47 d3_crescentia wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:23 Paramore wrote:
Meanwhile, the comfortable 12, get to sit back... and when the time comes, will fight ro16 from ro16 without ever having to go through the trouble of organizing with other players, casting their own games or finding casters willing to cast them or lifting a finger to work hard to become "known" or "good". They didn't ask to be invited, but yeah, they were just invited, and that was that... This is unbelievable arrogance. Who are YOU to judge how hard other people have worked to get to the point where they are? Yes, it's a matter of recognition, and moreover it's a matter of consistency. You beat someone who was invited somewhere else? Go do it again until you're known. People will just write you off as a fluke win until you stop whining about the situation and start posting consistent results. But I guess that's not the point of this post. The tournament structure IS what it is, and until there's signs point to a lot more background talent out there consistently taking invite-onlys out in tournaments the issue isn't worth discussing.
well said
On July 13 2010 03:49 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:45 mOnion wrote:
there are many tourneys that aren't invitational only, you just don't realize it because its a heuristic. you only recognize the big names and then go "psh invite only" but then when you see a tourney that is open you dont commit it to memory. Actually, i have been constantly rolling around multiple websites and signing up for tournaments that I can make, most, have "reserve seating" for those people they want to invite later...
but you can still sign up. get over it.
|
In the end of the day the main reason there is so much coverage around invitationals and invitationals themselves is because the game isn't even out yet and using the hype around it with established names is the way to generate more hype.
I only hope the scene doesn't come to solely rely on them with open tournaments receiving little joy about from participation
|
It's still beta. I'd rather spend my free time watching a bunch on known Progamers then some new comers. Alot of these guys have been pro for awhile, they have long time pro records dating back to SC1, WC3 or other games.
Be happy there is a qualifier bracket there at all. As ICCup said big names bring big money. Who would tune in to watch any sport on TV with a bunch of no names who may or may not be good.
I would like to see some more Pro-Am events later on but now, not yet. Look at it this way, once all the Korean's start playing you aren't going to be worthy of any tournaments anyways. 
|
On July 13 2010 03:47 d3_crescentia wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:23 Paramore wrote:
Meanwhile, the comfortable 12, get to sit back... and when the time comes, will fight ro16 from ro16 without ever having to go through the trouble of organizing with other players, casting their own games or finding casters willing to cast them or lifting a finger to work hard to become "known" or "good". They didn't ask to be invited, but yeah, they were just invited, and that was that... This is unbelievable arrogance. Who are YOU to judge how hard other people have worked to get to the point where they are? Yes, it's a matter of recognition, and moreover it's a matter of consistency. You beat someone who was invited somewhere else? Go do it again until you're known. People will just write you off as a fluke win until you stop whining about the situation and start posting consistent results. But I guess that's not the point of this post. The tournament structure IS what it is, and until there's signs point to a lot more background talent out there consistently taking invite-onlys out in tournaments the issue isn't worth discussing.
I'm not arrogant and I have worked just as hard as most of those that were invited. I've played in just as many tournaments and have similar results. Yet nobody knows who I am because I failed to properly network. Yeah, thats my fault, but the bottom line is, they are where they are now because of who they know, not because they worked harder in SC2.
How hard you worked in SC1 or WC3 shouldn't be that big a factor as to who you invite to tournaments. I worked hard at WC3.. I was at WCG, doesn't mean I'm shit at SC2. Sure, it is a factor, but not to the extent its being dragged out to right now. I'm sure once things retail goes live and there are thousands of more players to choose from, this might change, however, this is how I see it and its my own opinion. Never in my post did I say I was better than anyone, and I have respect for my fellow players, I'm just saying the system is wrong.
|
On July 13 2010 03:39 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:37 mOnion wrote:
also you come off whiney in this.
its not like the people who get auto invites just get them because they're attractive or good at making hamburgers. its cuz they did what you're doing now: grinding their way through shitty tourneys and slowly making a name for themselves.
I had never heard of sheth or slush or kiwikaki or qxc until SC2 beta, so its not like they became famous just because of some inate random luck factor. they had to play a lot.
This is a very good point. I remember a time when HuK did not get invited to the HDH. He was PISSED, btu at that point he did not have a big name. So he went out and whored himself out to every tournament in the world he could find and the ITL and is now regarded as one of the best on the planet. I guarantee he will not be skipped for HDH #2 or ANY major tournament.
This almost exactly, I complained about it too when i first joined the scene and felt i was better then some players in the hdh. i think ggi2 isnt such a bad event becuz its invite/open at the same time which means sure some people get invited (me ofc im bias) and you can still qualify. I think its really possible whoever does come from qualifier at the same time can win the whole thing. On a normal week once the game released there are going to be tons of weekly open tournaments that have already been mentioned in this thread + (zotac/esl/cc/gosucoaching/etc.)
|
On July 13 2010 03:53 HuK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:39 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On July 13 2010 03:37 mOnion wrote:
also you come off whiney in this.
its not like the people who get auto invites just get them because they're attractive or good at making hamburgers. its cuz they did what you're doing now: grinding their way through shitty tourneys and slowly making a name for themselves.
I had never heard of sheth or slush or kiwikaki or qxc until SC2 beta, so its not like they became famous just because of some inate random luck factor. they had to play a lot.
This is a very good point. I remember a time when HuK did not get invited to the HDH. He was PISSED, btu at that point he did not have a big name. So he went out and whored himself out to every tournament in the world he could find and the ITL and is now regarded as one of the best on the planet. I guarantee he will not be skipped for HDH #2 or ANY major tournament. This almost exactly, I complained about it too when i first joined the scene and felt i was better then some players in the hdh. i think ggi2 isnt such a bad event becuz its invite/open at the same time which means sure some people get invited (me ofc im bias) and you can still qualify. I think its really possible whoever does come from qualifier at the same time can win the whole thing. On a normal week once the game released there are going to be tons of weekly open tournaments that have already been mentioned in this thread + (zotac/esl/cc/gosucoaching/etc.)
Yeah, things probably just need to equalize on release... However, the GGI2 is ridiculous that 75% of their final bracket was invite only... if they wanted more invitational names, they should have just made the bracket larger...
|
On July 13 2010 03:52 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:47 d3_crescentia wrote:On July 13 2010 03:23 Paramore wrote:
Meanwhile, the comfortable 12, get to sit back... and when the time comes, will fight ro16 from ro16 without ever having to go through the trouble of organizing with other players, casting their own games or finding casters willing to cast them or lifting a finger to work hard to become "known" or "good". They didn't ask to be invited, but yeah, they were just invited, and that was that... This is unbelievable arrogance. Who are YOU to judge how hard other people have worked to get to the point where they are? Yes, it's a matter of recognition, and moreover it's a matter of consistency. You beat someone who was invited somewhere else? Go do it again until you're known. People will just write you off as a fluke win until you stop whining about the situation and start posting consistent results. But I guess that's not the point of this post. The tournament structure IS what it is, and until there's signs point to a lot more background talent out there consistently taking invite-onlys out in tournaments the issue isn't worth discussing. I'm not arrogant and I have worked just as hard as most of those that were invited. I've played in just as many tournaments and have similar results. Yet nobody knows who I am because I failed to properly network. Yeah, thats my fault, but the bottom line is, they are where they are now because of who they know, not because they worked harder in SC2. How hard you worked in SC1 or WC3 shouldn't be that big a factor as to who you invite to tournaments. I worked hard at WC3.. I was at WCG, doesn't mean I'm shit at SC2. Sure, it is a factor, but not to the extent its being dragged out to right now. I'm sure once things retail goes live and there are thousands of more players to choose from, this might change, however, this is how I see it and its my own opinion. Never in my post did I say I was better than anyone, and I have respect for my fellow players, I'm just saying the system is wrong.
so how come other no namers have made it big and you haven't?
is the system only being wrong to you? even though you ALREADY should have connections cuz you went to WCG?
what you're saying is that you were actually a somebody who started playing a different game and is now a nobody and you are VERY bitter about the fact that there are other people who were ACTUALLY nobodies who became somebodies and now you're jealous and blaming the system.
i feel like im talking about kingdom hearts 2
|
On July 13 2010 03:57 mOnion wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:52 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 03:47 d3_crescentia wrote:On July 13 2010 03:23 Paramore wrote:
Meanwhile, the comfortable 12, get to sit back... and when the time comes, will fight ro16 from ro16 without ever having to go through the trouble of organizing with other players, casting their own games or finding casters willing to cast them or lifting a finger to work hard to become "known" or "good". They didn't ask to be invited, but yeah, they were just invited, and that was that... This is unbelievable arrogance. Who are YOU to judge how hard other people have worked to get to the point where they are? Yes, it's a matter of recognition, and moreover it's a matter of consistency. You beat someone who was invited somewhere else? Go do it again until you're known. People will just write you off as a fluke win until you stop whining about the situation and start posting consistent results. But I guess that's not the point of this post. The tournament structure IS what it is, and until there's signs point to a lot more background talent out there consistently taking invite-onlys out in tournaments the issue isn't worth discussing. I'm not arrogant and I have worked just as hard as most of those that were invited. I've played in just as many tournaments and have similar results. Yet nobody knows who I am because I failed to properly network. Yeah, thats my fault, but the bottom line is, they are where they are now because of who they know, not because they worked harder in SC2. How hard you worked in SC1 or WC3 shouldn't be that big a factor as to who you invite to tournaments. I worked hard at WC3.. I was at WCG, doesn't mean I'm shit at SC2. Sure, it is a factor, but not to the extent its being dragged out to right now. I'm sure once things retail goes live and there are thousands of more players to choose from, this might change, however, this is how I see it and its my own opinion. Never in my post did I say I was better than anyone, and I have respect for my fellow players, I'm just saying the system is wrong. so how come other no namers have made it big and you haven't? is the system only being wrong to you? even though you ALREADY should have connections cuz you went to WCG? what you're saying is that you were actually a somebody who started playing a different game and is now a nobody and you are VERY bitter about the fact that there are other people who were ACTUALLY nobodies who became somebodies and now you're jealous and blaming the system. i feel like im talking about kingdom hearts 2
I'm not bitter at all. I have a very clear mind and am calm about this. I just dont like seeing so many invitationals. I don't get why you are on my balls about this. You have already voiced your opinion that you are on the opposite end of the spectrum. Why are you trying to start a flame war by calling me arrogant and saying the system is only wrong with me? Obviously there are other players who feel the same way, just because you aren't one of them doesn't giev you the right to flame bait my thread. Honestly.
|
United States2095 Posts
Don't you think that you work harder to play SC2 because you want the prestige of being invited to these tournaments? That's one big reason why I play(to eventually get invited to big tournaments). I think its an important part of this game. In my eyes your just complaining that your not good enough yet. Get to work son!
|
the lack of chat rooms and global ladder rankings are definately very detrimental to no namers getting recognized T____T
|
On July 13 2010 03:59 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:57 mOnion wrote:On July 13 2010 03:52 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 03:47 d3_crescentia wrote:On July 13 2010 03:23 Paramore wrote:
Meanwhile, the comfortable 12, get to sit back... and when the time comes, will fight ro16 from ro16 without ever having to go through the trouble of organizing with other players, casting their own games or finding casters willing to cast them or lifting a finger to work hard to become "known" or "good". They didn't ask to be invited, but yeah, they were just invited, and that was that... This is unbelievable arrogance. Who are YOU to judge how hard other people have worked to get to the point where they are? Yes, it's a matter of recognition, and moreover it's a matter of consistency. You beat someone who was invited somewhere else? Go do it again until you're known. People will just write you off as a fluke win until you stop whining about the situation and start posting consistent results. But I guess that's not the point of this post. The tournament structure IS what it is, and until there's signs point to a lot more background talent out there consistently taking invite-onlys out in tournaments the issue isn't worth discussing. I'm not arrogant and I have worked just as hard as most of those that were invited. I've played in just as many tournaments and have similar results. Yet nobody knows who I am because I failed to properly network. Yeah, thats my fault, but the bottom line is, they are where they are now because of who they know, not because they worked harder in SC2. How hard you worked in SC1 or WC3 shouldn't be that big a factor as to who you invite to tournaments. I worked hard at WC3.. I was at WCG, doesn't mean I'm shit at SC2. Sure, it is a factor, but not to the extent its being dragged out to right now. I'm sure once things retail goes live and there are thousands of more players to choose from, this might change, however, this is how I see it and its my own opinion. Never in my post did I say I was better than anyone, and I have respect for my fellow players, I'm just saying the system is wrong. so how come other no namers have made it big and you haven't? is the system only being wrong to you? even though you ALREADY should have connections cuz you went to WCG? what you're saying is that you were actually a somebody who started playing a different game and is now a nobody and you are VERY bitter about the fact that there are other people who were ACTUALLY nobodies who became somebodies and now you're jealous and blaming the system. i feel like im talking about kingdom hearts 2 I'm not bitter at all. I have a very clear mind and am calm about this. I just dont like seeing so many invitationals. I don't get why you are on my balls about this. You have already voiced your opinion that you are on the opposite end of the spectrum. Why are you trying to start a flame war by calling me arrogant and saying the system is only wrong with me? Obviously there are other players who feel the same way, just because you aren't one of them doesn't giev you the right to flame bait my thread. Honestly.
sorry i might be being a bit too asshole-ish, i'll back off
|
On July 13 2010 03:52 Paramore wrote:
I'm not arrogant and I have worked just as hard as most of those that were invited. I've played in just as many tournaments and have similar results. Yet nobody knows who I am because I failed to properly network. Yeah, thats my fault, but the bottom line is, they are where they are now because of who they know, not because they worked harder in SC2.
Edit: I MAY have read this response wrong. Re-reading now
+ Show Spoiler +The difference between you and HuK is that HuK completely rocked everyone in the scene not named Sheth for the better part of two months straight, and is still placing in the top spot in like everything. There was a point where almost every tournament finals was HuK vs. Sheth. Also when he won he did so in impressive fashion completely dominating his opponent and is ULTRA aggressive.
You are a good player Paramore, but HuK is one of the very best Protoss players in the world. Top two if not the very best without a shout of a doubt. You still have a bit to go.
Comparing yourself to HuK is not going to help you. HuK has earned his right for these spots imo, and should not be forced to go thru a 128 man tourney to get his shot.
|
The more viewers you get the more sponsors you can get in future tournaments. I feel that this has a lot to do with it. I'd say a tournament full of known names that have history with each other will draw more viewers than tournaments with people that few recognize even if they are really good. I don't organize tournaments so I can't testify to this, but I imagine when the game has launched and the organization of the tournaments become more standardized (fixed sponsors etc) you'll see a more diverse format of them as well. It's easy to forget we are still in beta.
|
I agree. If the big names are really the best, then they'll end up in the finals anyway.
On the other hand, I can see how invites might be beneficial. First of all, all those top players may not have competed of their on volition if they weren't invited. Along the same lines, making sure the big names are there draws in more viewers, increasing popularity as well as sponsors.
|
Make a name for yourself? Plenty of open tournaments out there like Zotac, CraftCup, various one time tournaments, etc to make a name for yourself. I remember telling HuK to stfu and go win something when he was complaining about not being invited to an event. Long story short, he did and now he gets invited to a lot of tournaments. I don't see the amount of invitationals as a problem when there are plenty of open tournaments still around.
|
Enter the tournament... win the tournament... problem solved.
|
On July 13 2010 03:45 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:43 Dr.Smoke wrote:
I don't watch sports, but tell me, are not 99% of them NOT INVITATIONAL? As in, the players or teams play all year to COMPETE to get into said finals and such? I know in football the only real "invitationals" are pre-season warmup type stuff.
"invitational" isn't really a term you can use for teams representing stuff like "their country"
its a very limited potential set so....
Also, every league in existence is invitation on a larger scale, a hockey team can't just decide to be in the NHL...
|
the problem with open tournaments is there's no way to ensure quality play and it's probably a complete pain to organize. i'd like to see more opens too but until blizzard rolls out with a global ladder or tournament system it's going to be nearly impossible.
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 13 2010 03:39 Doriboi wrote:
Invitationals should be the exception. However as more money is pumped into the sport, it will be more frequent. While I believe qualifiers should be setup like OSL or MSL, that may not be the norm for a while. Until then, players like MSV, Avilio or CheAse, will be left out until some major league team recognizes them.
MSL and OSL are interesting to bring up. While qualifiers seem open, IIRC you have to be a progamer to enter which, in and of itself is already quality assurance. In a sense, OSL and MSL are also invite-only, it's just that no one complains because the "invitations" (progaming licenses) are handled by a governing body that everyone accepts.
In the long run, it seems like the medium that people are most likely to accept. With progaming licenses or the like, you have a minimum level of quality that is assured for sponsors and viewers by the skill required to obtain the license. At the same time, you're not locked into just inviting big names to each tournament
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
Why the hell is everyone giving him so much crap for this? Clearly, he isn't some noob and he's performed well in quite a few broadcasted games. I barely watch streams and I've seen this guy beat a good zerg on koth match.
Let the guy vent and maybe he'll come back with better results.
|
100% agreed with OP. imho it has gotten to a point where we have so many invite tournaments right now that it's more or less just a rehash of the same thing over and over again. It's starting to get a bit old seeing the same 16 or 32 fight it out over a sum of money. It has made tournaments like zotac cup, which are open to everyone, more interesting to watch than "Whatever invite only $5k". This because you get new players that show you new ways of playing the game which might turn out bad or great. And when it's great it's freaking awesome. You just wanna fistpump when player NotSoKnown takes down I-Played-BW-For-10-yrs-And-Own-Everyone cus rooting for the underdog is just so much fun. It also makes for a great surprise and who doesnt love a surprise.
But invite tournaments serve a purpose as well. They build up future interest in sc2 for potential sponsors and most importantly future fans and players. People that keep our community fresh and alive. Also we get hours upon hours of quality entertainment and personally I have never been bored since the beta started except for the last two weeks of the beta downtime.
In the end it's worth it but also makes the future even more promising and hopeful for when we have this huge pool of talented and proven players that will be duking it out together with lesser known players. When you can get quality games and upsets in one 128 or even 256 player tourney all at the same time. It's gonna be awesome!
|
Seriously stop whining.. I just went through the Tournament forums and the first 4 I clicked on had open slots through qualifiers.
What is your true complaint? That these people are getting invites, that their are too many invites, that you aren't one of them?
If you are the best, then you should be able to win from the first qualifier to the finals. Even 1 open spot means that if you really are that good, you will get it.
Is it because there are to many reservered spots? Well that's like someone else mentioned with the PGA Tour, those names sell seats... or ad space in our case.
You need to learn to sell yourself, as HuK has already been mentioned. Email Day9 or Husky or HD. Send them a replay pack. Email all the commentators. Stream here.
From just reading your posts, I know nothing about you, you seem upset that you aren't famous yet. This game is still in beta. That is why people who have a following from other games and showed skill in SC2 are being showcased, it's the only thing we have to go on.
|
I got a point in case against having everything be open invite: LzGaMeR vs. Boxer (no not THAT boxer) on Scrap Station.
Simply put the matches between the top guys are almost always more entertaining than a top guy vs a newb.
But in all reality if you have done as much as u said you have (and I know you, you have), and still are not known you need to look at yourself to figure out the problem. First of all switching names is NEVER a good idea, you built a pretty solid name as Paramore and for no apparent reason wanted to become Sinatra. Also maybe look at your playstyle, is it exciting to watch? Remember that people thought Iloveoov and Flash were/are boring cause of their macro style.
I keep pointing to HuK cause he's such a perfect example. I KNOW when I watch a HuK game that A: It's going to be very exciting, B: HuK applies some sort of pressure all game keeping the boring spots to a minimum, and C: Not to get out of my chair or blink cause that's all it takes for HuK to pull off a game.
From the spectator point of view, Micro > Macro, Aggression > Passivity, Creativity > Standard Play.
|
I think all tournaments should be open tournaments. This is only because I am not good enough to get an invite
Big open tournaments are definitely the best though, and once the game is released there should be plenty so I wouldn't worry.
|
edit:.............. edited
but im sure there will be more and more ro128 / ro256 weeklys/monthlys will popup after launch, giving people like me a better chance to get noticed when i win it every week.
|
Its only the beta so a few weeks into release i think participating ones will be out pretty often.
|
My two cents. I agree with OP, but I also agree with some of the other posters that are coming from the other side, I will try to explain...
I do think that Invitational tournaments, should be kept to the minimum. Keep these big tournaments for special occasions, like the HDH, the big world event that was on recently with some great names from Korea and china etc, and some one off matches. The rest of the tournaments should be (if they want to be recognized) big tournaments with a lot of entrants, newb and pro alike, and be correctly seeded (according to wins in other tournaments or such like). These have the habit of drawing people who, like HuK when he was unknown, or the OP Sinatra, or others who are relatively unknown, who are actually good enough to give good games, get broadcast because of perhaps, performances in previous tournaments, and then perhaps get invites to the invite only events...
On the other hand, if you dont put yourself out there like Diamond i think said before, then nobody is going to know who you are, to invite you to these events. But perhaps more of the events that are invite only, will get some of the lesser known players into the spotlight?
Its hard. We all want to watch great games, and like has been said before, pro vs pro is generally better and more exciting than just a random vs pro... But... well, with the hundreds of thousands of people that will be joining the SC2 scene, everyone needs a chance
|
There are a few reasons why invitationals make sense (not saying that they should be this way):
- Invitation lets players who we know are good get into the final stages of the tournament (RO16, w/e), and doesn't risk having them get eliminated by cheese or another good player that would also be invited.
- There is a degree of drama that surrounds well-known players playing against each other, which adds to the popularity and sometimes, the prize pool, of the tournament.
All in all, I think the relatively large tourneys should be something like half-invitational; if there is a SCII TSL, of course it shouldn't be invitational
|
The system you described is fairly standard for tournamants in real sports that are individual.
You want to play in Wimbledon or the Masters? You have two choices, one is being good enough, and consistently good enough to get an invite. And the other is to go through the qualification process where lots of people compete for only a few spots.
Poker is a poor comparison. Every participant in a poker tournament brings an entry fee, while most starcraft, or golf, tennis type individual sports don't. Tons of people come to the WSOP main event because you buy your way in. Most professional sports have the organizers fronting the prize money, and hence get to decide the method of who gets the spots.
Results speak. You want invites? Win tournaments that are open. And keep playing well. People notice eventually. No matter how unfair it may be that people who played SC1 consistently are more famous than you, thats just life. Writing posts won't change that, winning in SC2 will.
Edited typos.
|
I understand the OPs point... But from a casters perspective you have to realise that even though it would be more fair to make everyone ear thier spot; Sponsors can't afford to lose someone like idra in the early stages. The reason being the "famous" gamer is going to generate thousands and thousands of views.
|
On July 13 2010 04:11 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:39 Doriboi wrote:
Invitationals should be the exception. However as more money is pumped into the sport, it will be more frequent. While I believe qualifiers should be setup like OSL or MSL, that may not be the norm for a while. Until then, players like MSV, Avilio or CheAse, will be left out until some major league team recognizes them. MSL and OSL are interesting to bring up. While qualifiers seem open, IIRC you have to be a progamer to enter which, in and of itself is already quality assurance. In a sense, OSL and MSL are also invite-only, it's just that no one complains because the "invitations" (progaming licenses) are handled by a governing body that everyone accepts. In the long run, it seems like the medium that people are most likely to accept. With progaming licenses or the like, you have a minimum level of quality that is assured for sponsors and viewers by the skill required to obtain the license. At the same time, you're not locked into just inviting big names to each tournament
I'm pretty sure OSL and MSL also have players 'seeded' into higher rounds based on past performance as well. So the way those are run are really no different from invite/open tournaments anyways.
|
While I would like to see less invite only tournaments, I do understand why they exist. The organizers and their sponsers want viewers and site traffic, and that is far easier to obtain when you have a bunch of recognizable people in your tournament.
Sure those people can sign up of their own accord, but there are no guarantees that they'll find it worth their time.
Also invitationals are usually better from a cost/benefit ratio standpoint. Having to organize and cast all the lower tier matches is a signifigant burden, one that usually does not bring with it signifigant viewership (at least not nearly as signifigant as the end rounds of a tournament). Doing an invitational cuts out alot of work while still retaining the most "valuable" matches.
|
On July 13 2010 04:53 Oceaniax wrote:
While I would like to see less invite only tournaments, I do understand why they exist. The organizers and their sponsers want viewers and site traffic, and that is far easier to obtain when you have a bunch of recognizable people in your tournament.
Sure those people can sign up of their own accord, but there are no guarantees that they'll find it worth their time.
Also invitationals are usually better from a cost/benefit ratio standpoint. Having to organize and cast all the lower tier matches is a signifigant burden, one that usually does not bring with it signifigant viewership (at least not nearly as signifigant as the end rounds of a tournament). Doing an invitational cuts out alot of work while still retaining the most "valuable" matches.
You are also essentially "paying" the big names to be in your tournament. For instance IdrA or WhiteRa may not find it worth their time to compete in a tourney that starts in a RO128 with a small prize pool. That hurts the Tourney it's self because you lose out on well known progamers. If you let them skip the first round or two, which given their records they would have probably won, you increase the chances of them attending your tournament.
|
I think this is an interesting debate but being that this game is still in beta I think we should be grateful for what we have so far. Personally I've been overwhelmed with what has been an abundance of tournaments and streamed content for viewers like me to enjoy. I can only hope it continues as the game gets released.
I sympathize with the OP however as HuK and others in this thread pointed out there are many ways to get your name out there and if you continue to show up for these tournaments and post consistent results you will be invited to tournaments. In the future I think there will be plenty of great open tournaments but I feel like the invitationals because of their well-known players and larger viewership will constantly have larger prize-pools.
As an aspiring pro(anyone not just OP) I think you need to sell yourself a bit more as the community is getting so large and there are so many names out there now that its easy to get lost among all the players. I would think streaming yourself playing, getting on Husky's, HD's or Day9's streams and/or youtube channels would be the easiest way. It ain't easy but I think if you get there its probably pretty rewarding. GL in future
|
IMHO I would like just about an even split 50/50. I like playing in the open tournaments but I prefer watching the invitationals.
Actually before the beta went down I had no clue who you were, but sense then you have been signing up for tournaments left and right. When I saw your name on here I knew oh, that is the guy named Sinatra and I saw him playing on iccup stream the other day.
Of course I am just some random guy, but it shows how you personally are starting to have a name for yourself. I hope that given a few more months I can be in the same spot.
Best of luck.
|
No sport is non invite. Soccer has leagues, National cup is close but my town team havent a chance to compete with them. American sports doesnt even have a relegation and promotion system. Tennis, invite, Golf, Invite, Athletics, invites. I cant compete in any of the top tournaments there.
|
On July 13 2010 04:05 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:52 Paramore wrote:
I'm not arrogant and I have worked just as hard as most of those that were invited. I've played in just as many tournaments and have similar results. Yet nobody knows who I am because I failed to properly network. Yeah, thats my fault, but the bottom line is, they are where they are now because of who they know, not because they worked harder in SC2. Edit: I MAY have read this response wrong. Re-reading now + Show Spoiler +The difference between you and HuK is that HuK completely rocked everyone in the scene not named Sheth for the better part of two months straight, and is still placing in the top spot in like everything. There was a point where almost every tournament finals was HuK vs. Sheth. Also when he won he did so in impressive fashion completely dominating his opponent and is ULTRA aggressive.
You are a good player Paramore, but HuK is one of the very best Protoss players in the world. Top two if not the very best without a shout of a doubt. You still have a bit to go.
Comparing yourself to HuK is not going to help you. HuK has earned his right for these spots imo, and should not be forced to go thru a 128 man tourney to get his shot.
I think some people are really getting side-tracked as to what this thread is about...
The reason I made this thread is because I think there are too many invitationals and that its unfair to up-and-coming players, possibly like me, that have to go through the Ro256 or Ro512 or Ro128 and we see players that only do the Ro16. I'm not comparing myself to HuK and I'm certainly not saying that I am "so awesome you should invite me" I'm just saying, there should be LESS invitationals and MORE open-tournaments. That is the message. I'm not advertising myself, I am using myself as an example.
|
On July 13 2010 05:04 Neobick wrote:
No sport is non invite. Soccer has leagues, National cup is close but my town team havent a chance to compete with them. American sports doesnt even have a relegation and promotion system. Tennis, invite, Golf, Invite, Athletics, invites. I cant compete in any of the top tournaments there.
Most of what you listed there are all qualification based and league based. Most sports have a system in place that allows one to work their way up. They don't just invite team/players.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
Invitationals are logistically easier to run. In a perfect world, there's a greater than average percentage that the invited players would end up in the final rounds anyways. It's much easier for the tournament organizers to simplify a "foregone conclusion" than to grind it out and arrive there anyways. Further, if the prize isn't big enough warrant top players entering, they may be swayed to enter if they are given preferred status, which in turn means more people will be interested with the results.
So in short, it's easier, which is inherently obvious to everyone. Your post is absurd. You are basically saying "tournament organizers have a duty to do more work." No, they don't.
|
On July 13 2010 04:11 mahnini wrote:
the problem with open tournaments is there's no way to ensure quality play and it's probably a complete pain to organize. i'd like to see more opens too but until blizzard rolls out with a global ladder or tournament system it's going to be nearly impossible.
One way around this has already been found. "Diamond Only can sign up" . There is a ladder, everybody is included. Anybody can be promoted to Diamond if they win enough. It's not exclusive and its not elitist. Its a simple qualification and, while not a completely accurate gauge for skill, still somewhat effective.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself.
|
On July 13 2010 03:27 Bob300 wrote:
I completely agree, invitationals are cool and all but i would love to see a HUGE bracket of people to see the best that are not even pros. I bet an unknown would win.
Ahh have you seen the Zotac cup? up to 512 competing every week. And pretty much everytime its won by a well known player (or they make their name their).
|
An important thing to remember is that this is beta and the tournament are for beta. It sounds obvious, but it's important because it means that everything has to happen quickly. A tournament for phase 2 only has 1-2 weeks to run. It's really tough to run a comprehensive qualifying league/tournament or a large tournament in such a small time frame. So instead we have a lot of invitationals.
|
Giving people a chance to come through a grid, but giving some proven pros a bye to a particular round isn't an issue. If people keep consistently rising through prelims, they won't be a nobody anymore, and will start to be invited. Even faster if they win tournaments out of nowhere. Personally, if you're going to take away all of the invitational factor, then you need to make tournaments smaller.
This is about to be my personal opinion, so please treat it as such.
I feel that when poker and the World Series of Poker really exploded, it hurt to some degree the brand. It became harder for pros to dodge the massive flood of amateurs. The potential for bad beats was just higher in the new world order. Poker is not SC2 and SC2 is not poker, but the larger the field, the bigger the chance that something weird happens to snipe a big name. It's crazy but cool that tournaments are having Ro256 or Ro512 or Ro1024. But, if Jinro gets proxied in a single-elimination round, it's cool for the "no-name" that beat them, but it hurts the tournament overall. Viewership thrives on big names being far in tournaments.
Personally I think it's fine to have a couple round qualification grid that earns you the right to challenge an invited player in the Ro16 or Ro32 or whatever. It raises viewership, it gives no-names a chance to earn a spot in, and it lowers the volatility in a game full of cheese possibilities in a single-elimination game.
I think there should be full invitationals rarely to allow new talent to come in, but I think that hybrid-invitationals are not only ok but probably a good idea.
|
While the $$$ tournaments will usually be part-invitational there will probably be dozens of cups which everyone can join. You just got to work your way up I guess.
|
On July 13 2010 05:11 Chill wrote:
Invitationals are logistically easier to run. In a perfect world, there's a greater than average percentage that the invited players would end up in the final rounds anyways. It's much easier for the tournament organizers to simplify a "foregone conclusion" than to grind it out and arrive there anyways. Further, if the prize isn't big enough warrant top players entering, they may be swayed to enter if they are given preferred status, which in turn means more people will be interested with the results.
So in short, it's easier, which is inherently obvious to everyone. Your post is absurd. You are basically saying "tournament organizers have a duty to do more work." No, they don't.
I think this response is somewhat absurd actually. If people want to be tournament organizers, they should know what to expect, yeah, its hard work, thats what you get. If you are saying that the top players end up being the top players anyway, and to forgo that conclusion and just make them the top, whats the point in having the tournament in the first place?
Every time I enter a tournament, I express my gratitude toward the organizers and thank them for doing this for the community, some organizers can vouch for me on this. I tell them I appreciate them because they put alot of effort into what they do.
If every tournament organizer thought it was the norm to just cookie cut their way to an exciting ro16 every tournament, well, we'd have alot of white-ra tournaments and not alot of "Oh Wow, we found an amazing player like TLO who is innovative and new" tournaments.
I love white-ra, but I also love innovation and "new", I'm sure he agrees with me himself in this aspect.
Bottom line: You can't just say, "oh we'll they'll make it to the finals anyways" and then make 256 people battle it out to fight Slayers`Boxer and then call whoever won that final round, the winner of the whole tournament. The difference is, the person who fought 256 other players, is more of a winner than if Boxer, but would receive no glory, if he lost. I think that is wrong and to call that absurd is rather absurd.
|
On July 13 2010 05:17 Logo wrote:
An important thing to remember is that this is beta and the tournament are for beta. It sounds obvious, but it's important because it means that everything has to happen quickly. A tournament for phase 2 only has 1-2 weeks to run. It's really tough to run a comprehensive qualifying league/tournament or a large tournament in such a small time frame. So instead we have a lot of invitationals.
For god sakes, stop using that "its beta" argument. Beta has nothing to do with how community-run tournaments are at now.
Tell me, what main difference will there be between the beta and the real game (which will be released in 2 weeks)? I guarantee you anything you list will not have any direct impact on tournaments, gameplay, or any other such things. At this point sc2 beta is a what-you-see-is-what-you-get kinda game for release.
|
On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself.
Nobody is denying that people like me don't want to be people like them. Why wouldn't we be jealous? Aren't you envious that you don't get glory? Its normal. Hell, I'd love to be invited to be in the top ro16 while the others had to duke it out, doesn't make my feelings of it any unfair. Yeah, I'd like an advantage stacked against my opponent, wouldn't you?
Alot of the top players are there because of the past. Alot of the top players I have beat. Think of players like Capoch, who have beat Idra and White-ra all in a days work on the ladder. Yet not many people know who they are, but I do.
I just think, there should be more chance for glory to those that don't have it yet. Not 75% stacked bracket. Inviting a few people and having them enter in, even the second round, of the bracket, nothing wrong with that. Inviting 75% of the final bracket, then creating, what is basically an extra tournament, is IMO more work and is actually 2 different tournaments with a single prize pool where the first 12 invitees have an "absurd' advantage over the rest. How can they not win? Think about it.
|
I totaly agree that we need some invites for most tournaments... and as many have stated those invited players are really the cream of the cream RIGHT NOW.
but instead of having 9,000+ invite, most tournaments could easily choose 5-9 invites 2-3 of each races and THAN open all other slots for players that wants to compete against the best since you only improve when playing the bests.
Personaly i'm FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR..... FAR away from those top players (currently diamond #400 ish rating), eventho i'm comming from a good War3 background... but I'm practicing verry hard, everyday for 4-5 hours... and I'd like to have a chance vs them. I know for a fact that I would probably get DESTROYED!!! but eh! thats part of the game... or maybe I'm just underestimating myself and I could actualy give them a run for their money? who knows.... :D
|
Some of the most major tournaments to take place in phase 1 had some players who were just embarrassing to watch-- usually players who were big names in the community or even sometimes as good Broodwar player.
I think part of that is because its a beta-- you wanna see how the people you know of are doing.
Some tournaments will be about the big names competing which I'm totally all right with, and to a certain extent invitationals means you can no what to expect and what to look forward to. As long as players who clearly dont deserve it don't get a shot that any high ranking diamond player could have made more use of.
|
Alot of cons were mentioned here, which i undoubtedly agree with, and as i DO think that invitationals should only be the exception, you also have to put in mind about how:
Alot of the game right now is about revewing replays and learning, and alot of newer players like to find one or two players playstyles, and watch a TON of replays following them to help learn and get practice. Now, if there were no invitationals at all, MANY of the "top popular" players would not have time to do qualifiers for all of these different tournements either, which would decrease the amount of vido recording of their games.
But yes i agree, Less invitational tournements should be made... I mean in the US vs CA games, they took some "popular" names from both countries, but there are many more better players than the ones "invited" to these.
BTW: I love your name =D
|
On July 13 2010 05:21 Energizer wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:17 Logo wrote:
An important thing to remember is that this is beta and the tournament are for beta. It sounds obvious, but it's important because it means that everything has to happen quickly. A tournament for phase 2 only has 1-2 weeks to run. It's really tough to run a comprehensive qualifying league/tournament or a large tournament in such a small time frame. So instead we have a lot of invitationals. For god sakes, stop using that "its beta" argument. Beta has nothing to do with how community-run tournaments are at now. Tell me, what main difference will there be between the beta and the real game (which will be released in 2 weeks)? I guarantee you anything you list will not have any direct impact on tournaments, gameplay, or any other such things. At this point sc2 beta is a what-you-see-is-what-you-get kinda game for release.
It's beta = we don't have weeks to parse through a RO256 or what ever. Once the game is launched we can have tournaments spanning weeks to months... I guess that is more of a league though.
|
On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself.
hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later)
but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more.
|
I agree that invitationals should not be the most common form of tournament, but they certainly do have their use when it comes to raising awareness.
Hopefully we will see loads of open tournaments already this year.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On July 13 2010 05:18 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:11 Chill wrote:
Invitationals are logistically easier to run. In a perfect world, there's a greater than average percentage that the invited players would end up in the final rounds anyways. It's much easier for the tournament organizers to simplify a "foregone conclusion" than to grind it out and arrive there anyways. Further, if the prize isn't big enough warrant top players entering, they may be swayed to enter if they are given preferred status, which in turn means more people will be interested with the results.
So in short, it's easier, which is inherently obvious to everyone. Your post is absurd. You are basically saying "tournament organizers have a duty to do more work." No, they don't. I think this response is somewhat absurd actually. If people want to be tournament organizers, they should know what to expect, yeah, its hard work, thats what you get. If you are saying that the top players end up being the top players anyway, and to forgo that conclusion and just make them the top, whats the point in having the tournament in the first place?
Everyone has their own motives. Not everyone is fishing for new talent when they host a tournament. Getting the best game / time efficiency lends itself to an invitational format.
Bottom line: You can't just say, "oh we'll they'll make it to the finals anyways" and then make 256 people battle it out to fight Slayers`Boxer and then call whoever won that final round, the winner of the whole tournament. The difference is, the person who fought 256 other players, is more of a winner than if Boxer, but would receive no glory, if he lost. I think that is wrong and to call that absurd is rather absurd.
I never said that, which is why I put forgone conclusion in quotations. Let's use the term 'expected finish.' As I keep saying, in terms of quality vs effort, the invitational format reigns supreme.
|
On July 13 2010 03:33 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
The problem is a tournament without having some big names in it will do nothing and not be worth a cent to potential sponsors. It's all about the name value. It's the same reason a ITL with LzGaMeR or TLO headlining it will outdraw one with a no name like Avilio in it.
You want $ and potential sponsors you do things like invitationals. if you want to have lame tournaments that no one cares about, you do no names.
It's all about the $
Also do not forget about the HDH/Day9 effect. About 70% of the SC fans I have talked with don't know someone exists if they have not seen them in the HDH or on Day's stream...
Do you realize that faulty logic? The only reason those players became known was because they WERE invited to those damn invite tourneys in the first place LMAO.
I 100% agree with this thread, I said this since the start of all these beta tournaments, but most people would flame, and anytime anyone else said the same thing people would come in the thread and say "YOU'RE TROLLING" or some stupid shit.
A lot of the SC1 talent that have not proven themselves in SC2 got free invite cards because they were good at SC1, when not all of them were the BEST OF THE BEST in SC2. Some got in because they had popular streams, most others though just got in because they knew someone that knew someone that knew them and were in the scene.
THat is not always the case, but it happened ALOT. And still happens.
Invitationals definitely must not be the norm, it's a lot a lot of BS.
And for your example Diamond, this is exactly what paramore is talking about. Just an ex (sorry LZ lol). i've played lz 4 times in the past, once in a tournament, and i'm 4-0 vs him so far. But because I am unknown, I do not get free invite cards/seeds to tournaments the same way he does. This is the stuff paramore is talking about.
Need more opens, more first round bo3s (so good players are not cheesed out, map imba'd out of the tourney), so yah 100% agree with this thread.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more.
Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good.
|
On July 13 2010 03:23 Paramore wrote:
Anybody that plays poker, which this site obviously is dedicated to, knows that its alot harder to win a 10 million player tournament than it is to win 10-handed right off the start. Event he world-series of poker doesn't save seats for the "pros", they have to tirelessly work themselves up every single year. Its no different when it comes to SC2. If I have to play ro512 (or its equivalent, because playing Ro128--> ro4 and then reverting back to ro16 is actually the exact same amount of opponents as starting off the whole tournament ro512, my chances are basically 1/512 to win the tournament. As opposed to the player that started at ro16 being invited, his chances were 1/16. Its not complete luck, and SC2 has less deviation of odds than poker does, but the concept is the same. Skill can only take you so far sometimes, you need a little luck, whether its in poker or SC2.
This arguments made my day.
Amazing.
I don't mind for invitational ONLY tournaments. I love to watch them.
But or you make it full invitational, or you make it free for all, but not a hybrid cz it's just unfair for those who are before RO/16 Invited players.
|
On July 13 2010 05:28 Spidermonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:21 Energizer wrote:On July 13 2010 05:17 Logo wrote:
An important thing to remember is that this is beta and the tournament are for beta. It sounds obvious, but it's important because it means that everything has to happen quickly. A tournament for phase 2 only has 1-2 weeks to run. It's really tough to run a comprehensive qualifying league/tournament or a large tournament in such a small time frame. So instead we have a lot of invitationals. For god sakes, stop using that "its beta" argument. Beta has nothing to do with how community-run tournaments are at now. Tell me, what main difference will there be between the beta and the real game (which will be released in 2 weeks)? I guarantee you anything you list will not have any direct impact on tournaments, gameplay, or any other such things. At this point sc2 beta is a what-you-see-is-what-you-get kinda game for release. It's beta = we don't have weeks to parse through a RO256 or what ever. Once the game is launched we can have tournaments spanning weeks to months... I guess that is more of a league though.
RO256 1 game (10-20 minuets) -> RO128
RO128 1 game (10-20 minuets) -> RO64
RO64 1 game (10-20 minuets) - > RO32
There. In 1 hour we went from 256 players to a more manageable 32 that can span however long the tournament organizer/sponsor wants. So your "we dont have enough time" point is mute.
|
"Even then, he still reserved the last few spots for well-knowns and put a "star" beside the names of those that "deserved" it. I have no hard-feelings, I didn't even get a star beside my name until I pmed him... I really didn't care whether or not I had a star or not, to be honest, I think every single person that signed up for that tournament deserved a star... "
LOL Starcraft 2 tournaments = Make a Wish Foundation?
|
On July 13 2010 05:37 Energizer wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:28 Spidermonkey wrote:On July 13 2010 05:21 Energizer wrote:On July 13 2010 05:17 Logo wrote:
An important thing to remember is that this is beta and the tournament are for beta. It sounds obvious, but it's important because it means that everything has to happen quickly. A tournament for phase 2 only has 1-2 weeks to run. It's really tough to run a comprehensive qualifying league/tournament or a large tournament in such a small time frame. So instead we have a lot of invitationals. For god sakes, stop using that "its beta" argument. Beta has nothing to do with how community-run tournaments are at now. Tell me, what main difference will there be between the beta and the real game (which will be released in 2 weeks)? I guarantee you anything you list will not have any direct impact on tournaments, gameplay, or any other such things. At this point sc2 beta is a what-you-see-is-what-you-get kinda game for release. It's beta = we don't have weeks to parse through a RO256 or what ever. Once the game is launched we can have tournaments spanning weeks to months... I guess that is more of a league though. RO256 1 game (10-20 minuets) -> RO128 RO128 1 game (10-20 minuets) -> RO64 RO64 1 game (10-20 minuets) - > RO32 There. In 1 hour we went from 256 players to a more manageable 32 that can span however long the tournament organizer/sponsor wants. So your "we dont have enough time" point is mute.
imo most tournaments should change their format to have every round as BO3. Makes it less luck oriented when there is a bigger pool of good players. Yes, it takes longer, but it's well worth it if you want to establish a "scene."
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On July 13 2010 05:22 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. Nobody is denying that people like me don't want to be people like them. Why wouldn't we be jealous? Aren't you envious that you don't get glory? Its normal. Hell, I'd love to be invited to be in the top ro16 while the others had to duke it out, doesn't make my feelings of it any unfair. Yeah, I'd like an advantage stacked against my opponent, wouldn't you? Alot of the top players are there because of the past. Alot of the top players I have beat. Think of players like Capoch, who have beat Idra and White-ra all in a days work on the ladder. Yet not many people know who they are, but I do. I just think, there should be more chance for glory to those that don't have it yet. Not 75% stacked bracket. Inviting a few people and having them enter in, even the second round, of the bracket, nothing wrong with that. Inviting 75% of the final bracket, then creating, what is basically an extra tournament, is IMO more work and is actually 2 different tournaments with a single prize pool where the first 12 invitees have an "absurd' advantage over the rest. How can they not win? Think about it.
I am not envious of something I don't deserve. They are known for a reason. You and I haven't done anything to put us in the same playing field, so we aren't known. When you do something like they did, you too will be known. If you accept there is an advantage why don't you look to put yourself in that advantageous situation instead of fighting the system?
I can see what you are saying but I don't agree with it. Everyone knows the Ro512 format is the most fair because everyone plays by the same rules. However, it's also the most work. I think it's fine if tournament organizers sacrifice some equality in the name of increasing efficiency. There are some added side effects which I've listed before.
|
On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good.
Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality.
If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit".
Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair).
|
United States22883 Posts
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention.
|
On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair).
"I cant enter US Open, because I havent played and won a lot of smaller tournaments, thats bullshit" That is what you come off as.
|
On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:
Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good.
im saying they did nothing in "SC2".... Via sc1 or other games doesnt matter according to alot of tournament hosts, its all about being in the in crowd and popular.
when you mention, we havent done anything what does that mean? ive won over 30 tournaments in my gaming career 3 top 3 wcg national places and a whole bunch of other achievements...
|
On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention.
what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in.
That is crazy.
the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified.
It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them.
they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments.
edit: just to re-iterate what i said all beta long, sC2 beta = hype yourself up wagon, that'll get you into tourneys =/ it's sad that you cannot just rely on skill alone right now. Hopefully this changes after the game is released.
|
On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments.
Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right?
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair).
Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them!
"Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them."
"Throwing is good but you can't do it so much."
"This tournament format is good but don't do it so much."
If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it.
I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments.
|
On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right?
Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds.
What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On July 13 2010 05:47 KiF1rE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:
Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. im saying they did nothing in "SC2".... Via sc1 or other games doesnt matter according to alot of tournament hosts, its all about being in the in crowd and popular.
Yep, I 100% agree. If we want to argue about that, as in "tournament hosts should be more careful about who they invite" then I think that would be a much more interesting conversation.
|
On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention.
In that case, then what is the merit in saying "I won the invitational of 2010"... ooooo big deal, it was already 90% over by the time you got to the ro16... "
But thats not the case, instead, its a snowball effect. Those that got invited, are now well known just for being invited (which has been a trend all throughout Beta). TLO is no exception, he's great, but he won ONE tournament and automatically he has a fan-club and based on that he is invited to everything that exists. Yeah, he's a great player, and I'm not saying he doesn't deserve a fan club, but I don't recall him winning tournaments en-mass to warrant being called "Top 16 player of the world" and given an invite to everything.
Lets say Jibba was invited to every tournament after he won a tournament early beta. He was literally put into ro16 every tournament. According to the statistics, he would finish in the top 16 every single time, even though he lost first round every time. Still top 16 in the world according to alot of people.
TLO is a great player, I'm not saying this is the case, but when you get invited to something over and over, you are automatically a great player because you got invited, not necessarily because you are a great player.
|
On July 13 2010 05:50 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right? Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds. What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free.
No player is auto-invited to the semis. People are auto-invited to the round of 16. OSL does the same thing. People should be happy that you dont need pro-licences and paying to play in tournaments.
|
Hmm I'd like to add my few cents to this:
Firstly, you don't have some god-given right to participate in every tournament Chill gave you the reasons that invite tourneys are run. You have to keep in mind that TO's are doing this in their SPARE TIME. Nobody is making a living running tournaments, or if I'm wrong and there is someone that is, chances are they're the kind of people running large open events.
Secondly, this is still a beta. Most TO's are running events to help generate publicity for the game. To do that you need to run an event people will WATCH. How many people do you think watch first round zotac cup matches? How many people do you think watch the semifinals and finals?
|
On July 13 2010 05:52 Neobick wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:50 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right? Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds. What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free. No player is auto-invited to the semis. People are auto-invited to the round of 16. OSL does the same thing. People should be happy that you dont need pro-licences and paying to play in tournaments.
Stop harping on things not related to the point at all. And once again, you do realize that the players auto-invited to the round of 16 get to FREELY skip over the ro128 in lots of these tournaments lately?
They are invited their, rather than having to work their way through the draw. Those are not as bad as some tournaments that were PURE invite only.
|
On July 13 2010 05:51 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. In that case, then what is the merit in saying "I won the invitational of 2010"... ooooo big deal, it was already 90% over by the time you got to the ro16... " But thats not the case, instead, its a snowball effect. Those that got invited, are now well known just for being invited (which has been a trend all throughout Beta). TLO is no exception, he's great, but he won ONE tournament and automatically he has a fan-club and based on that he is invited to everything that exists. Yeah, he's a great player, and I'm not saying he doesn't deserve a fan club, but I don't recall him winning tournaments en-mass to warrant being called "Top 16 player of the world" and given an invite to everything. Lets say Jibba was invited to every tournament after he won a tournament early beta. He was literally put into ro16 every tournament. According to the statistics, he would finish in the top 16 every single time, even though he lost first round every time. Still top 16 in the world according to alot of people. TLO is a great player, I'm not saying this is the case, but when you get invited to something over and over, you are automatically a great player because you got invited, not necessarily because you are a great player.
A lot of golf championships are invitationals in the format that you describe. People have to qualify to the event by attending proxy events, while certain players (past winners and top X in the world) get automatic berths to the field. It doesn't cheapen those tournaments in the least. It gives anyone a chance to participate and win, but doesn't unduly overburden the clearly top players in the world which draw all the crowds.
|
On July 13 2010 05:52 Neobick wrote:
No player is auto-invited to the semis. People are auto-invited to the round of 16. OSL does the same thing. People should be happy that you dont need pro-licences and paying to play in tournaments.
LOL, Are you fucking serious?
|
On July 13 2010 05:50 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right? Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds. What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free.
Golf is like it too. Big names get auto invited and don't have to mess around with qualifiers sometimes.
|
what are you talking about? there lots of tournaments that are not invitational. i played like 3 tournaments this weekend. and im not a known name. If you keep winnign these small tourneys then im sure your bound to get an invite
|
On July 13 2010 05:37 Energizer wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:28 Spidermonkey wrote:On July 13 2010 05:21 Energizer wrote:On July 13 2010 05:17 Logo wrote:
An important thing to remember is that this is beta and the tournament are for beta. It sounds obvious, but it's important because it means that everything has to happen quickly. A tournament for phase 2 only has 1-2 weeks to run. It's really tough to run a comprehensive qualifying league/tournament or a large tournament in such a small time frame. So instead we have a lot of invitationals. For god sakes, stop using that "its beta" argument. Beta has nothing to do with how community-run tournaments are at now. Tell me, what main difference will there be between the beta and the real game (which will be released in 2 weeks)? I guarantee you anything you list will not have any direct impact on tournaments, gameplay, or any other such things. At this point sc2 beta is a what-you-see-is-what-you-get kinda game for release. It's beta = we don't have weeks to parse through a RO256 or what ever. Once the game is launched we can have tournaments spanning weeks to months... I guess that is more of a league though. RO256 1 game (10-20 minuets) -> RO128 RO128 1 game (10-20 minuets) -> RO64 RO64 1 game (10-20 minuets) - > RO32 There. In 1 hour we went from 256 players to a more manageable 32 that can span however long the tournament organizer/sponsor wants. So your "we dont have enough time" point is mute.
Ouch...you've definitely never run any sort of event. Getting people to play their matches is a long and arduous task. Granted in a large tournament you can just DQ people like crazy for being late/not reporting their matches or whatever, but still to get 128 matches played is going to take longer than 20 minutes, no matter how good an organizer you are. Then there's dealing with disputes that are likely to crop up with that many matches played.
It's certainly possible to run a large bracket in a day or two, but the logistics are a nightmare and it's completely understandable to just not even want to try.
|
On July 13 2010 05:56 Spidermonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:50 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right? Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds. What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free. Golf is like it too. Big names get auto invited and don't have to mess around with qualifiers sometimes.
why do you think it has the perception of being a rich man sport that is difficult to get into? Because it is.
This is SC2, you should not have to go play high school popularity contest in order to be able to enter some high profile tourneys. The mass "invite-only" tourneys are very much BS.
If organizers or the community are afraid that good players would get cheesed or something out of the first round, then they should start doing bo3s for every round. And yes, the drawback is that takes longer.
|
On July 13 2010 05:54 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:52 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right? Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds. What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free. No player is auto-invited to the semis. People are auto-invited to the round of 16. OSL does the same thing. People should be happy that you dont need pro-licences and paying to play in tournaments. Stop harping on things not related to the point at all. And once again, you do realize that the players auto-invited to the round of 16 get to FREELY skip over the ro128 in lots of these tournaments lately? They are invited their, rather than having to work their way through the draw. Those are not as bad as some tournaments that were PURE invite only.
Related as hell to the point, we talked about tennis, and top-ranked pro-tennis players arent playing the whole tournaments, thats equally unfair if you are not logically unsound, in which case debating with you are just fun and fruitless.
Organize some tournaments yourself if you are complaining. Easy to complain, hard to do.
As I said, people are far to spoiled. Most sports you need pro-licenses or/and paying to enter top tournments like the zotac cup. If you say win two zotac cups in a row you surely will be invited to higher yeld tournaments. If you are so much better than everyone else, thats a small feat. But as long as not paying or doing anything complaining just makes it sound like you bite of the hand of the ones who feed you.
|
There is room for the occasional full-open and full-invitational tournament but in the long run, partial invitationals are going to be the most interesting to follow. Think OSL/MSL.
Established players SHOULD have some kind of advantage for being seeded, as a reward for past performance. This is because there is inherently a lot of luck in SC2 just because noone has come close to figuring out the game enough to decrease the luck factor. Even in SCBW, Flash's 70% win rate is deemed godly. Think about a 256-man tournament - the percentage that a 70% win rate player actually gets into the round of 16 is pretty damn small.
Since this is the beginning of SC2, the invitees are determined from the best information available - mostly the good players in SCBW, and a few new superstars of SC2. What I hope is that as we go along, the invitees are just the people who did well in the previous tournament. For example, for HDH2, I would like to see the players who made it to the ro8 get seeded into the ro16, as well as 8 new open spots to qualify for.
There is a place for full-open tournaments but you have to accept that many spectators would prefer to see some sort of invitational aspect to it. It's not an image thing - it's just what people prefer to see.
|
Both sides have a point. Having bronze-plat players in a tournament with pros is a waste of organizational time. However, right now every single person invited to these tournaments are SC1 or WC3 players. The best players are going to change as the game goes on, and players from other RTSes and even non-RTS players are going to get some spotlight. Creating a monopoly on these spots is going to keep this talent from being found.
The best way to do it is non-invitational but with an minimum entrance level. For example, at least Diamond with 250 ranking is required to sign up. It's the best of both worlds.
|
As some have mentioned, a lot of times it comes down to sponsors and the prize pool. Sponsors expect a certain return on their investment, in the form of increased sales and viewers. When most people see an advertisement for an upcoming tournament, they are more likely to tune in if it is a couple of pro well known gamers, compared to a few people they have never heard of. Same thing with BW games. The videos with the big names going head to had have the most hits. It is pretty much the exact same with other competitive events or sports. The big names draw, even when they arent the best. See John Daily
Take golf for example. Sponsors are allowed to let people into a tournament regardless of their record, because they know those names will help sell the tournament. Michelle Wie had several sponsor exemptions when she was qualified for the mens tournament. Small name golfers have a chance to play into a tournament. They play earlier in the week and have to go through a huge field of amateurs, but if they win, they are in the weekend tournament.
In the WSoP many amateurs do not have the buy in fee for the main event, so they play in on satellites. They have to play through a large field of no name players to win a slot in the main event. The odds that they will win it all are lower than the pros, but they have a shot. If they are good enough, they will have enough money to buy their way in next year and not have to win a satellite.
If the tournament does not have a sponsor to worry about, an open field is a good idea, but once a sponsor is involved, the organizers have to think about attracting as many viewers as possible. Like it or not, Big name players bring in more viewers. As long as tournaments have slots that are open for up and coming players, I do not have a problem with invitationals. Everyone has to start somewhere and prove themselves, pros had to start at the bottom like everyone else and imo have earn the right to skip the opening rounds of larger tournaments.
|
On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments.
Templars are fine, if you make too many of them, you won't have an army that can shoot a gun, therefore, don't make that many or you can't afford the rest of your army.
Throwing is good excersize, but don't do it too much or you'll throw out your arm, excersize in moderation.
Tournament format is good, however, its not good when it becomes the standard norm for tournament formats because it stagnates the competition and skews reality of how good any player is, so don't make that format standard.
I'm posting for the health of the community. I'd probably still be posting this if I were invited to all the tournaments, because there are honestly way too many invitationals to normal tournament ratios. I didn't give a specific ratio, I gave approximations. I don't have a personal wishlist, I'm voicing the opinion of people I've talked to and my own opinion about how things are done. Its not the ideal format and I don't think its perceived as acceptable. Its only perceived as acceptable to those that organize this and created this in the first place. I think if this were the norm, it would be unacceptable.
Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all.
|
On July 13 2010 05:59 iEchoic wrote:
Both sides have a point. Having bronze-plat players in a tournament with pros is a waste of organizational time. However, right now every single person invited to these tournaments are SC1 or WC3 players. The best players are going to change as the game goes on, and players from other RTSes and even non-RTS players are going to get some spotlight. Creating a monopoly on this spots is going to keep this talent from being found.
The best way to do it is non-invitational but with an minimum entrance level. For example, at least Diamond with 250 ranking is required to sign up. It's the best of both worlds.
As chill stated, as long as you play good you will eventually get your shot to prove yourself. Of course we need non-invite tournaments, which Ive seen plenty of so far in the beta.
|
On July 13 2010 05:57 Looky wrote:
what are you talking about? there lots of tournaments that are not invitational. i played like 3 tournaments this weekend. and im not a known name. If you keep winnign these small tourneys then im sure your bound to get an invite
I agree with you Looky, have you gotten an invite yet?
|
On July 13 2010 06:03 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:57 Looky wrote:
what are you talking about? there lots of tournaments that are not invitational. i played like 3 tournaments this weekend. and im not a known name. If you keep winnign these small tourneys then im sure your bound to get an invite I agree with you Looky, have you gotten an invite yet?
Ask him how many tournaments he won, how many he finished 2nd in. How many have you won btw?
|
On July 13 2010 05:58 Neobick wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:54 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:52 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right? Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds. What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free. No player is auto-invited to the semis. People are auto-invited to the round of 16. OSL does the same thing. People should be happy that you dont need pro-licences and paying to play in tournaments. Stop harping on things not related to the point at all. And once again, you do realize that the players auto-invited to the round of 16 get to FREELY skip over the ro128 in lots of these tournaments lately? They are invited their, rather than having to work their way through the draw. Those are not as bad as some tournaments that were PURE invite only. Related as hell to the point, we talked about tennis, and top-ranked pro-tennis players arent playing the whole tournaments, thats equally unfair if you are not logically unsound, in which case debating with you are just fun and fruitless. Organize some tournaments yourself if you are complaining. Easy to complain, hard to do. As I said, people are far to spoiled. Most sports you need pro-licenses or/and paying to enter top tournments like the zotac cup. If you say win two zotac cups in a row you surely will be invited to higher yeld tournaments. If you are so much better than everyone else, thats a small feat. But as long as not paying or doing anything complaining just makes it sound like you bite of the hand of the ones who feed you.
You've gotta be joking right? Top ranked pro tennis players ARE playing the entire tournament. Dare I say you're troll or completely ignorant?
And lol? You're saying people are spoiled? LMAO. Ok, I know not to take your posts seriously now thanks.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all.
Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community.
|
I think he didn't win any of them
(Sorry if I am wrong, Looky)
As far as I know there are 4 weekly open tournaments with prize money (+the nordic cup which is open but only for scandinavians), so there is plenty of opportunities to make yourself a name.
|
Does anyone disagree that an open tournament with a minimum-rating (i.e. 250 diamond) is the best idea?
Allows talent to surface, doesn't waste organizational time on people who are still learning the basics.
|
On July 13 2010 05:58 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:56 Spidermonkey wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right? Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds. What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free. Golf is like it too. Big names get auto invited and don't have to mess around with qualifiers sometimes. why do you think it has the perception of being a rich man sport that is difficult to get into? Because it is. This is SC2, you should not have to go play high school popularity contest in order to be able to enter some high profile tourneys. The mass "invite-only" tourneys are very much BS. If organizers or the community are afraid that good players would get cheesed or something out of the first round, then they should start doing bo3s for every round. And yes, the drawback is that takes longer.
So do you oppose the system or the way the system is being perceived?
Look at the viewer ratings for a PGA tournament. People don't watch to see who is going to win, they watch to see how Tiger Woods is doing. That is the same for SC2 games. I normally don't care if Joe Schmoe is playing, I want to see how TLO plays against WhiteRa or a IdrA/Lz grudge match. Just because YOU think that the PGA is rich man's sport doesn't mean everyone does.
There are enough open tournaments that this shouldn't be an issue. Learn to advertise yourself if you want to get into the big name tourney's. Like I said before, email Husky, HD, or Day9 and convince them to cast you.
|
On July 13 2010 05:58 avilo wrote:
why do you think it has the perception of being a rich man sport that is difficult to get into? Because it is.
This is SC2, you should not have to go play high school popularity contest in order to be able to enter some high profile tourneys. The mass "invite-only" tourneys are very much BS.
If organizers or the community are afraid that good players would get cheesed or something out of the first round, then they should start doing bo3s for every round. And yes, the drawback is that takes longer.
Holy crap there's SO many things wrong with this post. Firstly golf is hard to get in to because the top players are SO good that for anyone outside the top .0001% of players, they have to play the game of their life just to compete.
Second, it's a TO's decision what tournament they want to run. They don't have any "duty" to you, or to the community, to run events the way you want them run. And they ABSOLUTELY do not have any obligation to devote more time than they want to in order to run their event. You're a complete jackass for suggesting that TO's should just devote more time to make you happy. If you have the time to do it, then do it yourself. Not everyone does.
|
On July 13 2010 06:04 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:58 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:54 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:52 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right? Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds. What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free. No player is auto-invited to the semis. People are auto-invited to the round of 16. OSL does the same thing. People should be happy that you dont need pro-licences and paying to play in tournaments. Stop harping on things not related to the point at all. And once again, you do realize that the players auto-invited to the round of 16 get to FREELY skip over the ro128 in lots of these tournaments lately? They are invited their, rather than having to work their way through the draw. Those are not as bad as some tournaments that were PURE invite only. Related as hell to the point, we talked about tennis, and top-ranked pro-tennis players arent playing the whole tournaments, thats equally unfair if you are not logically unsound, in which case debating with you are just fun and fruitless. Organize some tournaments yourself if you are complaining. Easy to complain, hard to do. As I said, people are far to spoiled. Most sports you need pro-licenses or/and paying to enter top tournments like the zotac cup. If you say win two zotac cups in a row you surely will be invited to higher yeld tournaments. If you are so much better than everyone else, thats a small feat. But as long as not paying or doing anything complaining just makes it sound like you bite of the hand of the ones who feed you. You've gotta be joking right? Top ranked pro tennis players ARE playing the entire tournament. Dare I say you're troll or completely ignorant? And lol? You're saying people are spoiled? LMAO. Ok, I know not to take your posts seriously now thanks.
http://tennis.about.com/od/basicprotoursglossary/g/defseeding.htm
"Definition: Seeding is the system used to separate the top players in a draw so that they will not meet in the early rounds of a tournament. The top seed is the player the tournament committee deems the strongest player in the field. She and the second seed are placed at opposite ends of the draw so that, if they both keep winning, they will meet in the final round. The number of seeds is based on the size of the draw." Sounds a lot like an unfair advantage.
Edit: Oh I fucked up.
|
On July 13 2010 05:59 iEchoic wrote:
Both sides have a point. Having bronze-plat players in a tournament with pros is a waste of organizational time. However, right now every single person invited to these tournaments are SC1 or WC3 players. The best players are going to change as the game goes on, and players from other RTSes and even non-RTS players are going to get some spotlight. Creating a monopoly on these spots is going to keep this talent from being found.
The best way to do it is non-invitational but with an minimum entrance level. For example, at least Diamond with 250 ranking is required to sign up. It's the best of both worlds.
Pretty much agree with that. As right now that is how it is, there's a "monopoly" on spots going to people, which is dumb. But having copper players/bronze players entering pro tournaments is also ridiculous.
Just depends though, everyone has to have a chance.
|
On July 13 2010 06:04 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all. Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community.
If I wanted to bitch about not being invited, the TL.net SC2 General forum wouldn't be the place for me pitch my bitch at. I'd obviously bitch at the organizers of the tournament for not inviting me if I honestly wanted to bitch. You are reading my posts with the bias that I am only complaining for personal gain. However, this is not the case. Just because I have feelings of envy, does not skew my argument. I've already accepted that invitationals have merit and should exist, my argument was never about whether or not I should be in them, its whether or not so many should exist. Now do you get it?
|
On July 13 2010 06:03 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 05:57 Looky wrote:
what are you talking about? there lots of tournaments that are not invitational. i played like 3 tournaments this weekend. and im not a known name. If you keep winnign these small tourneys then im sure your bound to get an invite I agree with you Looky, have you gotten an invite yet?
i didnt win them, but winning them will get your name more known. its all about rep. get 1000+ points on ladder or win these tournaments. Some of the invitationals are only part invite so go and qaulify for the. How you think these guy get invited in the first place? I didnt know who TLO was but when he beat some great players in these tournaments with unique strats ,everybody knows him now and he was random in the beginning wow.
|
On July 13 2010 06:06 Neobick wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:04 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:58 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:54 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:52 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right? Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds. What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free. No player is auto-invited to the semis. People are auto-invited to the round of 16. OSL does the same thing. People should be happy that you dont need pro-licences and paying to play in tournaments. Stop harping on things not related to the point at all. And once again, you do realize that the players auto-invited to the round of 16 get to FREELY skip over the ro128 in lots of these tournaments lately? They are invited their, rather than having to work their way through the draw. Those are not as bad as some tournaments that were PURE invite only. Related as hell to the point, we talked about tennis, and top-ranked pro-tennis players arent playing the whole tournaments, thats equally unfair if you are not logically unsound, in which case debating with you are just fun and fruitless. Organize some tournaments yourself if you are complaining. Easy to complain, hard to do. As I said, people are far to spoiled. Most sports you need pro-licenses or/and paying to enter top tournments like the zotac cup. If you say win two zotac cups in a row you surely will be invited to higher yeld tournaments. If you are so much better than everyone else, thats a small feat. But as long as not paying or doing anything complaining just makes it sound like you bite of the hand of the ones who feed you. You've gotta be joking right? Top ranked pro tennis players ARE playing the entire tournament. Dare I say you're troll or completely ignorant? And lol? You're saying people are spoiled? LMAO. Ok, I know not to take your posts seriously now thanks. http://tennis.about.com/od/basicprotoursglossary/g/defseeding.htm"Definition: Seeding is the system used to separate the top players in a draw so that they will not meet in the early rounds of a tournament. The top seed is the player the tournament committee deems the strongest player in the field. She and the second seed are placed at opposite ends of the draw so that, if they both keep winning, they will meet in the final round. The number of seeds is based on the size of the draw." Sounds a lot like an unfair advantage.
RE-read a post I made earlier and you'll see I already posted what seeding essentially is. And seeding is perfectly fine, because it balances the aspect of having the great/known players in the tournament that people want to see, but allows new comers to challenge these players and make a name for themselves.
That is the huge difference between simply auto inviting people to deep rounds in a tournament, and between seeding them so that good players do not meet at the start but they still have to work their way and earn their way through.
|
On July 13 2010 06:06 Neobick wrote:http://tennis.about.com/od/basicprotoursglossary/g/defseeding.htm"Definition: Seeding is the system used to separate the top players in a draw so that they will not meet in the early rounds of a tournament. The top seed is the player the tournament committee deems the strongest player in the field. She and the second seed are placed at opposite ends of the draw so that, if they both keep winning, they will meet in the final round. The number of seeds is based on the size of the draw." Sounds a lot like an unfair advantage.
Seeding is the only way to make tournaments fair, actually. If you didn't seed tournaments, then you'd end up with absurd situations like the top 2 ranked players playing in the first round. THAT is unfair.
|
This thread is not about the nuances of tennis or golf. Its about what format the community wants as a norm for SC2. Do we honestly want so many invitationals, and even when we have invitationals, do we honestly want to give invited players so far of an advantage that its almost 75% probable that an invited player will win? Is it not enough for sponsors to simply KNOW that their horses are in the tournament, must the be given every advantage available for them to win as well?
|
I played Huk and sheth in these smaller tournaments and you wonder why these guys already have a name for themselves? they even play small tournaments and win them.
|
On July 13 2010 06:10 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:06 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:04 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:58 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:54 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:52 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:49 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 05:48 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 05:43 Jibba wrote:
ESPORTS, just like real sports, are not built on the foundation of competition > all. They work because sponsors want to give out money in return for advertising. Hevad and EG tournies are about the only exception, and as you've noticed, their payout is much lower than others.
So sponsors want attention and players want money. Inviting the best known players is the best way to draw lots of attention. what some crazy people seem to want is a "ruling class elite" of "professional known players" that are auto-invited to every tourney and do not have to work their way in. That is crazy. the good players will qualify if they can work their way through, but all these invite tourneys are lmao. Same damn people over and over again, auto-qualified. It'd be like auto qualifying nadal and federer for every single semi-finals of grandslams in tennis. That would be fucking ridiculous. Yes, they are that good that they will most *likely* get there, but that is the damn point, it's competition, and others have the opportunity to beat them. they are not "invited" to the semi-finals just because they are uber good. They worked their way up, and happen to be good enough to get that far every time in tournaments. Eh, you realise tennis players are seeded right? Yes, that's not the point. Seeding is perfectly fine, because it makes it so high profile players (that are recognized as such) do not end up playing each other in the first rounds. What is NOT fine, is auto-inviting those same players all the way into the semis for free. No player is auto-invited to the semis. People are auto-invited to the round of 16. OSL does the same thing. People should be happy that you dont need pro-licences and paying to play in tournaments. Stop harping on things not related to the point at all. And once again, you do realize that the players auto-invited to the round of 16 get to FREELY skip over the ro128 in lots of these tournaments lately? They are invited their, rather than having to work their way through the draw. Those are not as bad as some tournaments that were PURE invite only. Related as hell to the point, we talked about tennis, and top-ranked pro-tennis players arent playing the whole tournaments, thats equally unfair if you are not logically unsound, in which case debating with you are just fun and fruitless. Organize some tournaments yourself if you are complaining. Easy to complain, hard to do. As I said, people are far to spoiled. Most sports you need pro-licenses or/and paying to enter top tournments like the zotac cup. If you say win two zotac cups in a row you surely will be invited to higher yeld tournaments. If you are so much better than everyone else, thats a small feat. But as long as not paying or doing anything complaining just makes it sound like you bite of the hand of the ones who feed you. You've gotta be joking right? Top ranked pro tennis players ARE playing the entire tournament. Dare I say you're troll or completely ignorant? And lol? You're saying people are spoiled? LMAO. Ok, I know not to take your posts seriously now thanks. http://tennis.about.com/od/basicprotoursglossary/g/defseeding.htm"Definition: Seeding is the system used to separate the top players in a draw so that they will not meet in the early rounds of a tournament. The top seed is the player the tournament committee deems the strongest player in the field. She and the second seed are placed at opposite ends of the draw so that, if they both keep winning, they will meet in the final round. The number of seeds is based on the size of the draw." Sounds a lot like an unfair advantage. RE-read a post I made earlier and you'll see I already posted what seeding essentially is. And seeding is perfectly fine, because it balances the aspect of having the great/known players in the tournament that people want to see, but allows new comers to challenge these players and make a name for themselves. That is the huge difference between simply auto inviting people to deep rounds in a tournament, and between seeding them so that good players do not meet at the start but they still have to work their way and earn their way through.
Yeah, I did, sorry fucked up. Still same principle, living on former accomplishments. Where shall the line be drawn? I see the same problem, if the potential talent is being raped by federer and nadal every time, then how are they gonna advance? Joking aside. Still I think there are plenty of non-invites, plenty of invites and still if you prove yourself enough, you will end up like Huk. No problems at all.
And tell me why we arent spoiled?
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On July 13 2010 06:09 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:04 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all. Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community. If I wanted to bitch about not being invited, the TL.net SC2 General forum wouldn't be the place for me pitch my bitch at. I'd obviously bitch at the organizers of the tournament for not inviting me if I honestly wanted to bitch. You are reading my posts with the bias that I am only complaining for personal gain. However, this is not the case. Just because I have feelings of envy, does not skew my argument. I've already accepted that invitationals have merit and should exist, my argument was never about whether or not I should be in them, its whether or not so many should exist. Now do you get it?
I've understood all along, I just happen to disagree.
|
United States2095 Posts
On July 13 2010 06:09 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:04 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all. Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community. If I wanted to bitch about not being invited, the TL.net SC2 General forum wouldn't be the place for me pitch my bitch at. I'd obviously bitch at the organizers of the tournament for not inviting me if I honestly wanted to bitch. You are reading my posts with the bias that I am only complaining for personal gain. However, this is not the case. Just because I have feelings of envy, does not skew my argument. I've already accepted that invitationals have merit and should exist, my argument was never about whether or not I should be in them, its whether or not so many should exist. Now do you get it?
You say your not trying to say you should be in them. However in all of your posts complaining about invitational tournaments you make it sound like they should invite more people "like" you. Using you as an example, I don't realy know you that well. Have we ever played? Not saying I've played everyone "good" however out of the people who have been in all of the NA tournaments and NA events I know most of them. You... well once again using you as an "example" I woudln't invite you. (Mostly because you seem to be slightly whinish Nothing to do with your play style)
Getting well known by the players who play in inviationals is also a big thing. I've gotten invited to several tours because of that, and I've invited several people into tournaments because I know them. So back on the topic invitationals are easier to organize and more entertaining for spectators. (At least its funner for me to watch the ro16 then the ro512.
|
On July 13 2010 06:13 Looky wrote:
I played Huk and sheth in these smaller tournaments and you wonder why these guys already have a name for themselves? they even play small tournaments and win them.
Yes, but they worked their way through for their wins. The organizer didn't just simply invite them into the semis, or get sheth, huk, etc. and make a tournament with only them.
|
On July 13 2010 06:13 Paramore wrote:
This thread is not about the nuances of tennis or golf. Its about what format the community wants as a norm for SC2. Do we honestly want so many invitationals, and even when we have invitationals, do we honestly want to give invited players so far of an advantage that its almost 75% probable that an invited player will win? Is it not enough for sponsors to simply KNOW that their horses are in the tournament, must the be given every advantage available for them to win as well?
As a viewer, yes I am fine with it. Like I've already said I want to see IdrA, WhiteRa, Lz, NonY, and TLO play. Same reason I want to watch my favorite sports team play, not some random team from no where. I have a personal vested interest in these players because I know them.
Win small tournaments. Beat big names. Then maybe I'll start to care about you. I'm not being mean, just letting you know from a viewer perspective what I want... and since I watch most tourney's I am the target market.
|
On July 13 2010 06:16 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:13 Looky wrote:
I played Huk and sheth in these smaller tournaments and you wonder why these guys already have a name for themselves? they even play small tournaments and win them. Yes, but they worked their way through for their wins. The organizer didn't just simply invite them into the semis, or get sheth, huk, etc. and make a tournament with only them.
So which player that is being invited regularly did not work their way up?
|
I really think the best thing would be like buy-in tournaments. Have a 128 man tournament were you pay five or ten bucks to enter, and you can get a tournament with a big prize pool open to everyone pretty much automatically.
You could even have, say, then first round let people get their money back. Like winning the first game gets your 5 dollars back, and the prize pool would be the remaining 320 dollars for a 128 man tournament or 160 for a 32 man tournament.
|
On July 13 2010 06:11 altairian wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:06 Neobick wrote:http://tennis.about.com/od/basicprotoursglossary/g/defseeding.htm"Definition: Seeding is the system used to separate the top players in a draw so that they will not meet in the early rounds of a tournament. The top seed is the player the tournament committee deems the strongest player in the field. She and the second seed are placed at opposite ends of the draw so that, if they both keep winning, they will meet in the final round. The number of seeds is based on the size of the draw." Sounds a lot like an unfair advantage. Seeding is the only way to make tournaments fair, actually. If you didn't seed tournaments, then you'd end up with absurd situations like the top 2 ranked players playing in the first round. THAT is unfair.
First of all: there is nothing unfair about random, the universe is unforgiving when it comes to random, thats fair.
Second of all: seeding is much more fair than what is currently happening in GGI2.
GGI2 format (exagerated) : Lets make 10,000 people fight each other out, then the last person standing, won't be crowned winner, but has to play against God, IF HE WINS, he will be winner and get 1$500, if not, God will be the winner of all time and is clearly better than the 10,000 scrubs that had to fight to get to fight God himself. The 2nd place guy is clearly inferior and will be forgotten. After all, who teh fuk loses to God first-round... pch...
I see something wrong with the last part, don't you?
|
Also the NCAA BBall tournament works with play-in games to some degree as well. Had the tournament expanded to 96 teams, you'd actually have seen the first iteration of "byes" in the tournament. 32 teams would have gotten a first-round bye while 64 teams played for the right to play those 32 teams. You could arbitrarily push these rounds backwards to draw the clear line to SC2. That way you can have a Ro2048 and it doesn't stop the fact that at the end of the day you have 32 (or whatever number) pros playing against the winning 32 qualifiers.
Stop thinking about it like invites. Just think about it as pre-qualifiers.
|
Imo, invitationals lack the factor of "upsets". People like to see the underdogs playing at the level of the "pros" and giving them a run for their money. When you have a tournament filled with well-knowns it just takes that excitement out and makes it more dull. Successful unknowns keep the game fresh. TLO is a great example of this.
|
United States2095 Posts
|
On July 13 2010 06:19 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:11 altairian wrote:On July 13 2010 06:06 Neobick wrote:http://tennis.about.com/od/basicprotoursglossary/g/defseeding.htm"Definition: Seeding is the system used to separate the top players in a draw so that they will not meet in the early rounds of a tournament. The top seed is the player the tournament committee deems the strongest player in the field. She and the second seed are placed at opposite ends of the draw so that, if they both keep winning, they will meet in the final round. The number of seeds is based on the size of the draw." Sounds a lot like an unfair advantage. Seeding is the only way to make tournaments fair, actually. If you didn't seed tournaments, then you'd end up with absurd situations like the top 2 ranked players playing in the first round. THAT is unfair. First of all: there is nothing unfair about random, the universe is unforgiving when it comes to random, thats fair. Second of all: seeding is much more fair than what is currently happening in GGI2. GGI2 format (exagerated) : Lets make 10,000 people fight each other out, then the last person standing, won't be crowned winner, but has to play against God, IF HE WINS, he will be winner and get 1$500, if not, God will be the winner of all time and is clearly better than the 10,000 scrubs that had to fight to get to fight God himself. The 2nd place guy is clearly inferior and will be forgotten. After all, who teh fuk loses to God first-round... pch... I see something wrong with the last part, don't you?
Hyberbole only makes it seem like you have less to whine about so you try to make it bigger.
|
On July 13 2010 06:18 Neobick wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:16 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:13 Looky wrote:
I played Huk and sheth in these smaller tournaments and you wonder why these guys already have a name for themselves? they even play small tournaments and win them. Yes, but they worked their way through for their wins. The organizer didn't just simply invite them into the semis, or get sheth, huk, etc. and make a tournament with only them. So which player that is being invited regularly did not work their way up?
Stop trolling. Or do you really want people to start pointing out random names. There have been plenty. SC2 is a new game, and we all were new players to the game. When tournaments first started springing up there were plenty that did not work their way up.
That's not the point. The point is there should be less invitationals, and more open tournaments with seedings, and bo3s. If you have any better ideas, go ahead then.
|
On July 13 2010 06:15 Sheth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:09 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:04 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all. Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community. If I wanted to bitch about not being invited, the TL.net SC2 General forum wouldn't be the place for me pitch my bitch at. I'd obviously bitch at the organizers of the tournament for not inviting me if I honestly wanted to bitch. You are reading my posts with the bias that I am only complaining for personal gain. However, this is not the case. Just because I have feelings of envy, does not skew my argument. I've already accepted that invitationals have merit and should exist, my argument was never about whether or not I should be in them, its whether or not so many should exist. Now do you get it? You say your not trying to say you should be in them. However in all of your posts complaining about invitational tournaments you make it sound like they should invite more people "like" you. Using you as an example, I don't realy know you that well. Have we ever played? Not saying I've played everyone "good" however out of the people who have been in all of the NA tournaments and NA events I know most of them. You... well once again using you as an "example" I woudln't invite you. (Mostly because you seem to be slightly whinish Nothing to do with your play style) Getting well known by the players who play in inviationals is also a big thing. I've gotten invited to several tours because of that, and I've invited several people into tournaments because I know them. So back on the topic invitationals are easier to organize and more entertaining for spectators. (At least its funner for me to watch the ro16 then the ro512.
The ro16 would be just as entertaining regardless of whether or not 12 of the players were invited, because the players had to fight through ro512 just to get there, that in itself is an accomplishment. What did the "seeded" players accomplish before that point? Oh, they were good at Command and Conquer Red Alert, my bad, oh thats why they are there.... /end sarcasm
My argument is clear, whether you believe I have ulterior motives is not really up for discussion or the purpose I created this thread for. More fair system, less elitist system.
|
On July 13 2010 06:21 Sheth wrote:
No, because he's God.
God is only his alias, he's actually D+ iccup player that 6 lings all the time.. Final was ro1 and opponent was Terran on incineration zone with a ramp too large to block.
|
On July 13 2010 06:15 Sheth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:09 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:04 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all. Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community. If I wanted to bitch about not being invited, the TL.net SC2 General forum wouldn't be the place for me pitch my bitch at. I'd obviously bitch at the organizers of the tournament for not inviting me if I honestly wanted to bitch. You are reading my posts with the bias that I am only complaining for personal gain. However, this is not the case. Just because I have feelings of envy, does not skew my argument. I've already accepted that invitationals have merit and should exist, my argument was never about whether or not I should be in them, its whether or not so many should exist. Now do you get it? You say your not trying to say you should be in them. However in all of your posts complaining about invitational tournaments you make it sound like they should invite more people "like" you. Using you as an example, I don't realy know you that well. Have we ever played? Not saying I've played everyone "good" however out of the people who have been in all of the NA tournaments and NA events I know most of them. You... well once again using you as an "example" I woudln't invite you. (Mostly because you seem to be slightly whinish Nothing to do with your play style) Getting well known by the players who play in inviationals is also a big thing. I've gotten invited to several tours because of that, and I've invited several people into tournaments because I know them. So back on the topic invitationals are easier to organize and more entertaining for spectators. (At least its funner for me to watch the ro16 then the ro512.
Actually, I am saying they should invite more players like HuK, but how you read my words is up to you.
|
I think it's mostly because we are still in beta. I expect open ladders and tournaments after release.
|
On July 13 2010 06:22 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:15 Sheth wrote:On July 13 2010 06:09 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:04 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all. Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community. If I wanted to bitch about not being invited, the TL.net SC2 General forum wouldn't be the place for me pitch my bitch at. I'd obviously bitch at the organizers of the tournament for not inviting me if I honestly wanted to bitch. You are reading my posts with the bias that I am only complaining for personal gain. However, this is not the case. Just because I have feelings of envy, does not skew my argument. I've already accepted that invitationals have merit and should exist, my argument was never about whether or not I should be in them, its whether or not so many should exist. Now do you get it? You say your not trying to say you should be in them. However in all of your posts complaining about invitational tournaments you make it sound like they should invite more people "like" you. Using you as an example, I don't realy know you that well. Have we ever played? Not saying I've played everyone "good" however out of the people who have been in all of the NA tournaments and NA events I know most of them. You... well once again using you as an "example" I woudln't invite you. (Mostly because you seem to be slightly whinish Nothing to do with your play style) Getting well known by the players who play in inviationals is also a big thing. I've gotten invited to several tours because of that, and I've invited several people into tournaments because I know them. So back on the topic invitationals are easier to organize and more entertaining for spectators. (At least its funner for me to watch the ro16 then the ro512. The ro16 would be just as entertaining regardless of whether or not 12 of the players were invited, because the players had to fight through ro512 just to get there, that in itself is an accomplishment. What did the "seeded" players accomplish before that point? Oh, they were good at Command and Conquer Red Alert, my bad, oh thats why they are there.... /end sarcasm My argument is clear, whether you believe I have ulterior motives is not really up for discussion or the purpose I created this thread for. More fair system, less elitist system.
In this case, what's fair isn't what's best. Fairness isn't the highest ideal or the sole basis of "best". As a participant, I would. As a viewer, I consider "best" to be the most entertaining. The most entertaining is to get to see big name players I am familiar with. In addition, it's nice to see new players as well against those big names because it gives those players their seminal moment. Hell, that's why we know about TLO. An "unknown" that made it big in the TLI. Other people will get that opportunity, but viewers will still get to be assured of seeing the names they like instead of watching them unceremoniously vanquished in a Bo1 in the Ro512 by cheese.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On July 13 2010 06:22 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:15 Sheth wrote:On July 13 2010 06:09 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:04 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all. Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community. If I wanted to bitch about not being invited, the TL.net SC2 General forum wouldn't be the place for me pitch my bitch at. I'd obviously bitch at the organizers of the tournament for not inviting me if I honestly wanted to bitch. You are reading my posts with the bias that I am only complaining for personal gain. However, this is not the case. Just because I have feelings of envy, does not skew my argument. I've already accepted that invitationals have merit and should exist, my argument was never about whether or not I should be in them, its whether or not so many should exist. Now do you get it? You say your not trying to say you should be in them. However in all of your posts complaining about invitational tournaments you make it sound like they should invite more people "like" you. Using you as an example, I don't realy know you that well. Have we ever played? Not saying I've played everyone "good" however out of the people who have been in all of the NA tournaments and NA events I know most of them. You... well once again using you as an "example" I woudln't invite you. (Mostly because you seem to be slightly whinish Nothing to do with your play style) Getting well known by the players who play in inviationals is also a big thing. I've gotten invited to several tours because of that, and I've invited several people into tournaments because I know them. So back on the topic invitationals are easier to organize and more entertaining for spectators. (At least its funner for me to watch the ro16 then the ro512. The ro16 would be just as entertaining regardless of whether or not 12 of the players were invited, because the players had to fight through ro512 just to get there, that in itself is an accomplishment. What did the "seeded" players accomplish before that point? Oh, they were good at Command and Conquer Red Alert, my bad, oh thats why they are there.... /end sarcasm My argument is clear, whether you believe I have ulterior motives is not really up for discussion or the purpose I created this thread for. More fair system, less elitist system.
Your argument is idealistic but sadly untrue. A tournament with 8 unknowns fighting through the Ro256 will be decidedly less popular than one with 8 invited famous players. You can draw analogies from any sport to confirm this.
I know it's tangential to the main point, but I'm just saying it's not true. Big names draw big crowds. Especially because no one is going to be following a tournament closely all the the way from the Ro236 to witness those upsets.
|
On July 13 2010 06:21 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:18 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:16 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:13 Looky wrote:
I played Huk and sheth in these smaller tournaments and you wonder why these guys already have a name for themselves? they even play small tournaments and win them. Yes, but they worked their way through for their wins. The organizer didn't just simply invite them into the semis, or get sheth, huk, etc. and make a tournament with only them. So which player that is being invited regularly did not work their way up? Stop trolling. Or do you really want people to start pointing out random names. There have been plenty. SC2 is a new game, and we all were new players to the game. When tournaments first started springing up there were plenty that did not work their way up. That's not the point. The point is there should be less invitationals, and more open tournaments with seedings, and bo3s. If you have any better ideas, go ahead then.
Im arguing for status quo. Or that you make a tournament instead of complaining. I dislike people who expect without doing. Trolling? An factual argument without examples are meaningless. But you may wish we just spout the same things over and over again without giving empirical data. And by empirical I mean show me a player that has been invited/seeded more than 2 times that doesnt deserve it, show me the reason he doesnt deserve it or else you cannot say that people are being invited without deserving it without sounding like whining and not doing.
|
On July 13 2010 06:27 Neobick wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:21 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:18 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:16 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:13 Looky wrote:
I played Huk and sheth in these smaller tournaments and you wonder why these guys already have a name for themselves? they even play small tournaments and win them. Yes, but they worked their way through for their wins. The organizer didn't just simply invite them into the semis, or get sheth, huk, etc. and make a tournament with only them. So which player that is being invited regularly did not work their way up? Stop trolling. Or do you really want people to start pointing out random names. There have been plenty. SC2 is a new game, and we all were new players to the game. When tournaments first started springing up there were plenty that did not work their way up. That's not the point. The point is there should be less invitationals, and more open tournaments with seedings, and bo3s. If you have any better ideas, go ahead then. Im arguing for status quo. Or that you make a tournament instead of complaining. I dislike people who expect without doing. Trolling? An factual argument without examples are meaningless. But you may wish we just spout the same things over and over again without giving empirical data. And by empirical I mean show me a player that has been invited/seeded more than 2 times that doesnt deserve it, show me the reason he doesnt deserve it or else you cannot say that people are being invited without deserving it without sounding like whining and not doing.
Telling me and others that are posting our opinion that there should be less invites to go "host our own tournaments" is very retarded. I am not going to point out specific names, go look through all of the tournaments that there are up to this date yourself. Once again, that is not the damn point.
The point is there should be less invite only tournaments.
|
On July 13 2010 06:26 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:22 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:15 Sheth wrote:On July 13 2010 06:09 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:04 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:
[quote]
hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later)
but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all. Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community. If I wanted to bitch about not being invited, the TL.net SC2 General forum wouldn't be the place for me pitch my bitch at. I'd obviously bitch at the organizers of the tournament for not inviting me if I honestly wanted to bitch. You are reading my posts with the bias that I am only complaining for personal gain. However, this is not the case. Just because I have feelings of envy, does not skew my argument. I've already accepted that invitationals have merit and should exist, my argument was never about whether or not I should be in them, its whether or not so many should exist. Now do you get it? You say your not trying to say you should be in them. However in all of your posts complaining about invitational tournaments you make it sound like they should invite more people "like" you. Using you as an example, I don't realy know you that well. Have we ever played? Not saying I've played everyone "good" however out of the people who have been in all of the NA tournaments and NA events I know most of them. You... well once again using you as an "example" I woudln't invite you. (Mostly because you seem to be slightly whinish Nothing to do with your play style) Getting well known by the players who play in inviationals is also a big thing. I've gotten invited to several tours because of that, and I've invited several people into tournaments because I know them. So back on the topic invitationals are easier to organize and more entertaining for spectators. (At least its funner for me to watch the ro16 then the ro512. The ro16 would be just as entertaining regardless of whether or not 12 of the players were invited, because the players had to fight through ro512 just to get there, that in itself is an accomplishment. What did the "seeded" players accomplish before that point? Oh, they were good at Command and Conquer Red Alert, my bad, oh thats why they are there.... /end sarcasm My argument is clear, whether you believe I have ulterior motives is not really up for discussion or the purpose I created this thread for. More fair system, less elitist system. Your argument is idealistic but sadly untrue. A tournament with 8 unknowns fighting through the Ro256 will be decidedly less popular than one with 8 invited famous players. You can draw analogies from any sport to confirm this. I know it's tangential to the main point, but I'm just saying it's not true. Big names draw big crowds. Especially because no one is going to be following a tournament closely all the the way from the Ro236 to witness those upsets.
If White-ra lost first round in a ro256, wouldn't you want to follow the dragon-slayer and see how he did it throughout the rest of the tournament? If you seed properly, you won't have 8 randoms, you'll have 8 seeds or 8 dragon slayers, or what about those that can even best those that slay dragons?
It doesn't take that much effort to follow a tournament. A bracket can be easily accessible through a web-link at any point in time. Replays can be provided for past games. Its up to the organizer. Its not about how much work has to be done, but that is a quality tournament and ideal. There are probably even more prestigious ways to run things, but we can't have it all. I'm just saying, to have so many "cookie-cutter easy to organize" tournaments shouldn't be the norm since its not too many extra steps to seed properly.
If anything... top players would generate more replays if they started on the rest of the rounds the other players did... that in turn would draw more interest as well. Its not like our precious white-ra would lose first-round very often anyways, so I see no logical reason as to why he should start in the ro16 instead of the ro128... what.. all of a sudden he can't handle it?
|
On July 13 2010 06:29 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:27 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:21 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:18 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:16 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:13 Looky wrote:
I played Huk and sheth in these smaller tournaments and you wonder why these guys already have a name for themselves? they even play small tournaments and win them. Yes, but they worked their way through for their wins. The organizer didn't just simply invite them into the semis, or get sheth, huk, etc. and make a tournament with only them. So which player that is being invited regularly did not work their way up? Stop trolling. Or do you really want people to start pointing out random names. There have been plenty. SC2 is a new game, and we all were new players to the game. When tournaments first started springing up there were plenty that did not work their way up. That's not the point. The point is there should be less invitationals, and more open tournaments with seedings, and bo3s. If you have any better ideas, go ahead then. Im arguing for status quo. Or that you make a tournament instead of complaining. I dislike people who expect without doing. Trolling? An factual argument without examples are meaningless. But you may wish we just spout the same things over and over again without giving empirical data. And by empirical I mean show me a player that has been invited/seeded more than 2 times that doesnt deserve it, show me the reason he doesnt deserve it or else you cannot say that people are being invited without deserving it without sounding like whining and not doing. Telling me and others that are posting our opinion that there should be less invites to go "host our own tournaments" is very retarded.
Im not telling you, I am suggesting that you do. I think you can have an opinion, but if its complaining about other peoples efforts, MY opinion is that you should have a really good reason to.
|
On July 13 2010 06:29 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:27 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:21 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:18 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:16 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:13 Looky wrote:
I played Huk and sheth in these smaller tournaments and you wonder why these guys already have a name for themselves? they even play small tournaments and win them. Yes, but they worked their way through for their wins. The organizer didn't just simply invite them into the semis, or get sheth, huk, etc. and make a tournament with only them. So which player that is being invited regularly did not work their way up? Stop trolling. Or do you really want people to start pointing out random names. There have been plenty. SC2 is a new game, and we all were new players to the game. When tournaments first started springing up there were plenty that did not work their way up. That's not the point. The point is there should be less invitationals, and more open tournaments with seedings, and bo3s. If you have any better ideas, go ahead then. Im arguing for status quo. Or that you make a tournament instead of complaining. I dislike people who expect without doing. Trolling? An factual argument without examples are meaningless. But you may wish we just spout the same things over and over again without giving empirical data. And by empirical I mean show me a player that has been invited/seeded more than 2 times that doesnt deserve it, show me the reason he doesnt deserve it or else you cannot say that people are being invited without deserving it without sounding like whining and not doing. Telling me and others that are posting our opinion that there should be less invites to go "host our own tournaments" is very retarded. I am not going to point out specific names, go look through all of the tournaments that there are up to this date yourself. Once again, that is not the damn point. The point is there should be less invite only tournaments.
If the majority of people agreed with you, then yes it would be retarded. The fact that this is split down the middle really does mean that if you don't like it, then host your own... or convince someone who hosts tournaments to do it. It's clear at this point you aren't going to win the forums over.
|
On July 13 2010 06:22 Paramore wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 13 2010 06:15 Sheth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:09 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:04 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:28 KiF1rE wrote:On July 13 2010 05:13 Chill wrote:
Okay I reread your OP and there's a bad taste of jealousy in it. You keep using terms like "without lifting a finger" and "spoon fed". How do you think the invited players got their names out? By winning a lot of games. That's part of becoming known in any scene - pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to make a name for yourself. hmmm... the issue that i have is a vast majority of players in the SC2 scene being invited, did not work they're way up through SC2. they did it in other games... and according to a few tournament organizers here, previous accomplishments in other games dont matter, at least thats what i was told lol...(see the iccup tv tourney thread lol, signed up really early, like the first 10 or so and still waiting to be put into the "Open" sign up portion of the tourney several months later) but in reality what have a vast majority of popular SC2 players done in SC2 before invitationals? just about nothing. there was no working their way up... they played a previous game and then marketed themselves for SC2. but that is why i respect players like Huk alot more. Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all. Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community. If I wanted to bitch about not being invited, the TL.net SC2 General forum wouldn't be the place for me pitch my bitch at. I'd obviously bitch at the organizers of the tournament for not inviting me if I honestly wanted to bitch. You are reading my posts with the bias that I am only complaining for personal gain. However, this is not the case. Just because I have feelings of envy, does not skew my argument. I've already accepted that invitationals have merit and should exist, my argument was never about whether or not I should be in them, its whether or not so many should exist. Now do you get it? You say your not trying to say you should be in them. However in all of your posts complaining about invitational tournaments you make it sound like they should invite more people "like" you. Using you as an example, I don't realy know you that well. Have we ever played? Not saying I've played everyone "good" however out of the people who have been in all of the NA tournaments and NA events I know most of them. You... well once again using you as an "example" I woudln't invite you. (Mostly because you seem to be slightly whinish Nothing to do with your play style) Getting well known by the players who play in inviationals is also a big thing. I've gotten invited to several tours because of that, and I've invited several people into tournaments because I know them. So back on the topic invitationals are easier to organize and more entertaining for spectators. (At least its funner for me to watch the ro16 then the ro512. The ro16 would be just as entertaining regardless of whether or not 12 of the players were invited, because the players had to fight through ro512 just to get there, that in itself is an accomplishment. What did the "seeded" players accomplish before that point? Oh, they were good at Command and Conquer Red Alert, my bad, oh thats why they are there.... /end sarcasm My argument is clear, whether you believe I have ulterior motives is not really up for discussion or the purpose I created this thread for. More fair system, less elitist system.
To the public, no they are not. I'm a casual spectator, I enjoy watching players I recognize more than Joe Schmoe, even if Joe has a better build order. When I read about new tournaments and the first thing I do is to see who's in it. If there are only unknowns I'm not very likely to tune in to it however, his doesn't mean it's a bad tournament. I'm not unique and the sad part is that you depend on noobs like me if you ever wish to see a professional SC2 scene.
|
On July 13 2010 06:31 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:26 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 06:22 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:15 Sheth wrote:On July 13 2010 06:09 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:04 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 06:02 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:50 Chill wrote:On July 13 2010 05:41 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 05:32 Chill wrote:
[quote]
Okay, so then how did they get known? You are saying "The problem is known players did nothing to get known" which is completely irrational. Of course they did something, via SC1 or other games or streaming or winning SC2 tournaments. If you don't choose to accept those as valid reasons then I guess you can boycott the consensus of who the best players are, but that won't do you much good. Getting back to the point, invitationals are FINE, just not so many of them. Its like its a recurring theme, that anybody that wants to make a new tournament, apparently has to reserve seats or else apparently its a shit-tournament. This is a sad mentality. If someone makes a tournament and has a prize pool, that is already a worthy sacrifice to the community and should be respected and regarded as such. They shouldn't have to invite these "awesome players" just to draw attention to their tournament or have it not being labelled as "shit". Tournaments that don't have well-known's aren't shit-tournaments. If there weren't so many invitationals, people would stop thinking that. Its both disrespectful to the participants and to the tournament organizer. Why would there be alot of tournaments sprung up from small-beginnings if all you do is shit on the organizers for not having "big names" and instead having a "first come first serve with a height requirement" (which the latter is much more fair). Ugh. Don't you see how wrong this argument is? If you accept something is okay then you don't get to dictate the proportion of them! "Templar are fine but not if you make so many of them." "Throwing is good but you can't do it so much." "This tournament format is good but don't do it so much." If it's the ideal format, and it's perceived as acceptable, of course the majority of leagues will follow it. I think your post's tone should follow more of a personal wishlist as opposed to taking the tone of chastising tournament organizers for not providing your personal ideal ratio of invite : open tournaments. Am I not fair in my arguments? I don't think the community can grow if all we do is invitationals all the time, thats all. Well, forgive me if I'm reading into your posts wrong, but your goal seems to be getting yourself into more high-profile tournaments than an honest concern for the growth of a community. If I wanted to bitch about not being invited, the TL.net SC2 General forum wouldn't be the place for me pitch my bitch at. I'd obviously bitch at the organizers of the tournament for not inviting me if I honestly wanted to bitch. You are reading my posts with the bias that I am only complaining for personal gain. However, this is not the case. Just because I have feelings of envy, does not skew my argument. I've already accepted that invitationals have merit and should exist, my argument was never about whether or not I should be in them, its whether or not so many should exist. Now do you get it? You say your not trying to say you should be in them. However in all of your posts complaining about invitational tournaments you make it sound like they should invite more people "like" you. Using you as an example, I don't realy know you that well. Have we ever played? Not saying I've played everyone "good" however out of the people who have been in all of the NA tournaments and NA events I know most of them. You... well once again using you as an "example" I woudln't invite you. (Mostly because you seem to be slightly whinish Nothing to do with your play style) Getting well known by the players who play in inviationals is also a big thing. I've gotten invited to several tours because of that, and I've invited several people into tournaments because I know them. So back on the topic invitationals are easier to organize and more entertaining for spectators. (At least its funner for me to watch the ro16 then the ro512. The ro16 would be just as entertaining regardless of whether or not 12 of the players were invited, because the players had to fight through ro512 just to get there, that in itself is an accomplishment. What did the "seeded" players accomplish before that point? Oh, they were good at Command and Conquer Red Alert, my bad, oh thats why they are there.... /end sarcasm My argument is clear, whether you believe I have ulterior motives is not really up for discussion or the purpose I created this thread for. More fair system, less elitist system. Your argument is idealistic but sadly untrue. A tournament with 8 unknowns fighting through the Ro256 will be decidedly less popular than one with 8 invited famous players. You can draw analogies from any sport to confirm this. I know it's tangential to the main point, but I'm just saying it's not true. Big names draw big crowds. Especially because no one is going to be following a tournament closely all the the way from the Ro236 to witness those upsets. If White-ra lost first round in a ro256, wouldn't you want to follow the dragon-slayer and see how he did it throughout the rest of the tournament? If you seed properly, you won't have 8 randoms, you'll have 8 seeds or 8 dragon slayers, or what about those that can even best those that slay dragons? It doesn't take that much effort to follow a tournament. A bracket can be easily accessible through a web-link at any point in time. Replays can be provided for past games. Its up to the organizer. Its not about how much work has to be done, but that is a quality tournament and ideal. There are probably even more prestigious ways to run things, but we can't have it all. I'm just saying, to have so many "cookie-cutter easy to organize" tournaments shouldn't be the norm since its not too many extra steps to seed properly. If anything... top players would generate more replays if they started on the rest of the rounds the other players did... that in turn would draw more interest as well. Its not like our precious white-ra would lose first-round very often anyways, so I see no logical reason as to why he should start in the ro16 instead of the ro128... what.. all of a sudden he can't handle it?
I'll say that most of the time in Craft and Zotac and other large tournaments, you barely know a big name player lost. Sometimes it's more of a throw-away line in a live cast. You hear someone say "oh, so-an-so lost, ok, so who can we cast now?" They don't even explain who they lost to, nor do you really ever get to see it. That means you'd have to have the grid open yourself to notice, and then make a decision to follow that player (who still isn't having their games cast because they're an unknown) til they lose in a later pre-grid round.
It's definitely definitely worse from the general viewership perspective to have big names losing in Bo1 games early in large tournaments where not all games are cast.
|
On July 13 2010 06:33 Spidermonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:29 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:27 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:21 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:18 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:16 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:13 Looky wrote:
I played Huk and sheth in these smaller tournaments and you wonder why these guys already have a name for themselves? they even play small tournaments and win them. Yes, but they worked their way through for their wins. The organizer didn't just simply invite them into the semis, or get sheth, huk, etc. and make a tournament with only them. So which player that is being invited regularly did not work their way up? Stop trolling. Or do you really want people to start pointing out random names. There have been plenty. SC2 is a new game, and we all were new players to the game. When tournaments first started springing up there were plenty that did not work their way up. That's not the point. The point is there should be less invitationals, and more open tournaments with seedings, and bo3s. If you have any better ideas, go ahead then. Im arguing for status quo. Or that you make a tournament instead of complaining. I dislike people who expect without doing. Trolling? An factual argument without examples are meaningless. But you may wish we just spout the same things over and over again without giving empirical data. And by empirical I mean show me a player that has been invited/seeded more than 2 times that doesnt deserve it, show me the reason he doesnt deserve it or else you cannot say that people are being invited without deserving it without sounding like whining and not doing. Telling me and others that are posting our opinion that there should be less invites to go "host our own tournaments" is very retarded. I am not going to point out specific names, go look through all of the tournaments that there are up to this date yourself. Once again, that is not the damn point. The point is there should be less invite only tournaments. If the majority of people agreed with you, then yes it would be retarded. The fact that this is split down the middle really does mean that if you don't like it, then host your own... or convince someone who hosts tournaments to do it. It's clear at this point you aren't going to win the forums over.
To be fair, according to the poll it isnt :D. But I dont see any evidence for the things that they claim, just whine. So naturally I think complaining about other peoples efforts should be done with great care, and with good reasons. And most of all, with solid evidence.
|
Paramour run your own goddamn tournament and you can do it however you want to do it. If it works out and is really better and as good as you say then maybe other people will model after you. If not then maybe you will realize how good the opposing arguments you gloss over are.
|
Nobody wants to watch nobodies. Shit man, simple economics? Tournaments aren't run for free (monetarily or otherwise). Get your name/skill out there on your own. Nobody owes you anything.
EDIT: went and read the rest of the thread and just going to quote the below post (which is very eloquent and conveys what I wanted to fully say)
On July 13 2010 06:01 Tickmint wrote:
As some have mentioned, a lot of times it comes down to sponsors and the prize pool. Sponsors expect a certain return on their investment, in the form of increased sales and viewers. When most people see an advertisement for an upcoming tournament, they are more likely to tune in if it is a couple of pro well known gamers, compared to a few people they have never heard of. Same thing with BW games. The videos with the big names going head to had have the most hits. It is pretty much the exact same with other competitive events or sports. The big names draw, even when they arent the best. See John Daily
Take golf for example. Sponsors are allowed to let people into a tournament regardless of their record, because they know those names will help sell the tournament. Michelle Wie had several sponsor exemptions when she was qualified for the mens tournament. Small name golfers have a chance to play into a tournament. They play earlier in the week and have to go through a huge field of amateurs, but if they win, they are in the weekend tournament.
In the WSoP many amateurs do not have the buy in fee for the main event, so they play in on satellites. They have to play through a large field of no name players to win a slot in the main event. The odds that they will win it all are lower than the pros, but they have a shot. If they are good enough, they will have enough money to buy their way in next year and not have to win a satellite.
If the tournament does not have a sponsor to worry about, an open field is a good idea, but once a sponsor is involved, the organizers have to think about attracting as many viewers as possible. Like it or not, Big name players bring in more viewers. As long as tournaments have slots that are open for up and coming players, I do not have a problem with invitationals. Everyone has to start somewhere and prove themselves, pros had to start at the bottom like everyone else and imo have earn the right to skip the opening rounds of larger tournaments.
|
On July 13 2010 06:37 Neobick wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:33 Spidermonkey wrote:On July 13 2010 06:29 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:27 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:21 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:18 Neobick wrote:On July 13 2010 06:16 avilo wrote:On July 13 2010 06:13 Looky wrote:
I played Huk and sheth in these smaller tournaments and you wonder why these guys already have a name for themselves? they even play small tournaments and win them. Yes, but they worked their way through for their wins. The organizer didn't just simply invite them into the semis, or get sheth, huk, etc. and make a tournament with only them. So which player that is being invited regularly did not work their way up? Stop trolling. Or do you really want people to start pointing out random names. There have been plenty. SC2 is a new game, and we all were new players to the game. When tournaments first started springing up there were plenty that did not work their way up. That's not the point. The point is there should be less invitationals, and more open tournaments with seedings, and bo3s. If you have any better ideas, go ahead then. Im arguing for status quo. Or that you make a tournament instead of complaining. I dislike people who expect without doing. Trolling? An factual argument without examples are meaningless. But you may wish we just spout the same things over and over again without giving empirical data. And by empirical I mean show me a player that has been invited/seeded more than 2 times that doesnt deserve it, show me the reason he doesnt deserve it or else you cannot say that people are being invited without deserving it without sounding like whining and not doing. Telling me and others that are posting our opinion that there should be less invites to go "host our own tournaments" is very retarded. I am not going to point out specific names, go look through all of the tournaments that there are up to this date yourself. Once again, that is not the damn point. The point is there should be less invite only tournaments. If the majority of people agreed with you, then yes it would be retarded. The fact that this is split down the middle really does mean that if you don't like it, then host your own... or convince someone who hosts tournaments to do it. It's clear at this point you aren't going to win the forums over. To be fair, according to the poll it isnt :D. But I dont see any evidence for the things that they claim, just whine. So naturally I think complaining about other peoples efforts should be done with great care, and with good reasons. And most of all, with solid evidence.
That poll is very biased. The op is arguing we should have less invitationals or more open tournaments when, but that isn't what the poll is about. Of course people don't want invitationals as the norm. Ok, we don't have it as a norm right now either.
|
The OP sounds bitter. If you really deserve to hang with the top dogs, then earn your place.
|
On July 13 2010 06:45 Ocedic wrote:
The OP sounds bitter. If you really deserve to hang with the top dogs, then earn your place.
I never said I deserved it or that I wouldn't eventually try and earn my place. I'm willing to try and earn it.
I just think there should be less invitationals all around. Thats all. Or when you make an invitational, at least make it fair, not skewed.
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 13 2010 04:51 dogabutila wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 04:11 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2010 03:39 Doriboi wrote:
Invitationals should be the exception. However as more money is pumped into the sport, it will be more frequent. While I believe qualifiers should be setup like OSL or MSL, that may not be the norm for a while. Until then, players like MSV, Avilio or CheAse, will be left out until some major league team recognizes them. MSL and OSL are interesting to bring up. While qualifiers seem open, IIRC you have to be a progamer to enter which, in and of itself is already quality assurance. In a sense, OSL and MSL are also invite-only, it's just that no one complains because the "invitations" (progaming licenses) are handled by a governing body that everyone accepts. In the long run, it seems like the medium that people are most likely to accept. With progaming licenses or the like, you have a minimum level of quality that is assured for sponsors and viewers by the skill required to obtain the license. At the same time, you're not locked into just inviting big names to each tournament I'm pretty sure OSL and MSL also have players 'seeded' into higher rounds based on past performance as well. So the way those are run are really no different from invite/open tournaments anyways.
This is exactly my point. MSL and OSL are by far the best examples of a long-term functioning E-sports tournament, and the only way into them is by way of "invite" through earning a progaming license.
Until a reliable governing body emerges outside of Korea to handle progaming licenses, invitational tournaments are really the only way to ensure player quality in any way.
|
On July 13 2010 06:50 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 04:51 dogabutila wrote:On July 13 2010 04:11 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2010 03:39 Doriboi wrote:
Invitationals should be the exception. However as more money is pumped into the sport, it will be more frequent. While I believe qualifiers should be setup like OSL or MSL, that may not be the norm for a while. Until then, players like MSV, Avilio or CheAse, will be left out until some major league team recognizes them. MSL and OSL are interesting to bring up. While qualifiers seem open, IIRC you have to be a progamer to enter which, in and of itself is already quality assurance. In a sense, OSL and MSL are also invite-only, it's just that no one complains because the "invitations" (progaming licenses) are handled by a governing body that everyone accepts. In the long run, it seems like the medium that people are most likely to accept. With progaming licenses or the like, you have a minimum level of quality that is assured for sponsors and viewers by the skill required to obtain the license. At the same time, you're not locked into just inviting big names to each tournament I'm pretty sure OSL and MSL also have players 'seeded' into higher rounds based on past performance as well. So the way those are run are really no different from invite/open tournaments anyways. This is exactly my point. MSL and OSL are by far the best examples of a long-term functioning E-sports tournament, and the only way into them is by way of "invite" through earning a progaming license.
To expand the Korean SC scene paralell further, it seems the OP wants to skip courage, the B team, A team bench and go straight to the OSL/MSL.
Why should the organizers spend their time, effort and resources on unknown products (players) and have to deal with unknown returns on their investment?
|
On July 13 2010 06:52 Entropic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:50 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2010 04:51 dogabutila wrote:On July 13 2010 04:11 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2010 03:39 Doriboi wrote:
Invitationals should be the exception. However as more money is pumped into the sport, it will be more frequent. While I believe qualifiers should be setup like OSL or MSL, that may not be the norm for a while. Until then, players like MSV, Avilio or CheAse, will be left out until some major league team recognizes them. MSL and OSL are interesting to bring up. While qualifiers seem open, IIRC you have to be a progamer to enter which, in and of itself is already quality assurance. In a sense, OSL and MSL are also invite-only, it's just that no one complains because the "invitations" (progaming licenses) are handled by a governing body that everyone accepts. In the long run, it seems like the medium that people are most likely to accept. With progaming licenses or the like, you have a minimum level of quality that is assured for sponsors and viewers by the skill required to obtain the license. At the same time, you're not locked into just inviting big names to each tournament I'm pretty sure OSL and MSL also have players 'seeded' into higher rounds based on past performance as well. So the way those are run are really no different from invite/open tournaments anyways. This is exactly my point. MSL and OSL are by far the best examples of a long-term functioning E-sports tournament, and the only way into them is by way of "invite" through earning a progaming license. To expand the Korean SC scene paralell further, it seems the OP wants to skip courage, the B team, A team bench and go straight to the OSL/MSL. Why should the organizers spend their time, effort and resources on unknown products (players) and have to deal with unknown returns on their investment?
Well thats what some of the invites did... lol...
|
On July 13 2010 06:48 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:45 Ocedic wrote:
The OP sounds bitter. If you really deserve to hang with the top dogs, then earn your place. I never said I deserved it or that I wouldn't eventually try and earn my place. I'm willing to try and earn it. I just think there should be less invitationals all around. Thats all. Or when you make an invitational, at least make it fair, not skewed.
According to your logic how would an invitational be fair? (just curious =x)
Oh and its Global Gamers and not Gosu Gamers.
|
As a viewer and not a participant of tourneys, it is my opinion that having all these invite tourneys makes the scene much more boring. It's to the point where I feel like every tourney is the same 16 people playing against each other every week for money. I understand that (maybe) to most people this is preferable viewing to have the "top" players play each other for quality games, but to me it's just become tedious and actually turned me slightly off to SC2 as a whole.
Sometimes I need a little variety baby.
|
Read through most of this thread, and while I (Sorta?) sympathize with what the OP is saying, at the same time, the strong sense of entitlement and whining is very oft putting. Quite simply, I dont know if I speak for the majority, but the simple fact is that Invite Tournies are immensely more enjoyable for me the viewer to watch, and thus I would assume more attractive for potential sponsors as well.
While it sounds great in theory to have tons of 'unknowns' and underdogs who come out of nowhere to win it all, it just isn't that interesting for me to watch. I dont really care if its fair or not, I want to watch the big 'Names' play, their what draw me to the tournament in the first place. Its the same reason I dont bother following the multitude of other smaller tournies with tons of players I've never heard of. Are the players good? Who knows, but I wont be watching. Win enough of those smaller tournaments and then get invited with the big boys. I'm sure you'll get some attention then.
Recent example would be the awesome community grass roots started Global Gamers tourny. The invited players are a awesome who's who of names, but then you have a shitload of randoms playing. I tuned in and watched a few of them on youtube cause I was bored, and the level of play was pretty damn atrocious. No offense at all to those players, hell, they'd kick my ass, but the calibre is night and day between them and the 'pros'. It basically reminded me why I hate watching guys I've never heard of play.
|
United States2095 Posts
Paramore I now see it your way. How dare people who have been part of a TL.net community for years get invited into tournaments. How dare these people who create good tournaments not want my friend's bronze skills to play. How dare there not be plenty of tournaments like SIlver Stars, World Cup, or all of the other tournaments that require players to be below Diamond rank.
Oh wait, you say there are plenty of tournaments that include players who aren't that well known? You say that the invitational is already the rarity? Oh wow.. I so didn't know this, but don't worry Paramore. When I make my Sheth's Not Invitational Literally Everyone Can play tournament I'll invite you.
|
On July 13 2010 06:55 KobraKay wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:48 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:45 Ocedic wrote:
The OP sounds bitter. If you really deserve to hang with the top dogs, then earn your place. I never said I deserved it or that I wouldn't eventually try and earn my place. I'm willing to try and earn it. I just think there should be less invitationals all around. Thats all. Or when you make an invitational, at least make it fair, not skewed. According to your logic how would an invitational be fair? (just curious =x) Oh and its Global Gamers and not Gosu Gamers.
Seed the invitees at the first or second round instead of have them start in what is practically the semi-finals..
|
There are maybe 2 or 3 invitationals a month, compared to 4 or 5 open tournaments every single week.
Most of the guys that earn invites to the closed tournaments have made their reputation by consistantly performing well in the weekly Zotac, ESL and Craft Cups.
There's plenty of opportunity for unknown players to make a name for themselves if they're skilled enough, which is what most of the top players have already done. None of the established top tier players in SC2 are still getting by on their reputation from a previous game, they've all proven their skill in this one.
|
On July 13 2010 06:58 Sheth wrote:
Paramore I now see it your way. How dare people who have been part of a TL.net community for years get invited into tournaments. How dare these people who create good tournaments not want my friend's bronze skills to play. How dare there not be plenty of tournaments like SIlver Stars, World Cup, or all of the other tournaments that require players to be below Diamond rank.
Oh wait, you say there are plenty of tournaments that include players who aren't that well known? You say that the invitational is already the rarity? Oh wow.. I so didn't know this, but don't worry Paramore. When I make my Sheth's Not Invitational Literally Everyone Can play tournament I'll invite you.
Be sure to get casters for all the round of 512, 256, 128, rounds too. Why should casters only cast ro16 games?
|
On July 13 2010 06:58 Sheth wrote:
Paramore I now see it your way. How dare people who have been part of a TL.net community for years get invited into tournaments. How dare these people who create good tournaments not want my friend's bronze skills to play. How dare there not be plenty of tournaments like SIlver Stars, World Cup, or all of the other tournaments that require players to be below Diamond rank.
Oh wait, you say there are plenty of tournaments that include players who aren't that well known? You say that the invitational is already the rarity? Oh wow.. I so didn't know this, but don't worry Paramore. When I make my Sheth's Not Invitational Literally Everyone Can play tournament I'll invite you.
Thanks Sheth, I've never been invited to something before <3 I will make sure I will have the time of day for you in that case! Please, continue to skip over the conversation, especially the parts where tournaments should have requirements for entry instead of flat out invitationals... or how about the part where I mentioned that there was nothing wrong with invitationals, just that there are too damn many of them? Don't mind it, its nothing ^_^ All that matters is that I am invited, <3
|
On July 13 2010 06:58 Sheth wrote:
Paramore I now see it your way. How dare people who have been part of a TL.net community for years get invited into tournaments. How dare these people who create good tournaments not want my friend's bronze skills to play. How dare there not be plenty of tournaments like SIlver Stars, World Cup, or all of the other tournaments that require players to be below Diamond rank.
Oh wait, you say there are plenty of tournaments that include players who aren't that well known? You say that the invitational is already the rarity? Oh wow.. I so didn't know this, but don't worry Paramore. When I make my Sheth's Not Invitational Literally Everyone Can play tournament I'll invite you.
easy to say if you are already an invitee
|
On July 13 2010 07:02 Entropic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:58 Sheth wrote:
Paramore I now see it your way. How dare people who have been part of a TL.net community for years get invited into tournaments. How dare these people who create good tournaments not want my friend's bronze skills to play. How dare there not be plenty of tournaments like SIlver Stars, World Cup, or all of the other tournaments that require players to be below Diamond rank.
Oh wait, you say there are plenty of tournaments that include players who aren't that well known? You say that the invitational is already the rarity? Oh wow.. I so didn't know this, but don't worry Paramore. When I make my Sheth's Not Invitational Literally Everyone Can play tournament I'll invite you.
Be sure to get casters for all the round of 512, 256, 128, rounds too. Why should casters only cast ro16 games?
This bit of sarcasm is really the key. The bigger tournaments are also detrimental to the people trying to get better known. It's really hard to get your game cast in big tournaments of 64+ players. Unless you make it really deep, and even then your quarterfinal may not end up getting cast because two 'known' players are playing in the "must see" quarterfinal.
Hopefully the casting scene grows as quickly as the gaming scene and we can start to see tons more games getting casted.
|
I don't have a sense of entitlement to anything here. I stated a clear topic for my thread. Not once did I mention that I should be invited to anything.
|
United States2095 Posts
You're invited too Avilo.
Ok I know what your saying, but I really enjoy the hybrid of an invitational that includes the best and spots that are open for qualifiers. I think Global Gamers has a perfect set up. Just my 2 cents.
|
On July 13 2010 07:00 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 06:55 KobraKay wrote:On July 13 2010 06:48 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:45 Ocedic wrote:
The OP sounds bitter. If you really deserve to hang with the top dogs, then earn your place. I never said I deserved it or that I wouldn't eventually try and earn my place. I'm willing to try and earn it. I just think there should be less invitationals all around. Thats all. Or when you make an invitational, at least make it fair, not skewed. According to your logic how would an invitational be fair? (just curious =x) Oh and its Global Gamers and not Gosu Gamers. Seed the invitees at the first or second round instead of have them start in what is practically the semi-finals..
I was not for or against your point just to be clear but semis are 2 steps after the r16. So practically semifinals is not that accurate. If you ask me a r16 with 4 qualifiers like the global gamers its a really good starting place.
|
Invitationals are supposed to be the best tournies, the ones with high profile players who have won plenty of previous tournaments. These players have already showed their hard work in climbing the ladder. Now the audience gets to watch some of the best games on starcraft.
Now, of course there should be open invitationals so lesser knownn players can win those and get their name known. And there are. So I think the system is fine as it is.
|
On July 13 2010 07:07 KobraKay wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:00 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:55 KobraKay wrote:On July 13 2010 06:48 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 06:45 Ocedic wrote:
The OP sounds bitter. If you really deserve to hang with the top dogs, then earn your place. I never said I deserved it or that I wouldn't eventually try and earn my place. I'm willing to try and earn it. I just think there should be less invitationals all around. Thats all. Or when you make an invitational, at least make it fair, not skewed. According to your logic how would an invitational be fair? (just curious =x) Oh and its Global Gamers and not Gosu Gamers. Seed the invitees at the first or second round instead of have them start in what is practically the semi-finals.. I was not for or against your point just to be clear but semis are 2 steps after the r16. So practically semifinals is not that accurate. If you ask me a r16 with 4 qualifiers like the global gamers its a really good starting place.
Its the part where only 4 of the 128 other people that had to fight for it, get qualified into this elite circle... I guess its a tournament that got bigger than they expected it to be... I'm not trashing the GGI2, I'm a part of it.... good on the organizers for organizing something like this, I just wish there were more such great organizers organizing non 75% end-round invites so we can see some more action. Instead, its an injustice to the first 128 because they'll all be basically ignored by the community, whether I'm in it or not.
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 13 2010 06:56 R A V wrote:
As a viewer and not a participant of tourneys, it is my opinion that having all these invite tourneys makes the scene much more boring. It's to the point where I feel like every tourney is the same 16 people playing against each other every week for money. I understand that (maybe) to most people this is preferable viewing to have the "top" players play each other for quality games, but to me it's just become tedious and actually turned me slightly off to SC2 as a whole.
Sometimes I need a little variety baby.
It'll create less variety than you think. Using an SC1 analogy again, you *could* force Flash and Jaedong to have to grind through preliminaries every time to get back into the OSL and MSL, but do you *really* think that they wouldn't make it? And even if they did, would it really produce better games? Most of the time when a player gets ousted from a league by a nobody in SC1, that player ends up just failing badly in the next round, and we just end up with an overall worse set of games for the rounds to come.
You could open OSL and MSL to amateurs, but at the Ro32 and Ro16 level it would make no difference in the participants. All it would do is create a logistical nightmare for the lower levels.
|
On July 13 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote:
Invitationals are supposed to be the best tournies, the ones with high profile players who have won plenty of previous tournaments. These players have already showed their hard work in climbing the ladder. Now the audience gets to watch some of the best games on starcraft.
Now, of course there should be open invitationals so lesser knownn players can win those and get their name known. And there are. So I think the system is fine as it is.
If 90% of the tournies were invitationals, it'd be pretty fucking boring... Hell.. if even 50% of the tournaments were invitational.. whats so special about getting an invite anymore? I thought invitationals were suppose to be prestigious.. after the first 5 in a matter of 1 month, I just got tired of seeing the same players getting invited, even if they were garbage 2 tournaments ago...
|
On July 13 2010 07:14 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote:
Invitationals are supposed to be the best tournies, the ones with high profile players who have won plenty of previous tournaments. These players have already showed their hard work in climbing the ladder. Now the audience gets to watch some of the best games on starcraft.
Now, of course there should be open invitationals so lesser knownn players can win those and get their name known. And there are. So I think the system is fine as it is. If 90% of the tournies were invitationals, it'd be pretty fucking boring... Hell.. if even 50% of the tournaments were invitational.. whats so special about getting an invite anymore? I thought invitationals were suppose to be prestigious.. after the first 5 in a matter of 1 month, I just got tired of seeing the same players getting invited, even if they were garbage 2 tournaments ago...
I got tired of seeing Jaedong and Flash in Semifinals/Finals all the time too. Bastards got seeded into ro16.
|
You know what I had somethign long typed out but this thread is insane so let's just cover all the tournaments with open sign ups:
Open Sign ups
ITC
GG Inv
Wolf Cup
TRoU
EuroCraft
ZOTAC
Closing Beta KOTH
ESL
Sunday Warriors
ISC Cup
Inflow Recruits
Micro/Macro
TransTasman
InSC Liberty Cup
SC2 World Cup
Clan Property
VISTA Lasik Tourney
West vs. East
Beta Re-Uptake
PoleCraft
BASC
Green Forest E-Cafe
iCCup TV KOTH
Invite ONLY:
ITL
HDH
MLG
Gosucoaching Showdown's
You see a problem with your point? This is only off page one of the SC Tourney forum.
And anyway you look at it all 12 of those people for the GG Inv have earned it. let's stop beating around the bush man. YOU are pissed you didn't get seeded despite not winning anything significant to get there.
The other problem is YOU made a very poor decision by switching your name. That was really dumb cause Paramore was JUST beginning to become a known name.
Don't insult tournament organizers that are just trying to have some fun (remember GG iNV was originally out of the organizer's pockets 100%). Don't like the format? There's a VERY easy solution. Don't play. if no one plays or watches invitationals than they will die.
|
On July 13 2010 07:14 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote:
Invitationals are supposed to be the best tournies, the ones with high profile players who have won plenty of previous tournaments. These players have already showed their hard work in climbing the ladder. Now the audience gets to watch some of the best games on starcraft.
Now, of course there should be open invitationals so lesser knownn players can win those and get their name known. And there are. So I think the system is fine as it is. If 90% of the tournies were invitationals, it'd be pretty fucking boring... Hell.. if even 50% of the tournaments were invitational.. whats so special about getting an invite anymore? I thought invitationals were suppose to be prestigious.. after the first 5 in a matter of 1 month, I just got tired of seeing the same players getting invited, even if they were garbage 2 tournaments ago...
No, the games are still pretty epic. After all, its the games were watching. Its not the invite that's special, its you yourself. The invite is merely an indication that other players have recognized your thriving.
I mean, even look at the Micro Macro tournament two. Before it was unfortunately postponed(canceled?), the winners of the previous Micro Macro tournament(open tournament) got invites as well. It's just a ladder to climb in laddering up.
+ Show Spoiler +Yes, I did want to have ladder, climb, and laddering up, in the same sentence n.n
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 13 2010 07:14 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote:
Invitationals are supposed to be the best tournies, the ones with high profile players who have won plenty of previous tournaments. These players have already showed their hard work in climbing the ladder. Now the audience gets to watch some of the best games on starcraft.
Now, of course there should be open invitationals so lesser knownn players can win those and get their name known. And there are. So I think the system is fine as it is. If 90% of the tournies were invitationals, it'd be pretty fucking boring... Hell.. if even 50% of the tournaments were invitational.. whats so special about getting an invite anymore? I thought invitationals were suppose to be prestigious.. after the first 5 in a matter of 1 month, I just got tired of seeing the same players getting invited, even if they were garbage 2 tournaments ago...
The Korean Starcraft scene is basically 2 tournaments that are, for all intents and purposes, invite only. Guess it's "pretty fucking boring" too.
|
On July 13 2010 07:23 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:14 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote:
Invitationals are supposed to be the best tournies, the ones with high profile players who have won plenty of previous tournaments. These players have already showed their hard work in climbing the ladder. Now the audience gets to watch some of the best games on starcraft.
Now, of course there should be open invitationals so lesser knownn players can win those and get their name known. And there are. So I think the system is fine as it is. If 90% of the tournies were invitationals, it'd be pretty fucking boring... Hell.. if even 50% of the tournaments were invitational.. whats so special about getting an invite anymore? I thought invitationals were suppose to be prestigious.. after the first 5 in a matter of 1 month, I just got tired of seeing the same players getting invited, even if they were garbage 2 tournaments ago... The Korean Starcraft scene is basically 2 tournaments that are, for all intents and purposes, invite only. Guess it's "pretty fucking boring" too.
Its not boring but it really shits on people who want to be progamers. Even if you're really really good, you'll probably only be a house practice partner.
|
On July 13 2010 07:23 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:14 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote:
Invitationals are supposed to be the best tournies, the ones with high profile players who have won plenty of previous tournaments. These players have already showed their hard work in climbing the ladder. Now the audience gets to watch some of the best games on starcraft.
Now, of course there should be open invitationals so lesser knownn players can win those and get their name known. And there are. So I think the system is fine as it is. If 90% of the tournies were invitationals, it'd be pretty fucking boring... Hell.. if even 50% of the tournaments were invitational.. whats so special about getting an invite anymore? I thought invitationals were suppose to be prestigious.. after the first 5 in a matter of 1 month, I just got tired of seeing the same players getting invited, even if they were garbage 2 tournaments ago... The Korean Starcraft scene is basically 2 tournaments that are, for all intents and purposes, invite only. Guess it's "pretty fucking boring" too.
So is the NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL, SAME TEAMS OVER AND OVER WTF no variety
|
On July 13 2010 07:23 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:14 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote:
Invitationals are supposed to be the best tournies, the ones with high profile players who have won plenty of previous tournaments. These players have already showed their hard work in climbing the ladder. Now the audience gets to watch some of the best games on starcraft.
Now, of course there should be open invitationals so lesser knownn players can win those and get their name known. And there are. So I think the system is fine as it is. If 90% of the tournies were invitationals, it'd be pretty fucking boring... Hell.. if even 50% of the tournaments were invitational.. whats so special about getting an invite anymore? I thought invitationals were suppose to be prestigious.. after the first 5 in a matter of 1 month, I just got tired of seeing the same players getting invited, even if they were garbage 2 tournaments ago... The Korean Starcraft scene is basically 2 tournaments that are, for all intents and purposes, invite only. Guess it's "pretty fucking boring" too.
This. Seriously. x10000000
Plus this is about the fans not the players. If the fans were not here you would not be playing for anything. You would be like those guys that are REALLY good at Diablo 2. Sure they can beat anyone in the world in a PvP battle. But it sucks to wtach and no one cares so they stomp everyone for free.
Players need to get over this "me me me" attitude that has shown up with SC2 and be asking the fans what they want.
It's why I welcome emails at ANY times from any iCCup TV fan (iccup.diamond@gmail.com) and am CONSTANTLY monitor feedback from my fans and look at every post about an ITL. This is not about you, or TLO, this is about the thousands of people that love SC2 and we need to make THEM happy. If they want TLO, fucking give them TLO.....
On July 13 2010 07:26 Backpack wrote:
Its not boring but it really shits on people who want to be progamers. Even if you're really really good, you'll probably only be a house practice partner.
That just means you're not good enough.
|
On July 13 2010 07:18 Entropic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:14 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote:
Invitationals are supposed to be the best tournies, the ones with high profile players who have won plenty of previous tournaments. These players have already showed their hard work in climbing the ladder. Now the audience gets to watch some of the best games on starcraft.
Now, of course there should be open invitationals so lesser knownn players can win those and get their name known. And there are. So I think the system is fine as it is. If 90% of the tournies were invitationals, it'd be pretty fucking boring... Hell.. if even 50% of the tournaments were invitational.. whats so special about getting an invite anymore? I thought invitationals were suppose to be prestigious.. after the first 5 in a matter of 1 month, I just got tired of seeing the same players getting invited, even if they were garbage 2 tournaments ago... I got tired of seeing Jaedong and Flash in Semifinals/Finals all the time too. Bastards got seeded into ro16.
you do know that jaedong had to go through qualifiers when he lost in the round of 16 once and he still made it to the next tourney
|
On July 13 2010 07:20 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
You know what I had somethign long typed out but this thread is insane so let's just cover all the tournaments with open sign ups:
Open Sign ups
ITC
GG Inv
Wolf Cup
TRoU
EuroCraft
ZOTAC
Closing Beta KOTH
ESL
Sunday Warriors
ISC Cup
Inflow Recruits
Micro/Macro
TransTasman
InSC Liberty Cup
SC2 World Cup
Clan Property
VISTA Lasik Tourney
West vs. East
Beta Re-Uptake
PoleCraft
BASC
Green Forest E-Cafe
iCCup TV KOTH
Invite ONLY:
ITL
MLG
Gosucoaching Showdown's
You see a problem with your point? This is only off page one of the SC Tourney forum.
And anyway you look at it all 12 of those people for the GG Inv have earned it. let's stop beating around the bush man. YOU are pissed you didn't get seeded despite not winning anything significant to get there.
The other problem is YOU made a very poor decision by switching your name. That was really dumb cause Paramore was JUST beginning to become a known name.
Don't insult tournament organizers that are just trying to have some fun (remember GG iNV was originally out of the organizer's pockets 100%). Don't like the format? There's a VERY easy solution. Don't play. if no one plays or watches invitationals than they will die.
you forgot HDH, and a few other invite only tournaments that had 20x the prize money of all the non-invite ones put together.
|
On July 13 2010 07:28 avilo wrote:
you forgot HDH, and a few other invite only tournaments that had 20x the prize money of all the non-invite ones put together.
Besides HDH please inform me which other ones I forgot that were invite onyl and had good prize money?
|
Well if i would host a tourney i sure as hell would only invite some stars since it is a lot less work and more successful.
Who are we to tell others how the have to spend their money?
Of course rising stars have almost no chance to make a name for themselves right now, because they do not get invited.
It is not because of ill intentions, but the timing.
Once the game goes into retail Blizzard will surely start their own very big things at which point it will become skill again which decides who makes a name or not.
It is understandable that a few very skilled and unknown players are saddened about this current situation, but since retail starts in just 2 weeks i think everyone should just use these 2 weeks to sharpen their skills and use them at blizzards 1st big tourney which will surely start immediately after retail.
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 13 2010 07:26 Backpack wrote:
Its not boring but it really shits on people who want to be progamers. Even if you're really really good, you'll probably only be a house practice partner.
B-team progamers get to play in MSL and OSL prelims. In fact, I believe they are required to (seeing as Idra had to play in OSL prelims in order to keep his progaming license).
I don't think any more of them would be qualifying for the Ro16 if Flash/Effort/Kal/Pure weren't seeded. The system that "shits on people who want to be progamers" has absolutely nothing to do with the tournament structure.
On July 13 2010 07:28 Looky wrote:
you do know that jaedong had to go through qualifiers when he lost in the round of 16 once and he still made it to the next tourney
Which means the only thing not seeding good players accomplishes is making their practice schedules harder and giving us a few shitty games where they stomp players that are significantly worse.
|
On July 13 2010 07:28 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:20 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
You know what I had somethign long typed out but this thread is insane so let's just cover all the tournaments with open sign ups:
Open Sign ups
ITC
GG Inv
Wolf Cup
TRoU
EuroCraft
ZOTAC
Closing Beta KOTH
ESL
Sunday Warriors
ISC Cup
Inflow Recruits
Micro/Macro
TransTasman
InSC Liberty Cup
SC2 World Cup
Clan Property
VISTA Lasik Tourney
West vs. East
Beta Re-Uptake
PoleCraft
BASC
Green Forest E-Cafe
iCCup TV KOTH
Invite ONLY:
ITL
MLG
Gosucoaching Showdown's
You see a problem with your point? This is only off page one of the SC Tourney forum.
And anyway you look at it all 12 of those people for the GG Inv have earned it. let's stop beating around the bush man. YOU are pissed you didn't get seeded despite not winning anything significant to get there.
The other problem is YOU made a very poor decision by switching your name. That was really dumb cause Paramore was JUST beginning to become a known name.
Don't insult tournament organizers that are just trying to have some fun (remember GG iNV was originally out of the organizer's pockets 100%). Don't like the format? There's a VERY easy solution. Don't play. if no one plays or watches invitationals than they will die.
you forgot HDH, and a few other invite only tournaments that had 20x the prize money of all the non-invite ones put together.
He said those were off the Tournament forums... not past Tournaments.
|
Even if people agree with your points (thought I think you're over exaggerating quite a lot, as iCCup.diamond's post shows), that there should be more open tournaments, your post sounds childish and whiny and I think that's why people are jumping on you.
Post about how you hope for more open tournaments. Explain why open tournaments are a good thing. Do it without all the "but honestly, who qualified them?" schtick, and maybe people would be more likely to be on your side.
|
On July 13 2010 07:30 Teejing wrote:
Once the game goes into retail Blizzard will surely start their own very big things at which point it will become skill again which decides who makes a name or not.
It is understandable that a few very skilled and unknown players are saddened about this current situation, but since retail starts in just 2 weeks i think everyone should just use these 2 weeks to sharpen their skills and use them at blizzards 1st big tourney which will surely start immediately after retail.
I think you're being too optimistic. I think the message from Blizz has come through loud and clear. They only care about e-sports in Korea right now. They are already setting up college funds or w/e in Korea but have not dropped one cent into any prize pools in the states.
Anyone waiting for Blizz to come save the day might want to not hold their breath.
|
[QUOTE]On July 13 2010 07:27 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
[QUOTE]On July 13 2010 07:23 TheYango wrote:
[QUOTE]On July 13 2010 07:14 Paramore wrote:
[QUOTE]On July 13 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote:
[QUOTE]On July 13 2010 07:26 Backpack wrote:
Its not boring but it really shits on people who want to be progamers. Even if you're really really good, you'll probably only be a house practice partner.[/QUOTE]
That just means you're not good enough.
[/QUOTE]
It means all of the publicity is limited to the same players who are always on top.
|
8748 Posts
On July 13 2010 07:23 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:14 Paramore wrote:On July 13 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote:
Invitationals are supposed to be the best tournies, the ones with high profile players who have won plenty of previous tournaments. These players have already showed their hard work in climbing the ladder. Now the audience gets to watch some of the best games on starcraft.
Now, of course there should be open invitationals so lesser knownn players can win those and get their name known. And there are. So I think the system is fine as it is. If 90% of the tournies were invitationals, it'd be pretty fucking boring... Hell.. if even 50% of the tournaments were invitational.. whats so special about getting an invite anymore? I thought invitationals were suppose to be prestigious.. after the first 5 in a matter of 1 month, I just got tired of seeing the same players getting invited, even if they were garbage 2 tournaments ago... The Korean Starcraft scene is basically 2 tournaments that are, for all intents and purposes, invite only. Guess it's "pretty fucking boring" too.
Courage tournaments are open to anyone. Win a Courage tournament and you get to play in OSL and MSL qualifiers.
OSL and MSL are essentially open leagues that have several qualification steps. The only way to skip qualification steps (which is a similar thing to being invited) is to place high in a previous OSL/MSL. But everyone starts from the bottom and everyone has to do something to earn every spot they get.
I should also mention that the two big StarCraft tournaments outside of Korea, WCG and TSL, are both open as well. They both allow for skipping qualification steps after performing well in a previous WCG/TSL, but it's still an open event for almost everyone involved, and everyone earns every spot they're given.
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 13 2010 07:32 Backpack wrote:
It means all of the publicity is limited to the same players who are always on top.
Minor League/Dream League does exist. The fact that it's not televised probably speaks to the fact that it doesn't attract a large enough viewership to be worthwhile.
On July 13 2010 07:38 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Courage tournaments are open to anyone. Win a Courage tournament and you get to play in OSL and MSL qualifiers.
OSL and MSL are essentially open leagues that have several qualification steps. The only way to skip qualification steps (which is a similar thing to being invited) is to place high in a previous OSL/MSL. But everyone starts from the bottom and everyone has to do something to earn every spot they get.
From the standpoint of an uninformed viewer, winning Courage to qualify for MSL, or being seeded based on previous standings is fairly similar to being seeded based on performance in other tournaments. The primary difference is that I don't think the current SC2 tournament structure has a strong organizing body to govern the logistics of this sort of thing. Until that exists, I don't see slightly more informal tournament seeds based on past performance being a bad thing.
|
On July 13 2010 07:26 Backpack wrote:
It means all of the publicity is limited to the same players who are always on top.
And if they're always on top, shouldn't they get the publicity.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
Name one competitive game or sport that has the same players always at the top.
Edit: Not one player, but 16 of the same at the top for 6 months.
|
8748 Posts
On July 13 2010 07:32 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:30 Teejing wrote:
Once the game goes into retail Blizzard will surely start their own very big things at which point it will become skill again which decides who makes a name or not.
It is understandable that a few very skilled and unknown players are saddened about this current situation, but since retail starts in just 2 weeks i think everyone should just use these 2 weeks to sharpen their skills and use them at blizzards 1st big tourney which will surely start immediately after retail. I think you're being too optimistic. I think the message from Blizz has come through loud and clear. They only care about e-sports in Korea right now. They are already setting up college funds or w/e in Korea but have not dropped one cent into any prize pools in the states. Anyone waiting for Blizz to come save the day might want to not hold their breath.
If Blizzard focuses on Korea, MLG will take care of North America.
|
Here, I took your first post and made it less offensive. If you posted in a less aggressive manner I think you would get some support. People may agree that more open tournaments would be a good thing, but that doesn't mean they agree with your "spoon fed" invitees viewpoint.
+ Show Spoiler +Sure... once in a while, by well known stakeholders is completely understandable and great. Who wouldn't want to see a soccer match with the best of the best stacked against each other on each team? However, the recent trend for tournaments posted on the Team Liquid SC2 Tournament forum is to have a degree of 'invitational' in it. I do understand, however, that its a free world out there, and if you had enough money and wanted to make a tournament exclusively for pro-scene and only wanted to exclusively watch those players play, nothing is stopping you. SC2 tournaments should be 60-80% or even more non-invitational, meaning, completely open. Instead, we are seeing more tournaments than ever with reserved spots for players and very few tournaments that have all their spots given in a free-for-all. Wolf Cup 2 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=133169 I talked to the organizer of this tournament. He's a really nice guy and hell, I'd even say we were friends after a few conversations. His tournament, is not very wide known, certainly not as large as GosuGamers SC2 invitational and only had a $50 prize pool out of his own pocket as opposed to a $1500 with t-shirts and hardware sponsors etc. Even then, he still reserved the last few spots for well-knowns and put a "star" beside the names of those that "deserved" it. I think every single person that signed up for that tournament deserved a star. If this is the trend that is going to be for the new SC2 scene, it’s going to be a lot harder for really talented players to become competitive. After a grueling ro128 if someone makes it to the ro4, they have to face another ro16. It’s very difficult for people trying to get through. I'm not saying invitationals are bad, but too many are not good for the community and do more harm than good. What does the community think? Should invitationals be the exception or should they be the norm? How should we define our competition?
|
dont really care if there r none invite tourneys at all, they mostly dont provide replays worth a watch and i dont need those tourneys to actually play the game.
|
8748 Posts
On July 13 2010 07:38 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:32 Backpack wrote:
It means all of the publicity is limited to the same players who are always on top. Minor League/Dream League does exist. The fact that it's not televised probably speaks to the fact that it doesn't attract a large enough viewership to be worthwhile. Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:38 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Courage tournaments are open to anyone. Win a Courage tournament and you get to play in OSL and MSL qualifiers.
OSL and MSL are essentially open leagues that have several qualification steps. The only way to skip qualification steps (which is a similar thing to being invited) is to place high in a previous OSL/MSL. But everyone starts from the bottom and everyone has to do something to earn every spot they get. From the standpoint of an uninformed viewer, winning Courage to qualify for MSL, or being seeded based on previous standings is fairly similar to being seeded based on performance in other tournaments. The primary difference is that I don't think the current SC2 tournament structure has a strong organizing body to govern the logistics of this sort of thing. Until then, I don't see slightly more informal tournament seeds based on past performance being a bad thing.
I don't have an opinion on the situation for SC2. I was just getting facts straight for SC1. I realize what side of the argument I was supporting by saying that that's how MSL and OSL work, but I'm neutral on it.
I personally prefer for everything to be open because I feel like I've missed things that I could have qualified for (a Blizzcon spot, for one). But I don't know what's best for the scene. Invitationals save both the players and organizers a bunch of work. In a world of unlimited time and resources, open tournaments would be ideal.
|
I like the points that this made, a lot and the examples and cases fit pretty well. The information was great and I totally agree that there has been a huge surge of invitationals happening
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 13 2010 07:45 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
I don't have an opinion on the situation for SC2. I was just getting facts straight for SC1. I realize what side of the argument I was supporting by saying that that's how MSL and OSL work, but I'm neutral on it.
I personally prefer for everything to be open because I feel like I've missed things that I could have qualified for (a Blizzcon spot, for one). But I don't know what's best for the scene. Invitationals save both the players and organizers a bunch of work. In a world of unlimited time and resources, open tournaments would be ideal.
It's also worth noting that the "have to win Courage" requirement is a much stronger than any qualifications for entering SC2 tournaments currently in place. I'm all for Courage-style qualification requirements, but that would require a larger playerbase (only possible post-release), and a tournament organizing body a-la KeSPA that could enforce the requirement for relevant tournaments.
|
On July 13 2010 07:20 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
You know what I had somethign long typed out but this thread is insane so let's just cover all the tournaments with open sign ups:
Open Sign ups
ITC
GG Inv
Wolf Cup
TRoU
EuroCraft
ZOTAC
Closing Beta KOTH
ESL
Sunday Warriors
ISC Cup
Inflow Recruits
Micro/Macro
TransTasman
InSC Liberty Cup
SC2 World Cup
Clan Property
VISTA Lasik Tourney
West vs. East
Beta Re-Uptake
PoleCraft
BASC
Green Forest E-Cafe
iCCup TV KOTH
Invite ONLY:
ITL
HDH
MLG
Gosucoaching Showdown's
You see a problem with your point? This is only off page one of the SC Tourney forum.
And anyway you look at it all 12 of those people for the GG Inv have earned it. let's stop beating around the bush man. YOU are pissed you didn't get seeded despite not winning anything significant to get there.
The other problem is YOU made a very poor decision by switching your name. That was really dumb cause Paramore was JUST beginning to become a known name.
Don't insult tournament organizers that are just trying to have some fun (remember GG iNV was originally out of the organizer's pockets 100%). Don't like the format? There's a VERY easy solution. Don't play. if no one plays or watches invitationals than they will die.
Half or most of the tournaments you listed in non-invite only contain a value of invitational in them or reserve seating... Some of them don't even relate to the rest of the community.. like Inflow gaming clan recruitment? Don't twist my words for the sake of your arguement please.
|
I think too many invitationals are a bad thing, especially for a brand new game. We want to encourage people to get good at SC2 with the hopes of making a name for themselves in a big tourney. Invitationals discourage that and it there are too many too early in SC2's lifetime, the community will be smaller IMO.
|
|
|
On July 13 2010 07:55 0neder wrote:
I think too many invitationals are a bad thing, especially for a brand new game. We want to encourage people to get good at SC2 with the hopes of making a name for themselves in a big tourney. Invitationals discourage that and it there are too many too early in SC2's lifetime, the community will be smaller IMO.
Great post, very good point there!
|
I think the advantage invitational have is it is more fun for the spectators but certainly not the best system for the players.
If you are just watching the games, seeing your favourite players play each other is fun, you get their history and how they did in the previous tournament.
From a fairness point of view of course this is not the best system. People running tournaments want viewers and invitational is a good way to make sure people will watch. These hybrids that are qualifier and invite is probably a good idea to make sure you get people to watch, but also allow for some unknown to rise to the top and become famous for future invitationals.
|
On July 13 2010 08:02 f4hy wrote:
I think the advantage invitational have is it is more fun for the spectators but certainly not the best system for the players.
If you are just watching the games, seeing your favourite players play each other is fun, you get their history and how they did in the previous tournament.
From a fairness point of view of course this is not the best system. People running tournaments want viewers and invitational is a good way to make sure people will watch. These hybrids that are qualifier and invite is probably a good idea to make sure you get people to watch, but also allow for some unknown to rise to the top and become famous for future invitationals.
This entire thing is just a bitch fest regarding the 'haves' vs the 'have nots'
But it's not like there AREN'T open slots in these Tournaments, there are. The complaint is there aren't enough slots. Truth be told only 1 person will win. If you really are the best, and not a big name yet, then starting in the RO512 instead of the RO16 shouldn't concern you. You're amazing remember? You are going to win anyways.
If it's about publicity for new players then I think you are going to be SOL. Right now the TL.net community has a few favorites, ie TLO, and I think it's going to take time and amazing play for anyone to match his popularity. Again though, you need to make it to the finals for us to care. No one cares what unknown player gets 4th or 5th in any tournament, win or go home.
Guess what else? As soon as an unknown player does win over the community it's not going to be "lets see who the next unknown super star is!?" it's going to be "lets invite this new guy to all the tournaments!" and that guy will gladly accept it now that he is a 'have'.
You have to have these big names for the Tournaments to bring in alot of fans. Fans mean sponsors, sponsors mean money.
***edit... not sure if I really should quote you. Only 1 thing pertains to what you said so when I say "you're" I don't actually mean you f4hy.
|
On July 13 2010 07:45 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:38 TheYango wrote:On July 13 2010 07:32 Backpack wrote:
It means all of the publicity is limited to the same players who are always on top. Minor League/Dream League does exist. The fact that it's not televised probably speaks to the fact that it doesn't attract a large enough viewership to be worthwhile. On July 13 2010 07:38 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Courage tournaments are open to anyone. Win a Courage tournament and you get to play in OSL and MSL qualifiers.
OSL and MSL are essentially open leagues that have several qualification steps. The only way to skip qualification steps (which is a similar thing to being invited) is to place high in a previous OSL/MSL. But everyone starts from the bottom and everyone has to do something to earn every spot they get. From the standpoint of an uninformed viewer, winning Courage to qualify for MSL, or being seeded based on previous standings is fairly similar to being seeded based on performance in other tournaments. The primary difference is that I don't think the current SC2 tournament structure has a strong organizing body to govern the logistics of this sort of thing. Until then, I don't see slightly more informal tournament seeds based on past performance being a bad thing. I don't have an opinion on the situation for SC2. I was just getting facts straight for SC1. I realize what side of the argument I was supporting by saying that that's how MSL and OSL work, but I'm neutral on it. I personally prefer for everything to be open because I feel like I've missed things that I could have qualified for (a Blizzcon spot, for one). But I don't know what's best for the scene. Invitationals save both the players and organizers a bunch of work. In a world of unlimited time and resources, open tournaments would be ideal.
If the GGI2 tournament were actually 2 tournaments, IE a qualifer tournament and then a main tournament, I'd have less of an issue than it is now, since its all rolled into one tournament...
Winning the qualifier tournament means nothing to the viewers because its so downplayed. I guess this is yet to be seen and I may be jumping to conclusions... but still, its too early to mimic OSL and MSL and this GGI2 certainly isn't OSL MSL and the "qualifier" isn't Courage.
|
There will probably be several open tournaments after the release. I myself will be running a weekly casual tournament geared for those who want to get their feet wet playing tournaments as part of the Practice Partner Finder Web site. I'm in the process of writing the code that will completely automate the process and hope to be testing it soon. All will be welcome.
|
I dont know what the ideal ratio is, but both invite and non-invite should exist. Then, ideally, the ones that do well in either are the ones that get invited. But I agree that there should be a non trivial amount of high profile tourneys that give equal chance. Thats how diamonds in the rough are uncovered.
What would be sweet is some kind of feeder system, or external rank (could be informal) used to select seeds/invites. Kind of like how you could say rank/league/rating except something more meaningful or specific(ie to narrow it to 32 or 16).
|
I think it's only natural that high-level tourneys apply a level of qualification to who gets a spot in the tournament - it happens in every major sport in some way or another. What I'm not so sure about is situations where the seeds automatically get a spot in the ROx rather than starting out in round 1. I'm sure the great tennis stars would love to start in the RO16 at Wimbledon but they have to fight there way through from Round 1
I guess what we are seeing at the moment is that there are a huge number of tournaments running and the organisers have to do 'extra' things to attract the names that will make their tournament visible. I'm only very new to the SC scene but I'm interested to see if this level of tournament activity continues post-launch because it seems to be way higher than what was there for SC1
|
Am I the only one who thinks there is a good balance of invitational and open sign up tournaments?
As a spectator and a competitor, I am really quite pleased with how the tournaments on beta have been unfolding. There seems to be the perfect amount of invitational tournaments to provide the community with enough footage/VODs to fill our free time/nerdgasms, and there are also plenty of sign up tournaments. I get the feeling one of your main issues (whether it is mentioned in your posts or not) is that all of the massively popular tournaments are the invite only tournaments - because really, there are plenty of quiet open sign-up tournaments.
If you're going to try to intellectually discuss the flaws in the tournament community though, you may want to go back and edit your original post. I tried to stay objective as I read it but I couldn't help but get a feeling of major bias while reading it.
There are a number of other things i'd like to add but I believe they've already been said thus far.
|
I agree, there are alot of players (i.e. many of the top 100 on each realm) who have few opportunities to participate in tournaments due to the invitational nature of the tournaments. We all know Idra, Dimaga, Sen, Nony, Maka, WhiteRa, TLO etc. are going to do well in these tournaments, but it certainly seems to stifle the ability of new players to participate. I think it is good for raising publicity about SC2, and I'm sure there will be more non-invitational tournaments in the future, but it would be nice to have some tourneys consisting of some players we haven't seen yet.
|
Well i vote for this subject to be discussed from time to time. i guess open largr bracket tourneys needs alot of work from alot of trusted volunteers
|
I agree strongly with the notion of this thread and in fact I have thought about opening one like this as well. The problem as I see it is that right now maybe not most of the tournaments are invitationals but the most important ones are.
I think the reasons for this are pretty obvious. Invitationals draw a lot of attention because people tend to think that they will see the best of the best. This makes finding potential sponsors a lot easier.
I think this logic is extremely flawed. If you look at TLO's recent rise to the top names of Starcraft 2 which started with him getting to the finals of the first TLI. Before this happened he was pretty much a stranger to most of the community. So I want you to imagine what if he hadn't been invited. I am pretty sure he would have made a name for himself in another tournament but what I want you to consider is this: What do you remember this specific tournament for? You remember it for those epic finals where the newcomer challenged the old guru of the scene. So to all those people who think invitationals provide a better experience for the fans I think you are horribly mistaken.
Of course watching the first rounds of open tournaments can be frustrating but you may as well skip that step and start watching at the round of 8. This is a problem of organizing a proper shout cast and not of quality itself. I guarantee you the replays of the last couple of rounds of a big open tournament are just as good if not better than those of an invitation covering the so called "best of the best". Don't get me wrong it was fun watching HDH but it was also a little shallow. Like All-Star-Games in the NBA.
So open tournaments are not only better for the players they also provide a more realistic competition to the viewer.
|
We can talk about what "should" happen all we want, but the fact is invitationals are easier to run. Also what are you gonna do if the dude who's sponsoring says explicitly I want xxx players? Sure I'd like to see more open tournaments but that's also asking a lot from organizers and sponsors. As soon as you have an open thing with a large prize pool, then thousands of people are gonna try for it. How are you planning on managing all of that?
|
On July 13 2010 05:37 Drakan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:23 Paramore wrote:
Anybody that plays poker, which this site obviously is dedicated to, knows that its alot harder to win a 10 million player tournament than it is to win 10-handed right off the start. Event he world-series of poker doesn't save seats for the "pros", they have to tirelessly work themselves up every single year. Its no different when it comes to SC2. If I have to play ro512 (or its equivalent, because playing Ro128--> ro4 and then reverting back to ro16 is actually the exact same amount of opponents as starting off the whole tournament ro512, my chances are basically 1/512 to win the tournament. As opposed to the player that started at ro16 being invited, his chances were 1/16. Its not complete luck, and SC2 has less deviation of odds than poker does, but the concept is the same. Skill can only take you so far sometimes, you need a little luck, whether its in poker or SC2.
This arguments made my day. Amazing. I don't mind for invitational ONLY tournaments. I love to watch them. But or you make it full invitational, or you make it free for all, but not a hybrid cz it's just unfair for those who are before RO/16 Invited players.
It's not a good argument at all.
In starcraft the seeded players are generally a lot better than most of the ones that have to fight through the tournament. Poker is a lot more random and much more luck is involved so no real comparison can be made.
Besides, the players who manage to get through the brackets to reach the seeded players will surely have the best chance out of the unknown players.
OP's point of view is rediculous imo.
|
I would agree with the OP if there werent so many open touneys, if you win two or three of the weeklys you will start getting invited. invites are a hell of a lot easier to organize and get more viewers, if you want more open tourneys try hosting one yourself, its a lot of work
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 13 2010 08:50 Baum wrote:
I agree strongly with the notion of this thread and in fact I have thought about opening one like this as well. The problem as I see it is that right now maybe not most of the tournaments are invitationals but the most important ones are.
What qualifies a tournament as being "the most important"? The ones with the largest prize pools? Those prize pools are provided by sponsors, who likely sponsor those tournaments BECAUSE they have big names in them.
|
Well I guess I'll explain for my part how the Global Gamers Invitational became how it is today. Please note that it's the GGI, the GGI2 hasn't been announced yet
So, JMS and I both had some extra money and we wanted it to go into eSports. We both loved Starcraft 2 and so we decided to team up and start a tournament. We had seen a lot of the great US and EU players, but knowledge of the Asian scene was limited to the 17173 SC2 WC and Tester in the Altitude Invitational. So we decided upon doing a global tournament, hence the Global Gamers Invitational name.
Next step was deciding upon a format and we decided that in order to make a name for our tournament we would have to invite some great players. No-one would care about an unknown open tournament by two unknown people in the community. But then again, we were also hoping to give some no-name players a chance to prove themselves and so we invited 12 players and kept the remaining 4 spots open for qualifiers.
The qualifiers kept growing until we had 128 people, which in retrospect ofcourse is a lot for only 4 spots. But we weren't planning on excluding any players that might be the next TLO (so to speak).
The main purpose for new TO's like us is to make a name for ourselves and our tournament. If we had kept an all open tournament all the invited players probably wouldn't have participated, meaning our tournament would have created little buzz and would have died silently because no sponsor cares about tournaments that don't have huge buzz/ viewercounts. You have to realise that most tournaments aren't organised on behalf of the player, they are organised to give the viewers some spectacle. Viewers simply like seeing players that they know and most of these players have deserved it. The 12 invited players are all highly skilled SC2 players and I think all of them have a shot at winning. None of them got invited purely because they are a familiar face, they got invited because we think they are the best and will provide some epic matches.
That said, when our tournament runs smoothly and gets good viewercounts it will be MUCH easier for us to 1. get sponsors 2. get players 3. organise more of an open tournament. It's not just the players that have to get known before they can get things done
Seriously Paramore, the entire oGs team is playing in the qualifiers and we all know that at least half of them have a good chance at winning the whole thing. Even though they weren't seeded they said "ok" and are starting from step 1, just like you. If you manage to beat Cool in the Ro16 of the qualifiers, or even if you take 1 game off him, people will remember that and say "hmmm, he's pretty good, we should invite him for a showmatch". All our matches, even the qualifiers, are being commentated and distributed so you have a good chance of proving yourself.
|
On July 13 2010 09:16 Saechiis wrote:Well I guess I'll explain for my part how the Global Gamers Invitational became how it is today. Please note that it's the GGI, the GGI2 hasn't been announced yet So, JMS and I both had some extra money and we wanted it to go into eSports. We both loved Starcraft 2 and so we decided to team up and start a tournament. We had seen a lot of the great US and EU players, but knowledge of the Asian scene was limited to the 17173 SC2 WC and Tester in the Altitude Invitational. So we decided upon doing a global tournament, hence the Global Gamers Invitational name. Next step was deciding upon a format and we decided that in order to make a name for our tournament we would have to invite some great players. No-one would care about an unknown open tournament by two unknown people in the community. But then again, we were also hoping to give some no-name players a chance to prove themselves and so we invited 12 players and kept the remaining 4 spots open for qualifiers. The qualifiers kept growing until we had 128 people, which in retrospect ofcourse is a lot for only 4 spots. But we weren't planning on excluding any players that might be the next TLO (so to speak). The main purpose for new TO's like us is to make a name for ourselves and our tournament. If we had kept an all open tournament all the invited players probably wouldn't have participated, meaning our tournament would have created little buzz and would have died silently because no sponsor cares about tournaments that don't have huge buzz/ viewercounts. You have to realise that most tournaments aren't organised on behalf of the player, they are organised to give the viewers some spectacle. Viewers simply like seeing players that they know and most of these players have deserved it. The 12 invited players are all highly skilled SC2 players and I think all of them have a shot at winning. None of them got invited purely because they are a familiar face, they got invited because we think they are the best and will provide some epic matches. That said, when our tournament runs smoothly and gets good viewercounts it will be MUCH easier for us to 1. get sponsors 2. get players 3. organise more of an open tournament. It's not just the players that have to get known before they can get things done Seriously Paramore, the entire oGs team is playing in the qualifiers and we all know that at least half of them have a good chance at winning the whole thing. Even though they weren't seeded they said "ok" and are starting from step 1, just like you. If you manage to beat Cool in the Ro16 of the qualifiers, or even if you take 1 game off him, people will remember that and say "hmmm, he's pretty good, we should invite him for a showmatch". All our matches, even the qualifiers, are being commentated and distributed so you have a good chance of proving yourself.
Thanks, responses like these are seriously the ones I was looking for... I didn't have such an in depth history about why GGI was created or what the purpose of it was. It is a great tournament and sorry I had to use it as an example for my thread. My point was not that this tournament was poorly organized or that the players selected were poor choices, I merely wished that there were more tournaments of your size that were open to the public.
I'm really glad you did leave 4 spots open to the public since that is better than nothing. Thank you again.
|
Allow me to try a real-life analogy.
The proposition is that what you are describing in the OP works very much like recruitment works in real life. I will, just like you, give an example with myself.
Here is how your post looks literally translated into a RL situation from my perspective.
REVELATION to PARAMORE.
I hold a Bachelor degree in Communication from a Dutch University and I want to get a job in Brussels. I believe that I am a very good graduate with high potential, appropriate qualification and I have the papers, scores and even academic awards to show for it.
There are a lot of "open" positions in Brussels because, well, it is the heart of the European Union. For every starting graduate-oriented position in my field there are at least 300 to 400 candidates from across the EU. All of them have their potential, their dreams, their aspirations and their level of qualification and experience, but less than a dozen get an invite for an interview - the other 390 or so do not even get a generic rejection by e-mail.
Much like a tournament organizer in SC2, the employer looks at the past accomplishments of a given individual - in EU's case that is represented by a CV. If someone has a "better" past, the employer will choose to invite that person to an interview. I might be equally qualified and knowledgeable or even better, but the employer wouldn't know, and more importantly would not want to take the risk with me. He only needs 10 guys with a solid CV and does not give a toss about the other hundreds upon hundreds of people. Sometimes, there will be 50 guys with a solid CV, or maybe even 200, but he only needs 10 and he would bet on the very, very best 10. If you are that eleventh person, you will be no more than the other 390.
So there you have it - this is your Ro16 Invitational. Can you imagine a job interview with 256 participants?
I, much like you, blame it on elitism, discrimination, unfairness, my shitty Eastern-European passport and a range of other outrageous factors that probably no one at the employment-offering company has even thought about.
What is funny about this situation, is that the moment I get employed in Brussels and the moment you receive an invitation to a SC2 tournament, all these doubts, anger and general uneasy feeling in your testicles will magically disappear.
The conclusion is: this is just how the world works - in games, sports, career, whatever you can think of. The people "above" you will always choose the "better" and more importantly "proven to be better" candidate.
You would say - OMG, WHEN!? THIS IS SO UNFAIR, I AM READY FOR THIS, BABY!
The answer is: No one can tell when. But it is important to keep being ready for it (being good, being qualified for it), and keep trying to secure your place under the sun (keep participating) while never forgetting that there are many, MANY others just like you.
|
I personally think the invitation system is fine. Most of the invitationals have open spot qualifiers, and the ones that don't have been great to watch anyway IE HDH. The players that get invited have proven their skill, and deserve the spots. Besides, watching high level play between TLO and White-ra is much more exciting then watching two bronze players duke it out IMO.
|
|
|
I love how biased the poll at the start of this thread is. There's no middle road option, which is obviously what everyone wants.
|
On July 13 2010 09:15 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 08:50 Baum wrote:
I agree strongly with the notion of this thread and in fact I have thought about opening one like this as well. The problem as I see it is that right now maybe not most of the tournaments are invitationals but the most important ones are. What qualifies a tournament as being "the most important"? The ones with the largest prize pools? Those prize pools are provided by sponsors, who likely sponsor those tournaments BECAUSE they have big names in them.
Haven't I said so in my post? I guess you just read those first 3 lines.
Anyway the most important tournaments are the ones which have big prize pools and draw a lot attention. If you noticed the viewer counts of HDH and look at the money at stake it's easy to say it was one of the most important tournaments from the point of view of a player, a sponsor and a fan.
|
I agree with OP that perhaps there are too many invitationals, but the fact of the matter is, people who are invited deserve it in one way or another.
Best example I can think of is HuK. I remember when he was whining on the HDH tourney thread about not being invited (he was being rather bitchy at one point too x]) but what did he do? He just basically went out and won so many tournaments until he made his name.
People who are invited and known are often thus because they have and achieve consistent results and will very likely give the viewers a good game. This is what it's all about.
Sponsors want views. They want that more than anything. The best way to achieve that is to attract big name players. It's how it works in pretty much everything in life, not just SC2. Sports sponsorships and other celebrity sponsorships work off the same concept. Why do you think Lebron James has such big name sponsors while some random NFL lineman doesn't? Because that's where the money is.
Most tournaments have prize pools because sponsors give 'em money for it. To ensure their sponsors are happy, they need views and to get that, they invite. Even tourneys like the postponed MicroMacro2 tournament, which had less of a "qualifier" round, still ensure that big names will be seen using a heavily weighted seeding system.
You're right though, it'd be nice to not have so many invitations as the norm. This way we can discover new talent and new faces. However, it's unavoidable to a large extent.
|
On July 13 2010 03:23 Paramore wrote:
Sure... once in a while, by well known stakeholders is completely understandable and great. Who wouldn't want to see a soccer match with the best of the best stacked against each other on each team?
However, the recent trend for tournaments posted on the Team Liquid SC2 Tournament forum is completely ridiculous. Almost every tournament that I have participated in so far, has a degree of 'invitational' in it.
I do understand, however, that its a free world out there, and if you had enough money and wanted to make a tournament exclusively for pro-scene and only wanted to exclusively watch those players play, nothing is stopping you. However, it shouldn't be a trend that the rest of the community should follow, because thats not how competition is born.
I read up to here and I know your pretty stupid.
What the rest of the community does is out of the control of the person who made the tournament.
Honestly this argument takes top10 in dumbest sc2 arguments ever .....
|
On July 13 2010 09:49 virgozero wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 03:23 Paramore wrote:
Sure... once in a while, by well known stakeholders is completely understandable and great. Who wouldn't want to see a soccer match with the best of the best stacked against each other on each team?
However, the recent trend for tournaments posted on the Team Liquid SC2 Tournament forum is completely ridiculous. Almost every tournament that I have participated in so far, has a degree of 'invitational' in it.
I do understand, however, that its a free world out there, and if you had enough money and wanted to make a tournament exclusively for pro-scene and only wanted to exclusively watch those players play, nothing is stopping you. However, it shouldn't be a trend that the rest of the community should follow, because thats not how competition is born. I read up to here and I know your pretty stupid. What the rest of the community does is out of the control of the person who made the tournament. Honestly this argument takes top10 in dumbest sc2 arguments ever .....
You sound like someone I would want to know IRL. Can we be E-friends? :D
|
On July 13 2010 09:40 USn wrote:
I love how biased the poll at the start of this thread is. There's no middle road option, which is obviously what everyone wants.
Actually theres no extreme road as in "zero invitationals" ... theres no middle road between more invitationals and less invitationals...
|
On July 13 2010 07:38 Chill wrote:
Name one competitive game or sport that has the same players always at the top.
Edit: Not one player, but 16 of the same at the top for 6 months.
table tennis.
|
On July 13 2010 11:21 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 09:40 USn wrote:
I love how biased the poll at the start of this thread is. There's no middle road option, which is obviously what everyone wants. Actually theres no extreme road as in "zero invitationals" ... theres no middle road between more invitationals and less invitationals...
Your poll isn't more invitationals vs less invitationals.
|
On July 13 2010 13:06 dogabutila wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 07:38 Chill wrote:
Name one competitive game or sport that has the same players always at the top.
Edit: Not one player, but 16 of the same at the top for 6 months. table tennis.
Major League Eating.
|
Also wanted to point out that it seems that OP seems to have an issue with seeding, also. The GG tourney is based off of heavy seeding and seeds are always around and have always been around. Not just in SC2.
|
I haven't kept count of how many invitationals and qualifiers in tournaments there are these days. However, during the 1 month downtime, many organizers were keen to develop their own events.
A proven way to keep interest going in that climate was to invite well known players to play in their tournament, and to a lesser extent, to invite well-known casters to cast them. Compared to phase 1, yes there are more invitationals.
That definitely won't be the case on release, I think. Craftcup, Gosucoaching, Zotac, among some others I forgot about at the moment are not invitational and present good chances for rising players to prove themselves.
I don't think it's a cause of concern that in particular, in these last weeks of beta, there are many invitationals. It's just the way the timing worked out, and that's the way tournament organizers are maintaining interest in their events.
|
How would you improve the situation?
Assume that a person or a person representing an corporation interested in sponsoring a tournament. How would you avoid the invitational trap? Assume that the corporation will assign some well known personality, how do you avoid ANY invites? How do you convince that sponsor that an inviteless tournament would bring greater returns than an invitational?
Would a tournament that assigns brackets to various weekly open tournaments be better? How do you go about ensuring the greatest return for a sponsor in terms of immediate impact, ease of organization, time expenditure rather than a invite only or partial invite tournament. Can it be justified beyond fairness in E-Sport?
As a representative of a potential sponsor, those are questions I will like to get answered, and I don't see it in this thread.
|
I believe the OP is asking why there aren't any qualifiers for the invitational tournaments like even an offline one so maybe an unknown can grab a spot and potentially get better known by doing well against named players. You can reach the target audience with a well put together qualifier that leads to a tournament and ends in a final. This has been done countless times.
|
imo invitational should be VERY special not a regular thing, with open tourneys in between invitational, but there are too many people hosting tournys which make this near impossible
|
On July 13 2010 18:10 Baarn wrote:
I believe the OP is asking why there aren't any qualifiers for the invitational tournaments like even an offline one so maybe an unknown can grab a spot and potentially get better known by doing well against named players. You can reach the target audience with a well put together qualifier that leads to a tournament and ends in a final. This has been done countless times.
They have qualifiers in the ggsc2 tournament and the op made a less grateful post in that thread as well.
|
Not sure if this was said earlier in the thread but, The reason the tl community has done so many invitationals is to put the best players together to make it attract the most viewers. More viewers= high potential to pick up sponsors. More sponsors=Growth for the community. This is how we grow esports from the ground up. Has to start somewheres
|
ya it really sucks when people like tlo and huk just ride their starcraft fame to get in to everything.
|
|
|
I don't think there are too many invitationals (too much = other players cannot play in regulars tourneys). There were like 3 open tourneys each week with big brackets. And i'm not talking about little national tourneys..
As a viewer I could not follow all those tourneys.
If you wanted to play, you could have just sign up for those tourneys.
There is not too much invitationals because you can't play in tourneys, so it's because of some jealousy ?
|
On July 13 2010 20:45 HubertFelix wrote:
I don't think there are too many invitationals (too much = other players cannot play in regulars tourneys). There were like 3 open tourneys each week with big brackets. And i'm not talking about little national tourneys..
As a viewer I could not follow all those tourneys.
If you wanted to play, you could have just sign up for those tourneys.
There is not too much invitationals because you can't play in tourneys, so it's because of some jealousy ?
I think what you're saying is actually part of his point. There are many tournaments going and lots of them are only showing the 'known' players, so it's not very likely that someone who doesn't spend 10 hours a day watching SC2 will notice newer talent, thus tournaments without the big names go largely ignored, thus all the attention stays on the old favorites, ad infinitum. That can't be a good thing in any way, really.
|
On July 13 2010 20:42 IdrA wrote:
ya it really sucks when people like tlo and huk just ride their starcraft fame to get in to everything.
LOL. But yea IdrA has a point here....
|
you rise your way up to the top dude, yeah, EVERY tournament doesnt give you the shot to do that, but jesus, they shouldnt. If every big tournament had 1024 players all striving to be the next TLO breakthrough, do you know how tedious it would be? Imo GGi has the perfect set-up right now.
|
Fundamentally this is no different to seeding - it's not "fair" that tournament seeds get
- to skip right into later rounds
- to be split from other seeds, to increase their chances of winning
But the principle behind it is exactly the same - people want to see the familiar faces and the big names in the late stages, not beating each other up (or losing in random upsets) in the ro512 or whatever. As a spectator I don't see this as a bad thing, and while I can understand player frustration it really is nothing new.
|
On July 13 2010 21:10 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2010 20:42 IdrA wrote:
ya it really sucks when people like tlo and huk just ride their starcraft fame to get in to everything. LOL. But yea IdrA has a point here....
LOL. but I wasn't talking about HuK and TLO when it came to this, in fact I support both those players and they should be invited, maybe follow the fucking thread... IdrA... LOL....
|
I think what OP wants is maybe give at least a chance for less known players to show themselves..probably not any bronze player, but many top diamond players who can actually compete..
i'll give a quick example, let's say MoMaN, he won many tourneys, but isnt in the top "12" of all invites in every tourney. Its always the same ones, which doesn't allow any top 12 to top 50 players to actually have a chance to show their names and get better.
Dont get me wrong, I love watching TLO, idra white-ra etc
|
no shit they should be invited, and they proved that they deserved invites in open tournaments. tlo had a good run in a zotac before getting invited to the tli, making his name, and then continuing to do well in everything, huk had to win all the newbie american stuff before he started getting invites.
invitationals are good for competitive gaming because they have the biggest draw, people dont watch for fairness and competitive integrity, they watch for entertainment. big name players provide better entertainment because their reputations make it more exciting and people are too stupid to see any real difference in the gameplay anyway. that allows invitationals to get better sponsors, get more money into the scene, which is obviously good. huk and tlo and various others already proved that its possible to go from a complete unknown to getting invited to everything, as long as you're capable of demonstrating that you deserve it.
of course thats all already been said and you'll just continue to ignore it cuz the sole reason you made this thread is because you think you deserve to be treated the same as people who have actually accomplished something.
|
I think the gosugamers tournament has quite a good format. It ensures there will be known players participating while also giving a chance to the unknown. You say that players like Idra, etc. are just as good as some unknown player however I think results so far have shown that the players who are "known" deserve it. Take a look at the ZotacCup which everyone is allowed to participate in. They've had like 15 tourneys so far and pretty much every one of them has been won by a player who is well known in the community. Is that a coincidence? If you are truly good enough then making a name for yourself is always possible.
|
On July 14 2010 00:10 IdrA wrote:
no shit they should be invited, and they proved that they deserved invites in open tournaments. tlo had a good run in a zotac before getting invited to the tli, making his name, and then continuing to do well in everything, huk had to win all the newbie american stuff before he started getting invites.
invitationals are good for competitive gaming because they have the biggest draw, people dont watch for fairness and competitive integrity, they watch for entertainment. big name players provide better entertainment because their reputations make it more exciting and people are too stupid to see any real difference in the gameplay anyway. that allows invitationals to get better sponsors, get more money into the scene, which is obviously good. huk and tlo and various others already proved that its possible to go from a complete unknown to getting invited to everything, as long as you're capable of demonstrating that you deserve it.
of course thats all already been said and you'll just continue to ignore it cuz the sole reason you made this thread is because you think you deserve to be treated the same as people who have actually accomplished something.
this is an example of someone not reading the thread... maybe if he bothered to read past the title, he would know that i never once talked about me wanting to be invited to anything... yeah.. it's already been said that TLO and HuK deserve their reputations... BY ME.. moron...
its okay though, its only idra, once launch comes and there are hundreds of thousands of other players that exist, you will only be remembered as a bad taste in everyone's mouths since you are possibly the worst mannered "professional" that exists and have complete disregard for respect at all levels of play... maybe you are cool in real life, but you forget that people are still people if you can't see their face on the other side of your screen...
you come into my thread, don't even read it, don't even know wtf its all about, then call me dumbass ^_^ very classy...
gl hf in the GGI, don't forget to say gg after you lose and don't let the door hit you on your way out
|
To be clear, the GGinvitational is the "Global Gamers" invitational. A lot of people are making that mistake.
|
there is a TON of weekly tourneys, craftcup on usa/euro, zotac, esl, gosucoaching, probably more that im forgetting and anyone can join them. If the tourney hosts put up open registration then 5000 people would sign up.
|
On July 14 2010 00:22 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:10 IdrA wrote:+ Show Spoiler +no shit they should be invited, and they proved that they deserved invites in open tournaments. tlo had a good run in a zotac before getting invited to the tli, making his name, and then continuing to do well in everything, huk had to win all the newbie american stuff before he started getting invites.
invitationals are good for competitive gaming because they have the biggest draw, people dont watch for fairness and competitive integrity, they watch for entertainment. big name players provide better entertainment because their reputations make it more exciting and people are too stupid to see any real difference in the gameplay anyway. that allows invitationals to get better sponsors, get more money into the scene, which is obviously good. huk and tlo and various others already proved that its possible to go from a complete unknown to getting invited to everything, as long as you're capable of demonstrating that you deserve it.
of course thats all already been said and you'll just continue to ignore it cuz the sole reason you made this thread is because you think you deserve to be treated the same as people who have actually accomplished something. this is an example of someone not reading the thread... maybe if he bothered to read past the title, he would know that i never once talked about me wanting to be invited to anything... its okay though, its only idra, once launch comes and there are hundreds of thousands of other players that exist, you will only be remembered as a bad taste in everyone's mouths since you are possibly the worst mannered "professional" that exists and have complete disregard for respect at all levels of play... maybe you are cool in real life, but you forget that people are still people if you can't see their face on the other side of your screen... you come into my thread, don't even read it, don't even know wtf its all about, then call me dumbass ^_^ very classy... gl hf in the GGI, don't forget to say gg after you lose and don't let the door hit you on your way out
You know, I like to go out of my way to disagree with much of what IdrA says (even though he's normally right) but he is 100% spot on in this case. It's apparent he DID reap the OP, you just are refusing to listen to anyone that does not agree with you. And please be honest here, this IS a thread about you not getting a seed in the GG Inv or Wolf Cup. There is no other reason in the world this OP would exist.
Let's look at it from my view:
I run a broadcasting stream that RELIES on having massive numbers to keep sponsors happy, and to attract new ones. These sponsors are the type of guys that care about one thing only, NUMBERS. Without big names you will not get big numbers. Period. End of Story.
Point in case:
ITL on Sunday (one of our smallest turnouts for an ITL in a LONG time):
Unique Viewers: 8,447
Total Viewers: 16,995
Total Viewer Time: 316 days, 12 hours, 24 minutes
Average # of Viewers: 1,560
ITC on Monday: (one of our best ITC turnouts)
Unique Viewers: 6,742
Total Viewers: 10,155
Total Viewer Time: 103 days, 14 hours, 19 minutes
Average # of Viewers: 675
Proof is in the pudding.... As a sponsor which of those two events would you rather put your $ into?
|
On July 14 2010 00:38 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:22 Paramore wrote:On July 14 2010 00:10 IdrA wrote:+ Show Spoiler +no shit they should be invited, and they proved that they deserved invites in open tournaments. tlo had a good run in a zotac before getting invited to the tli, making his name, and then continuing to do well in everything, huk had to win all the newbie american stuff before he started getting invites.
invitationals are good for competitive gaming because they have the biggest draw, people dont watch for fairness and competitive integrity, they watch for entertainment. big name players provide better entertainment because their reputations make it more exciting and people are too stupid to see any real difference in the gameplay anyway. that allows invitationals to get better sponsors, get more money into the scene, which is obviously good. huk and tlo and various others already proved that its possible to go from a complete unknown to getting invited to everything, as long as you're capable of demonstrating that you deserve it.
of course thats all already been said and you'll just continue to ignore it cuz the sole reason you made this thread is because you think you deserve to be treated the same as people who have actually accomplished something. this is an example of someone not reading the thread... maybe if he bothered to read past the title, he would know that i never once talked about me wanting to be invited to anything... its okay though, its only idra, once launch comes and there are hundreds of thousands of other players that exist, you will only be remembered as a bad taste in everyone's mouths since you are possibly the worst mannered "professional" that exists and have complete disregard for respect at all levels of play... maybe you are cool in real life, but you forget that people are still people if you can't see their face on the other side of your screen... you come into my thread, don't even read it, don't even know wtf its all about, then call me dumbass ^_^ very classy... gl hf in the GGI, don't forget to say gg after you lose and don't let the door hit you on your way out You know, I like to go out of my way to disagree with much of what IdrA says (even though he's normally right) but he is 100% spot on in this case. It's apparent he DID reap the OP, you just are refusing to listen to anyone that does not agree with you. And please be honest here, this IS a thread about you not getting a seed in the GG Inv or Wolf Cup. There is no other reason in the world this OP would exist. Let's look at it from my view: I run a broadcasting stream that RELIES on having massive numbers to keep sponsors happy, and to attract new ones. These sponsors are the type of guys that care about one thing only, NUMBERS. Without big names you will not get big numbers. Period. End of Story. Point in case: ITL on Sunday (one of our smallest turnouts for an ITL in a LONG time): Unique Viewers: 8,447 Total Viewers: 16,995 Total Viewer Time: 316 days, 12 hours, 24 minutes Average # of Viewers: 1,560 ITC on Monday:Unique Viewers: 6,742 Total Viewers: 10,155 Total Viewer Time: 103 days, 14 hours, 19 minutes Average # of Viewers: 675 Proof is in the pudding.... As a sponsor which of those two events would you rather put your $ into?
Well, let's be fair here Diamond. You compared a Sunday tournament to a Monday tournament. I think the draw for a Sunday tournament will ALWAYS be higher than a Monday tournament just due to the fact that people have more time on the weekends. I know for a fact that I watch tournaments nonstop when I have time on Weekends, but can't be bothered to find time for them Monday-Thursday.
|
On July 14 2010 00:41 Takkara wrote:
Well, let's be fair here Diamond. You compared a Sunday tournament to a Monday tournament. I think the draw for a Sunday tournament will ALWAYS be higher than a Monday tournament just due to the fact that people have more time on the weekends. I know for a fact that I watch tournaments nonstop when I have time on Weekends, but can't be bothered to find time for them Monday-Thursday.
Actually Monday is normally one of our better ratings days. The only death days per se are Thursday and Friday.
And actually iirc Monday is the optimum viewer time, it's why hit shows like House are on Monday's. Monday is a great day for video content. Sunday is actually considered in the broadcasting industry as a weaker day outside of Football season.
|
On July 14 2010 00:38 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:22 Paramore wrote:On July 14 2010 00:10 IdrA wrote:+ Show Spoiler +no shit they should be invited, and they proved that they deserved invites in open tournaments. tlo had a good run in a zotac before getting invited to the tli, making his name, and then continuing to do well in everything, huk had to win all the newbie american stuff before he started getting invites.
invitationals are good for competitive gaming because they have the biggest draw, people dont watch for fairness and competitive integrity, they watch for entertainment. big name players provide better entertainment because their reputations make it more exciting and people are too stupid to see any real difference in the gameplay anyway. that allows invitationals to get better sponsors, get more money into the scene, which is obviously good. huk and tlo and various others already proved that its possible to go from a complete unknown to getting invited to everything, as long as you're capable of demonstrating that you deserve it.
of course thats all already been said and you'll just continue to ignore it cuz the sole reason you made this thread is because you think you deserve to be treated the same as people who have actually accomplished something. this is an example of someone not reading the thread... maybe if he bothered to read past the title, he would know that i never once talked about me wanting to be invited to anything... its okay though, its only idra, once launch comes and there are hundreds of thousands of other players that exist, you will only be remembered as a bad taste in everyone's mouths since you are possibly the worst mannered "professional" that exists and have complete disregard for respect at all levels of play... maybe you are cool in real life, but you forget that people are still people if you can't see their face on the other side of your screen... you come into my thread, don't even read it, don't even know wtf its all about, then call me dumbass ^_^ very classy... gl hf in the GGI, don't forget to say gg after you lose and don't let the door hit you on your way out You know, I like to go out of my way to disagree with much of what IdrA says (even though he's normally right) but he is 100% spot on in this case. It's apparent he DID reap the OP, you just are refusing to listen to anyone that does not agree with you. And please be honest here, this IS a thread about you not getting a seed in the GG Inv or Wolf Cup. There is no other reason in the world this OP would exist. Let's look at it from my view: I run a broadcasting stream that RELIES on having massive numbers to keep sponsors happy, and to attract new ones. These sponsors are the type of guys that care about one thing only, NUMBERS. Without big names you will not get big numbers. Period. End of Story. Point in case: ITL on Sunday (one of our smallest turnouts for an ITL in a LONG time): Unique Viewers: 8,447 Total Viewers: 16,995 Total Viewer Time: 316 days, 12 hours, 24 minutes Average # of Viewers: 1,560 ITC on Monday: (one of our best ITC turnouts)Unique Viewers: 6,742 Total Viewers: 10,155 Total Viewer Time: 103 days, 14 hours, 19 minutes Average # of Viewers: 675 Proof is in the pudding.... As a sponsor which of those two events would you rather put your $ into?
I guess I can't reiterate enough that this isn't really about me and that I just used tournaments that I happened to participate in as an example. Perhaps I should have used other tournaments that did not even include open sign ups.
Sure, as I have already admitted, I wouldn't mind being an invitee... WHO WOULDNT? but again.. this thread is entirely about the fact that there are too many tournaments which have reserve seating, invitational or some other part JUST FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING IT... and its quickly becoming the NORM when it should be the EXCEPTION.
So, maybe YOU should re-read the OP because clearly YOU seem to be misunderstanding as well...
Also, some people have work on Mondays and Tuesdays and Wednesdays and even Fridays, but can not mistake cause and effect if you want to talk about numbers.
Regardless, we are on two different sides of a debate, nothing is wrong with that, I just want you to be argueing for the other side and not some ulterior point.... The arguement is.. invitationals vs non-invitationals, should we have less invitationals.. not... "OP is crying about not being invited' because clearly I'm not.
|
On July 14 2010 00:42 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:41 Takkara wrote:
Well, let's be fair here Diamond. You compared a Sunday tournament to a Monday tournament. I think the draw for a Sunday tournament will ALWAYS be higher than a Monday tournament just due to the fact that people have more time on the weekends. I know for a fact that I watch tournaments nonstop when I have time on Weekends, but can't be bothered to find time for them Monday-Thursday. Actually Monday is normally one of our better ratings days. The only death days per se are Thursday and Friday. And actually iirc Monday is the optimum viewer time, it's why hit shows like House are on Monday's. Monday is a great day for video content. Sunday is actually considered in the broadcasting industry as a weaker day outside of Football season.
If Monday is your best viewer time, wouldn't it make sense to put your larger draw (the ITL) in the Monday slot? From a pure ratings standpoint, that would make the most sense then, no? I'd be very interested if you had any links about Monday being an optimal video content day. I'm far more likely to watch something on a weekend than a weekday. I'd rather spend my precious free time hours on a weekday actually playing SC2 than just watching.
|
On July 14 2010 00:46 Paramore wrote:
I guess I can't reiterate enough that this isn't really about me and that I just used tournaments that I happened to participate in as an example. Perhaps I should have used other tournaments that did not even include open sign ups.
Sure, as I have already admitted, I wouldn't mind being an invitee... WHO WOULDNT? but again.. this thread is entirely about the fact that there are too many tournaments which have reserve seating, invitational or some other part JUST FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING IT... and its quickly becoming the NORM when it should be the EXCEPTION.
So, maybe YOU should re-read the OP because clearly YOU seem to be misunderstanding as well...
Also, some people have work on Mondays and Tuesdays and Wednesdays and even Fridays, but you can not mistake cause and effect if you want to talk about numbers.
Ok I said this earlier and I will say it again. No matter how much the players want to feel cool and powerful this is for one thing and one thing only.
The fans.
Without them you would be getting $0 to play this game and just be like some guy that's really good at D2 PvP. It's something that a lot of players are forgetting recently.
The fans like invitationals, the fans will get them. Once fans stop liking them than maybe we won't see as many.
And turns out that some people actually work on Saturdays and Sunday's too!!!! Liek I said before though, Monday's are a VERY good day for ratings, much more so than Sundays.
On July 14 2010 00:50 Takkara wrote:
If Monday is your best viewer time, wouldn't it make sense to put your larger draw (the ITL) in the Monday slot? From a pure ratings standpoint, that would make the most sense then, no? I'd be very interested if you had any links about Monday being an optimal video content day. I'm far more likely to watch something on a weekend than a weekday. I'd rather spend my precious free time hours on a weekday actually playing SC2 than just watching.
Actually I don't have links as all this info comes from my cousin who works for G4 and is host of a show (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1977437/), and we talk quite a bit about things like this. I'm sure someone could dig up a source, but this is just something that is a known in the industry. Monday night football anyone?
|
On July 14 2010 00:42 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:41 Takkara wrote:
Well, let's be fair here Diamond. You compared a Sunday tournament to a Monday tournament. I think the draw for a Sunday tournament will ALWAYS be higher than a Monday tournament just due to the fact that people have more time on the weekends. I know for a fact that I watch tournaments nonstop when I have time on Weekends, but can't be bothered to find time for them Monday-Thursday. Actually Monday is normally one of our better ratings days. The only death days per se are Thursday and Friday. And actually iirc Monday is the optimum viewer time, it's why hit shows like House are on Monday's. Monday is a great day for video content. Sunday is actually considered in the broadcasting industry as a weaker day outside of Football season.
Let's not get into the discussion of TV ratings since they probably don't correlate with internet ratings... seeing as there is a large population of people that don't watch TV but game on the internet... also, this isn't a discussion as to what days are more popular... we could probably argue all day on that subject too.. but lets not
|
On July 14 2010 00:22 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:10 IdrA wrote:
no shit they should be invited, and they proved that they deserved invites in open tournaments. tlo had a good run in a zotac before getting invited to the tli, making his name, and then continuing to do well in everything, huk had to win all the newbie american stuff before he started getting invites.
invitationals are good for competitive gaming because they have the biggest draw, people dont watch for fairness and competitive integrity, they watch for entertainment. big name players provide better entertainment because their reputations make it more exciting and people are too stupid to see any real difference in the gameplay anyway. that allows invitationals to get better sponsors, get more money into the scene, which is obviously good. huk and tlo and various others already proved that its possible to go from a complete unknown to getting invited to everything, as long as you're capable of demonstrating that you deserve it.
of course thats all already been said and you'll just continue to ignore it cuz the sole reason you made this thread is because you think you deserve to be treated the same as people who have actually accomplished something. this is an example of someone not reading the thread... maybe if he bothered to read past the title, he would know that i never once talked about me wanting to be invited to anything... yeah.. it's already been said that TLO and HuK deserve their reputations... BY ME.. moron... its okay though, its only idra, once launch comes and there are hundreds of thousands of other players that exist, you will only be remembered as a bad taste in everyone's mouths since you are possibly the worst mannered "professional" that exists and have complete disregard for respect at all levels of play... maybe you are cool in real life, but you forget that people are still people if you can't see their face on the other side of your screen... you come into my thread, don't even read it, don't even know wtf its all about, then call me dumbass ^_^ very classy... gl hf in the GGI, don't forget to say gg after you lose and don't let the door hit you on your way out
youd be rude too if you had to talk to yourself
the only mention of huk or tlo in your first post is preceded by "as mentioned in this thread" you did not bring up that they deserved to be invited. it was brought up by people who were pointing out that unknown players who were actually good are fully capable of working their way to the top.
you dont say you want to be invited, but its still the whole point of your post. if you, or anyone else, wants recognition, play any of the tens of open tournaments hosted every week and earn it like everyone else. and yes, the famous starcraft1 players getting invites did earn their spots. competitive gaming is an entertainment industry. starcraft1 players have reputations, that makes them entertaining. nobody gives a shit what you do. but they do give a shit about ret, even if he barely plays sc2.
|
On July 14 2010 00:46 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:38 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On July 14 2010 00:22 Paramore wrote:On July 14 2010 00:10 IdrA wrote:+ Show Spoiler +no shit they should be invited, and they proved that they deserved invites in open tournaments. tlo had a good run in a zotac before getting invited to the tli, making his name, and then continuing to do well in everything, huk had to win all the newbie american stuff before he started getting invites.
invitationals are good for competitive gaming because they have the biggest draw, people dont watch for fairness and competitive integrity, they watch for entertainment. big name players provide better entertainment because their reputations make it more exciting and people are too stupid to see any real difference in the gameplay anyway. that allows invitationals to get better sponsors, get more money into the scene, which is obviously good. huk and tlo and various others already proved that its possible to go from a complete unknown to getting invited to everything, as long as you're capable of demonstrating that you deserve it.
of course thats all already been said and you'll just continue to ignore it cuz the sole reason you made this thread is because you think you deserve to be treated the same as people who have actually accomplished something. this is an example of someone not reading the thread... maybe if he bothered to read past the title, he would know that i never once talked about me wanting to be invited to anything... its okay though, its only idra, once launch comes and there are hundreds of thousands of other players that exist, you will only be remembered as a bad taste in everyone's mouths since you are possibly the worst mannered "professional" that exists and have complete disregard for respect at all levels of play... maybe you are cool in real life, but you forget that people are still people if you can't see their face on the other side of your screen... you come into my thread, don't even read it, don't even know wtf its all about, then call me dumbass ^_^ very classy... gl hf in the GGI, don't forget to say gg after you lose and don't let the door hit you on your way out You know, I like to go out of my way to disagree with much of what IdrA says (even though he's normally right) but he is 100% spot on in this case. It's apparent he DID reap the OP, you just are refusing to listen to anyone that does not agree with you. And please be honest here, this IS a thread about you not getting a seed in the GG Inv or Wolf Cup. There is no other reason in the world this OP would exist. Let's look at it from my view: I run a broadcasting stream that RELIES on having massive numbers to keep sponsors happy, and to attract new ones. These sponsors are the type of guys that care about one thing only, NUMBERS. Without big names you will not get big numbers. Period. End of Story. Point in case: ITL on Sunday (one of our smallest turnouts for an ITL in a LONG time): Unique Viewers: 8,447 Total Viewers: 16,995 Total Viewer Time: 316 days, 12 hours, 24 minutes Average # of Viewers: 1,560 ITC on Monday: (one of our best ITC turnouts)Unique Viewers: 6,742 Total Viewers: 10,155 Total Viewer Time: 103 days, 14 hours, 19 minutes Average # of Viewers: 675 Proof is in the pudding.... As a sponsor which of those two events would you rather put your $ into? I guess I can't reiterate enough that this isn't really about me and that I just used tournaments that I happened to participate in as an example. Perhaps I should have used other tournaments that did not even include open sign ups. Sure, as I have already admitted, I wouldn't mind being an invitee... WHO WOULDNT? but again.. this thread is entirely about the fact that there are too many tournaments which have reserve seating, invitational or some other part JUST FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING IT... and its quickly becoming the NORM when it should be the EXCEPTION. So, maybe YOU should re-read the OP because clearly YOU seem to be misunderstanding as well... Also, some people have work on Mondays and Tuesdays and Wednesdays and even Fridays, but can not mistake cause and effect if you want to talk about numbers. Regardless, we are on two different sides of a debate, nothing is wrong with that, I just want you to be argueing for the other side and not some ulterior point.... The arguement is.. invitationals vs non-invitationals, should we have less invitationals.. not... "OP is crying about not being invited' because clearly I'm not.
Clearly it's not what your intent was, but your OP and some early replies just painted the whole argument wrong. Like Chill said, your point is lost amidst the rambling, and sometimes what you say just really comes off as self-serving. It's not as blatant as "I want an invite and deserve one" but it's more of a 'read-between-the-lines' type of thing. I've attached the ones if you're genuinely wondering why people get this vibe from your post.
Your point is just that you wish there weren't as many invitationals and want a world that's more equitable for all players. Others have countered with the fact they're ok with it and want a world that's more skewed towards the viewers than fairness for all players. That's the argument, but you muddied with water with a lot of your replies and bringing the focus to particular tournaments.
+ Show Spoiler +I look on the ladder everyday and Idra's record is just as imperfect as the next person under him. He still has losses even though he is #1 Diamond (doesn't mean anything btw), he also plays 8 hours a day, something most players don't have the time for. Even then, he still reserved the last few spots for well-knowns and put a "star" beside the names of those that "deserved" it. I have no hard-feelings, I didn't even get a star beside my name until I pmed him... I'm not arrogant and I have worked just as hard as most of those that were invited. I've played in just as many tournaments and have similar results. Yet nobody knows who I am because I failed to properly network. Yeah, thats my fault, but the bottom line is, they are where they are now because of who they know, not because they worked harder in SC2.
|
On July 14 2010 00:46 Paramore wrote:
..."OP is crying about not being invited' because clearly I'm not.
The bitter and arrogant tone in the OP aswell as in comments both in this and other threads strongly suggests that you are. That's the problem.
|
On July 14 2010 00:51 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:46 Paramore wrote:
I guess I can't reiterate enough that this isn't really about me and that I just used tournaments that I happened to participate in as an example. Perhaps I should have used other tournaments that did not even include open sign ups.
Sure, as I have already admitted, I wouldn't mind being an invitee... WHO WOULDNT? but again.. this thread is entirely about the fact that there are too many tournaments which have reserve seating, invitational or some other part JUST FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING IT... and its quickly becoming the NORM when it should be the EXCEPTION.
So, maybe YOU should re-read the OP because clearly YOU seem to be misunderstanding as well...
Also, some people have work on Mondays and Tuesdays and Wednesdays and even Fridays, but you can not mistake cause and effect if you want to talk about numbers. Ok I said this earlier and I will say it again. No matter how much the players want to feel cool and powerful this is for one thing and one thing only. The fans. Without them you would be getting $0 to play this game and just be like some guy that's really good at D2 PvP. It's something that a lot of players are forgetting recently. The fans like invitationals, the fans will get them. Once fans stop liking them than maybe we won't see as many. And turns out that some people actually work on Saturdays and Sunday's too!!!! Liek I said before though, Monday's are a VERY good day for ratings, much more so than Sundays.
Thats fine, i totally understand what you are coming from... that is why I put in the OP the pros and cons of invitationals... I dont have some one-sided view where I refuse to listen, its just that morons keep posting here and talking about something entirely different or say that I'm just whining about not invited, which is not the case... if the community truly wants more invitationals.. let it happen, I'm all for what everyone wants... the question in the OP was:
What does the community think? Should invitationals be the exception or should they be the norm? How should we define our competition? Should they fight for it, or should they be spoon fed? Those that aren't known would have to fight so much harder.
Thats what it was always about. Sure, I used some harsh words in it, but honestly, some of the players that are invited, don't deserve it, its insulting to those that do deserve it (HuK, TLO, [not talking about myself]) and an eyesore to those that watch (yes now I'm talking about me) .
Besides the point, I'm not saying BAN invitationals, just make it more exclusive/special so its not the regular basis type of cookie-cutter tournament you run ex:... oh.. some guy has $1500 to give away, the money is already committed.. lets just make it an invitational because we want viewers... don't remember that the money was already committed and all you needed to do was run a tournament... doesn't need to be invitational every god-damn time... there can just exist a big tournament that is open to diamonds.. etc... i don't even care what the pre-requisits are...
|
On July 14 2010 00:52 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:22 Paramore wrote:On July 14 2010 00:10 IdrA wrote:
no shit they should be invited, and they proved that they deserved invites in open tournaments. tlo had a good run in a zotac before getting invited to the tli, making his name, and then continuing to do well in everything, huk had to win all the newbie american stuff before he started getting invites.
invitationals are good for competitive gaming because they have the biggest draw, people dont watch for fairness and competitive integrity, they watch for entertainment. big name players provide better entertainment because their reputations make it more exciting and people are too stupid to see any real difference in the gameplay anyway. that allows invitationals to get better sponsors, get more money into the scene, which is obviously good. huk and tlo and various others already proved that its possible to go from a complete unknown to getting invited to everything, as long as you're capable of demonstrating that you deserve it.
of course thats all already been said and you'll just continue to ignore it cuz the sole reason you made this thread is because you think you deserve to be treated the same as people who have actually accomplished something. this is an example of someone not reading the thread... maybe if he bothered to read past the title, he would know that i never once talked about me wanting to be invited to anything... yeah.. it's already been said that TLO and HuK deserve their reputations... BY ME.. moron... its okay though, its only idra, once launch comes and there are hundreds of thousands of other players that exist, you will only be remembered as a bad taste in everyone's mouths since you are possibly the worst mannered "professional" that exists and have complete disregard for respect at all levels of play... maybe you are cool in real life, but you forget that people are still people if you can't see their face on the other side of your screen... you come into my thread, don't even read it, don't even know wtf its all about, then call me dumbass ^_^ very classy... gl hf in the GGI, don't forget to say gg after you lose and don't let the door hit you on your way out youd be rude too if you had to talk to yourself the only mention of huk or tlo in your first post is preceded by "as mentioned in this thread" you did not bring up that they deserved to be invited. it was brought up by people who were pointing out that unknown players who were actually good are fully capable of working their way to the top. you dont say you want to be invited, but its still the whole point of your post. if you, or anyone else, wants recognition, play any of the tens of open tournaments hosted every week and earn it like everyone else. and yes, the famous starcraft1 players getting invites did earn their spots. competitive gaming is an entertainment industry. starcraft1 players have reputations, that makes them entertaining. nobody gives a shit what you do. but they do give a shit about ret, even if he barely plays sc2.
Don't really understand as well why you have to be so arrogant right of the bat, IdrA might have a reputation of being a bit BM, but he was just telling you facts then you blatantly bash him in the next post. It surely isn't helping your case, specially seeing as you choose to ignore everyone's opinion beside your own.
Why invitationals are so popular has been explained to you about 30 times in this thread ;/
On July 14 2010 00:57 Paramore wrote:
What does the community think? Should invitationals be the exception or should they be the norm? How should we define our competition? Should they fight for it, or should they be spoon fed? Those that aren't known would have to fight so much harder.
THIS, you keep saying those that are invited are SPOON-FED.. they worked hard for their reputation and are reaping what they sow, this works the same in everything else.
|
On July 14 2010 00:57 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:51 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On July 14 2010 00:46 Paramore wrote:
I guess I can't reiterate enough that this isn't really about me and that I just used tournaments that I happened to participate in as an example. Perhaps I should have used other tournaments that did not even include open sign ups.
Sure, as I have already admitted, I wouldn't mind being an invitee... WHO WOULDNT? but again.. this thread is entirely about the fact that there are too many tournaments which have reserve seating, invitational or some other part JUST FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING IT... and its quickly becoming the NORM when it should be the EXCEPTION.
So, maybe YOU should re-read the OP because clearly YOU seem to be misunderstanding as well...
Also, some people have work on Mondays and Tuesdays and Wednesdays and even Fridays, but you can not mistake cause and effect if you want to talk about numbers. Ok I said this earlier and I will say it again. No matter how much the players want to feel cool and powerful this is for one thing and one thing only. The fans. Without them you would be getting $0 to play this game and just be like some guy that's really good at D2 PvP. It's something that a lot of players are forgetting recently. The fans like invitationals, the fans will get them. Once fans stop liking them than maybe we won't see as many. And turns out that some people actually work on Saturdays and Sunday's too!!!! Liek I said before though, Monday's are a VERY good day for ratings, much more so than Sundays. Thats fine, i totally understand what you are coming from... that is why I put in the OP the pros and cons of invitationals... I dont have some one-sided view where I refuse to listen, its just that morons keep posting here and talking about something entirely different or say that I'm just whining about not invited, which is not the case... if the community truly wants more invitationals.. let it happen, I'm all for what everyone wants... the question in the OP was: What does the community think? Should invitationals be the exception or should they be the norm? How should we define our competition? Should they fight for it, or should they be spoon fed? Those that aren't known would have to fight so much harder. Thats what it was always about. Sure, I used some harsh words in it, but honestly, some of the players that are invited, don't deserve it, its insulting to those that do deserve it (HuK, TLO, [not talking about myself]) and an eyesore to those that watch (yes now I'm talking about me) . Besides the point, I'm not saying BAN invitationals, just make it more exclusive/special so its not the regular basis type of cookie-cutter tournament you run ex:... oh.. some guy has $1500 to give away, the money is already committed.. lets just make it an invitational because we want viewers... don't remember that the money was already committed and all you needed to do was run a tournament... doesn't need to be invitational every god-damn time... there can just exist a big tournament that is open to diamonds.. etc... i don't even care what the pre-requisits are...
Wait wait wait......
The viewer base has spoken in a very loud and clear manner (as suggested by my numbers above), they WANT invitationals. Name me one invitational event that has outdrawn the ITL or HDH....
As for the $1500 thing, you realize that the $ for the GG inv thing came AFTER they made the format?
Any company that invests $1500 in a open tourney is stupid. They will NOT get their $'s worth. I would know being I have like access to the stats form every event ever hosted on iCCup TV.
|
On July 14 2010 00:59 Chesner wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:52 IdrA wrote:On July 14 2010 00:22 Paramore wrote:On July 14 2010 00:10 IdrA wrote:
no shit they should be invited, and they proved that they deserved invites in open tournaments. tlo had a good run in a zotac before getting invited to the tli, making his name, and then continuing to do well in everything, huk had to win all the newbie american stuff before he started getting invites.
invitationals are good for competitive gaming because they have the biggest draw, people dont watch for fairness and competitive integrity, they watch for entertainment. big name players provide better entertainment because their reputations make it more exciting and people are too stupid to see any real difference in the gameplay anyway. that allows invitationals to get better sponsors, get more money into the scene, which is obviously good. huk and tlo and various others already proved that its possible to go from a complete unknown to getting invited to everything, as long as you're capable of demonstrating that you deserve it.
of course thats all already been said and you'll just continue to ignore it cuz the sole reason you made this thread is because you think you deserve to be treated the same as people who have actually accomplished something. this is an example of someone not reading the thread... maybe if he bothered to read past the title, he would know that i never once talked about me wanting to be invited to anything... yeah.. it's already been said that TLO and HuK deserve their reputations... BY ME.. moron... its okay though, its only idra, once launch comes and there are hundreds of thousands of other players that exist, you will only be remembered as a bad taste in everyone's mouths since you are possibly the worst mannered "professional" that exists and have complete disregard for respect at all levels of play... maybe you are cool in real life, but you forget that people are still people if you can't see their face on the other side of your screen... you come into my thread, don't even read it, don't even know wtf its all about, then call me dumbass ^_^ very classy... gl hf in the GGI, don't forget to say gg after you lose and don't let the door hit you on your way out youd be rude too if you had to talk to yourself the only mention of huk or tlo in your first post is preceded by "as mentioned in this thread" you did not bring up that they deserved to be invited. it was brought up by people who were pointing out that unknown players who were actually good are fully capable of working their way to the top. you dont say you want to be invited, but its still the whole point of your post. if you, or anyone else, wants recognition, play any of the tens of open tournaments hosted every week and earn it like everyone else. and yes, the famous starcraft1 players getting invites did earn their spots. competitive gaming is an entertainment industry. starcraft1 players have reputations, that makes them entertaining. nobody gives a shit what you do. but they do give a shit about ret, even if he barely plays sc2. Don't really understand as well why you have to be so arrogant right of the bat, IdrA might have a reputation of being a bit BM, but he was just telling you facts then you blatantly bash him in the next post. It surely isn't helping your case, specially seeing as you choose to ignore everyone's opinion beside your own. Why invitationals are so popular has been explained to you about 30 times in this thread ;/ Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:57 Paramore wrote:
What does the community think? Should invitationals be the exception or should they be the norm? How should we define our competition? Should they fight for it, or should they be spoon fed? Those that aren't known would have to fight so much harder.
THIS, you keep saying those that are invited are SPOON-FED.. they worked hard for their reputation and are reaping what they sow, this works the same in everything else.
Actually I do listen to other people's arguements, especially when they are on topic... like talking about why invitationals are good or bad... otherwise, its just basic flaming in which I am defending myself...
-You can keep telling me that I want to be invited,
-and I'll keep telling you that I want to be invited, but this isn't what its really about...
-and then the only arguement anybody can come up with is that i want to be invited.. which is not really an arguement at all.. since you already said it, and I admitted it, and then you are just saying it over and over and over again...
So of course I'm going to bash Idra when he walks in this thread with his huge head and starts talking out of his ass like he does every other time.
|
On July 14 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:57 Paramore wrote:On July 14 2010 00:51 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On July 14 2010 00:46 Paramore wrote:
I guess I can't reiterate enough that this isn't really about me and that I just used tournaments that I happened to participate in as an example. Perhaps I should have used other tournaments that did not even include open sign ups.
Sure, as I have already admitted, I wouldn't mind being an invitee... WHO WOULDNT? but again.. this thread is entirely about the fact that there are too many tournaments which have reserve seating, invitational or some other part JUST FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING IT... and its quickly becoming the NORM when it should be the EXCEPTION.
So, maybe YOU should re-read the OP because clearly YOU seem to be misunderstanding as well...
Also, some people have work on Mondays and Tuesdays and Wednesdays and even Fridays, but you can not mistake cause and effect if you want to talk about numbers. Ok I said this earlier and I will say it again. No matter how much the players want to feel cool and powerful this is for one thing and one thing only. The fans. Without them you would be getting $0 to play this game and just be like some guy that's really good at D2 PvP. It's something that a lot of players are forgetting recently. The fans like invitationals, the fans will get them. Once fans stop liking them than maybe we won't see as many. And turns out that some people actually work on Saturdays and Sunday's too!!!! Liek I said before though, Monday's are a VERY good day for ratings, much more so than Sundays. Thats fine, i totally understand what you are coming from... that is why I put in the OP the pros and cons of invitationals... I dont have some one-sided view where I refuse to listen, its just that morons keep posting here and talking about something entirely different or say that I'm just whining about not invited, which is not the case... if the community truly wants more invitationals.. let it happen, I'm all for what everyone wants... the question in the OP was: What does the community think? Should invitationals be the exception or should they be the norm? How should we define our competition? Should they fight for it, or should they be spoon fed? Those that aren't known would have to fight so much harder. Thats what it was always about. Sure, I used some harsh words in it, but honestly, some of the players that are invited, don't deserve it, its insulting to those that do deserve it (HuK, TLO, [not talking about myself]) and an eyesore to those that watch (yes now I'm talking about me) . Besides the point, I'm not saying BAN invitationals, just make it more exclusive/special so its not the regular basis type of cookie-cutter tournament you run ex:... oh.. some guy has $1500 to give away, the money is already committed.. lets just make it an invitational because we want viewers... don't remember that the money was already committed and all you needed to do was run a tournament... doesn't need to be invitational every god-damn time... there can just exist a big tournament that is open to diamonds.. etc... i don't even care what the pre-requisits are... Wait wait wait...... The viewer base has spoken in a very loud and clear manner (as suggested by my numbers above), they WANT invitationals. Name me one invitational event that has outdrawn the ITL or HDH.... As for the $1500 thing, you realize that the $ for the GG inv thing came AFTER they made the format? Any company that invests $1500 in a open tourney is stupid. They will NOT get their $'s worth. I would know being I have like access to the stats form every event ever hosted on iCCup TV.
I'm not talking about the GGI anymore.. i was talking about a random tournament with $1500 ... please, not everythign is about GGI
Regardless.. so your way would basically be... lets do mostly invitationals all the time so that we can get good ratings and more money then... is that your stance?
|
On July 14 2010 00:57 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:51 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On July 14 2010 00:46 Paramore wrote:
I guess I can't reiterate enough that this isn't really about me and that I just used tournaments that I happened to participate in as an example. Perhaps I should have used other tournaments that did not even include open sign ups.
Sure, as I have already admitted, I wouldn't mind being an invitee... WHO WOULDNT? but again.. this thread is entirely about the fact that there are too many tournaments which have reserve seating, invitational or some other part JUST FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING IT... and its quickly becoming the NORM when it should be the EXCEPTION.
So, maybe YOU should re-read the OP because clearly YOU seem to be misunderstanding as well...
Also, some people have work on Mondays and Tuesdays and Wednesdays and even Fridays, but you can not mistake cause and effect if you want to talk about numbers. Ok I said this earlier and I will say it again. No matter how much the players want to feel cool and powerful this is for one thing and one thing only. The fans. Without them you would be getting $0 to play this game and just be like some guy that's really good at D2 PvP. It's something that a lot of players are forgetting recently. The fans like invitationals, the fans will get them. Once fans stop liking them than maybe we won't see as many. And turns out that some people actually work on Saturdays and Sunday's too!!!! Liek I said before though, Monday's are a VERY good day for ratings, much more so than Sundays. What does the community think? Should invitationals be the exception or should they be the norm? How should we define our competition? Should they fight for it, or should they be spoon fed? Those that aren't known would have to fight so much harder.
Seriously are you really that new to the internet? Do you simply have no idea how to talk to people on the forums without pissing them off? Most people learn in their first month how to construct a post without inciting the kind of responses you have gotten.
You are insulting TLO, WhiteRa, HuK, and every other well liked Pro with that statement. It's no wonder we are reacting to you with such venom.
When the viewers start watching Open tournaments there will be more. Until then welcome to SC2 Tournaments.
|
On July 14 2010 01:09 Spidermonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 00:57 Paramore wrote:On July 14 2010 00:51 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On July 14 2010 00:46 Paramore wrote:
I guess I can't reiterate enough that this isn't really about me and that I just used tournaments that I happened to participate in as an example. Perhaps I should have used other tournaments that did not even include open sign ups.
Sure, as I have already admitted, I wouldn't mind being an invitee... WHO WOULDNT? but again.. this thread is entirely about the fact that there are too many tournaments which have reserve seating, invitational or some other part JUST FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING IT... and its quickly becoming the NORM when it should be the EXCEPTION.
So, maybe YOU should re-read the OP because clearly YOU seem to be misunderstanding as well...
Also, some people have work on Mondays and Tuesdays and Wednesdays and even Fridays, but you can not mistake cause and effect if you want to talk about numbers. Ok I said this earlier and I will say it again. No matter how much the players want to feel cool and powerful this is for one thing and one thing only. The fans. Without them you would be getting $0 to play this game and just be like some guy that's really good at D2 PvP. It's something that a lot of players are forgetting recently. The fans like invitationals, the fans will get them. Once fans stop liking them than maybe we won't see as many. And turns out that some people actually work on Saturdays and Sunday's too!!!! Liek I said before though, Monday's are a VERY good day for ratings, much more so than Sundays. What does the community think? Should invitationals be the exception or should they be the norm? How should we define our competition? Should they fight for it, or should they be spoon fed? Those that aren't known would have to fight so much harder. Seriously are you really that new to the internet? Do you simply have no idea how to talk to people on the forums without pissing them off? Most people learn in their first month how to construct a post without inciting the kind of responses you have gotten. You are insulting TLO, WhiteRa, HuK, and every other well liked Pro with that statement. It's no wonder we are reacting to you with such venom. When the viewers start watching Open tournaments there will be more. Until then welcome to SC2 Tournaments.
Actually, I think TLO Whitera and Huk are great players and well deserving to be invited to large events. I wasn't talking about them when I made that comment. It doesn't matter who I was talking about, I'm not going to name-drop. Great though, open tournaments will be more prevelant when more viewers watch them, I look forward to that, I really do.
|
On July 14 2010 01:06 Paramore wrote:
I'm not talking about the GGI anymore.. i was talking about a random tournament with $1500 ... please, not everythign is about GGI
Regardless.. so your way would basically be... lets do mostly invitationals all the time so that we can get good ratings and more money then... is that your stance?
Well a non-invitational will never get a $1500 prize pool in SC2's current state.
Yes that is my point. $ is good. I like $. Call me crazy.
|
Paramore: I completely agree, I was going to say something similar but didn't want to look like I was whining - you said this very well.
THIS IS SC2 PEOPLE, YOUR SC1 DOESN'T MATTER.
For instance, a lot of players (was going to name names but took it back) back in 2004 generally was considered a mediocre player back when I was on a team with Elky and others, and was considered one of the better americans. True for a lot of the other "invite" players out there today, as well.
|
Also, to back up the point, did Grrr or Agent911 or Tillerman or any of the original gosus get invites? No they did it the tough way by climbing the ladders and tours.
|
On July 14 2010 01:16 vinautomatic wrote:
Also, to back up the point, did Grrr or Agent911 or Tillerman or any of the original gosus get invites? No they did it the tough way by climbing the ladders and tours.
The point is about money. It's not about fairness. Read what Diamond is saying.
|
@ Diamond
You may have all these fancy numbers about ITL vs ITC, but don't forget where the people in ITL came from... everyone had to start somewhere... its great that you guys run ITC along with ITL, thats the type of attitude I would like more of the community organizers to participate in...
I think ITC is an awesome concept. Everybody gets a chance as long as they are plat/diamond players. That's pretty open to me. ITL people earned their right.. etc.. if you have an invite ITL only tournament, that'd be fine, because you are from the ICCUP organization and EVERYBODY got a chance to ladder and got a chance to get diamond and in turn got a chance in ITC to get to ITL...
However, besides first-come-first-serve, what chance did lower players get to go to great events like HDH. Sure, well known community sharing people got invited along with some "better known" players. Yeah, I was okay with the first few invitationals. However, then it became a regular thing.. and occuring in tournaments with $50 prize pools, thats when I made this thread. Because if $10 tournaments become invite-only, wtf tournament is anybody ever going to participate in if you can only participate in winning 25 cents if you are invited?
True, big names draw large crowds, but do we really have to start reserving seats and inviting people to tournaments that are as so small, comparatively speaking? Like I said, what is special about any invitational, if all tournaments are invitational. If they become the norm, your viewer base will normalize and act as if they were just normal open-tournaments. Its because they are special that they get that many viewers in the first place. Once this goes "Norm" it wont be the same.
|
On July 14 2010 01:18 Paramore wrote:
@ Diamond
You may have all these fancy numbers about ITL vs ITC, but don't forget where the people in ITL came from... everyone had to start somewhere... its great that you guys run ITC along with ITL, thats the type of attitude I would like more of the community organizers to participate in...
I think ITC is an awesome concept. Everybody gets a chance as long as they are plat/diamond players. That's pretty open to me. ITL people earned their right.. etc.. if you have an invite ITL only tournament, that'd be fine, because you are from the ICCUP organization and EVERYBODY got a chance to ladder and got a chance to get diamond and in turn got a chance in ITC to get to ITL...
However, besides first-come-first-serve, what chance did lower players get to go to great events like HDH. Sure, well known community sharing people got invited along with some "better known" players. Yeah, I was okay with the first few invitationals. However, then it became a regular thing.. and occuring in tournaments with $50 prize pools, thats when I made this thread. Because if $10 tournaments become invite-only, wtf tournament is anybody ever going to participate in if you can only participate in winning 25 cents if you are invited?
True, big names draw large crowds, but do we really have to start reserving seats and inviting people to tournaments that are as so small, comparatively speaking? Like I said, what is special about any invitational, if all tournaments are invitational. If they become the norm, your viewer base will normalize and act as if they were just normal open-tournaments. Its because they are special that they get that many viewers in the first place. Once this goes "Norm" it wont be the same.
your basic argument throughout the thread is "people should work hard to be in tournaments and people shouldn't get free rides." there are plenty of open tournaments without $$, and even some with money like craftcup or zotac! keep winning those, and then you'll be recognized enough that invitationals will start inviting you. win those invitationals, and MORE people will want to invite you.
that sounds like hard work to me. if TLO lost every single match he ever played in an invitational from now on in a non-entertaining manner, he'd probably lose his popularity, and no longer be invited.
and guess what, people don't want to watch open tournaments. you can complain all you like, not no one wants to watch them unless there're known players in there, or if a known caster is casting. you keep whining about big tournaments not featuring players like you. (essentially you're begging for a free ride to the big tournament circuit without working your way through the smaller ones first) in any case, i don't want to watch you play because i have no clue who you are. would you?
|
If a tournament has a reputation, big players will sign up, we don't need to invite them, they'll come.
Sigh*** another person who has not read the entire story... oh well... anyways... I'm not going to be further replying to those that think this thread is about me or that I'm whining to be invited. The thread isn't about that. Those that think it is should probably re-read the OP and all the following posts.
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 14 2010 01:18 Paramore wrote:
However, besides first-come-first-serve, what chance did lower players get to go to great events like HDH. Sure, well known community sharing people got invited along with some "better known" players. Yeah, I was okay with the first few invitationals. However, then it became a regular thing.. and occuring in tournaments with $50 prize pools, thats when I made this thread. Because if $10 tournaments become invite-only, wtf tournament is anybody ever going to participate in if you can only participate in winning 25 cents if you are invited?
True, big names draw large crowds, but do we really have to start reserving seats and inviting people to tournaments that are as so small, comparatively speaking? Like I said, what is special about any invitational, if all tournaments are invitational. If they become the norm, your viewer base will normalize and act as if they were just normal open-tournaments. Its because they are special that they get that many viewers in the first place. Once this goes "Norm" it wont be the same.
Now you're trying to use a slippery-slope argument to make your point, which doesn't work.
$10 tournaments won't become invite-only, because they won't be able to get the players they want. As people get better at the game, they will have to work harder to win tournaments, and practice time will be an issue--why risk a $10000 prize pool to win $50? In the long run, small tournaments cannot afford to be invite-only, simple as that. Just look at the Korean SC1 pro scene. Progamers were disallowed by their teams from entering the GOMTV Classic, which had a $40,000 USD prize pool in part because it would interfere with their existing practice schedules too much (those same teams still sent B-teamers, which, consequently, ended up getting some good air time). Also, go back to the poker analogy. Do you see top Poker players wasting their time with $1 Sit 'n' Gos?
On July 14 2010 02:26 Paramore wrote:
Sigh*** another person who has not read the entire story... oh well... anyways... I'm not going to be further replying to those that think this thread is about me or that I'm whining to be invited. The thread isn't about that. Those that think it is should probably re-read the OP and all the following posts.
If so many people think that way, you might want to try harder at not *sounding* like you're whining.
|
On July 14 2010 02:26 Paramore wrote:
If a tournament has a reputation, big players will sign up, we don't need to invite them, they'll come.
Sigh*** another person who has not read the entire story... oh well... anyways... I'm not going to be further replying to those that think this thread is about me or that I'm whining to be invited. The thread isn't about that. Those that think it is should probably re-read the OP and all the following posts.
@Paramore
The problem is the WAY you have written some of your replays makes it seem like you are insuating that either you should have been invited or that some people didn't deserve an invite. I'm not saying that is what you meant, but that is the way it comes off. The issue with that is you have made some good points, but then it seems like you are ignoring some too.
If invite only tournaments become the norm, they will drop in popularity. I totally agree. I also think that the sponsorship/contestants will balance themselves out. Sponsors wont pay money because ratings drop and then either less pro's will get invites or they simply wont show because the money is to low.
There should be MORE open tournaments. Well that one is entirely subjective. There are some, in fact a great deal of them. Sure none are as popular as the invite ones but I think we have established why that is.
You don't feel some people deserve their invites... you said yourself they are being "spoon fed". This implies, to me atleast, that you disagree with the picks. You want call anyone out though so it is kind of a worthless point for you to make. If you aren't willing to say why you disagree with a pick there is no reason to even bring it up.
Tournaments are about business. You want the best and fairest competition, which is admirable. When the money and the competition find middle ground then I think everything will balance out. The game is still young and this may well be one of those things that takes a few months to fix it's self.
The only reason this thread has reached 14 pages is because the way you are responding to people.
|
Since I got into Beta Phase 1 I started watching every tournament I could find online. The first one that I watched was the HDH Invitational and honestly I enjoyed all of the matches. I have also watched some tournaments that had games that were pretty boring to watch these were open tourneys. If the games in open tourneys were as exciting as the games usually are in the invitationals and showmatches then I would agree that there need to me more open tournaments, but with the viewer aspect in mind I prefer watching the invitationals just because they are more action packed and exciting.
I am pretty bad at SC2 but I guess that is expected since I did not play SC1 and this is really my first RTS game that I have played online however, from a players standpoint I am sure that if my skill was the caliber of those that are high ranked diamond players that may be able to compete with the big names I would prefer to have the open format tourneys so that I could have a chance to play them and possibly win.
So all in all, from a viewer standpoint (which the tourneys tend to favor as they are what brings the money in) invitationals are more exciting and action packed because we KNOW the big names will usually have good games while the open tourneys are not always as exciting.
I have read through all 15 pages of this thread and I do not feel that Paramore is arguing just because he wants an invite to these tourneys, I feel he is arguing and posing this question because he is more of a player than a viewer and wants the tournaments to be more fair towards the unknowns that may be as good or better than the big names that we viewers love to watch play.
|
On July 14 2010 02:38 Uncertain wrote:
Since I got into Beta Phase 1 I started watching every tournament I could find online. The first one that I watched was the HDH Invitational and honestly I enjoyed all of the matches. I have also watched some tournaments that had games that were pretty boring to watch these were open tourneys. If the games in open tourneys were as exciting as the games usually are in the invitationals and showmatches then I would agree that there need to me more open tournaments, but with the viewer aspect in mind I prefer watching the invitationals just because they are more action packed and exciting.
I am pretty bad at SC2 but I guess that is expected since I did not play SC1 and this is really my first RTS game that I have played online however, from a players standpoint I am sure that if my skill was the caliber of those that are high ranked diamond players that may be able to compete with the big names I would prefer to have the open format tourneys so that I could have a chance to play them and possibly win.
So all in all, from a viewer standpoint (which the tourneys tend to favor as they are what brings the money in) invitationals are more exciting and action packed because we KNOW the big names will usually have good games while the open tourneys are not always as exciting.
I have read through all 15 pages of this thread and I do not feel that Paramore is arguing just because he wants an invite to these tourneys, I feel he is arguing and posing this question because he is more of a player than a viewer and wants the tournaments to be more fair towards the unknowns that may be as good or better than the big names that we viewers love to watch play.
I think this sums it up. Casual fans (ie: this guy) WANT too see invitationals. Sponsors like viewers, and more viewers is better than less viewers.
I mean I HATE tournaments, but it's what the fans want to see. I think show matches are the best for SC2 but not everyone agrees so we still have tournaments. Trust me the last thing I wanted to do was an ITL Grand Prix, but it's what the people want.
For the 100th time, this is about the fans, not you. The fans want invitationals so they will get them. When it changes to people wanting non-invitationals you will see peopl follow suit.
This is NOT about you, not in the least. This is about the fans and too many players forget this all too often.
|
On July 14 2010 02:46 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
I think this sums it up. Casual fans (ie: this guy) WANT too see invitationals. Sponsors like viewers, and more viewers is better than less viewers.
I mean I HATE tournaments, but it's what the fans want to see. I think show matches are the best for SC2 but not everyone agrees so we still have tournaments. Trust me the last thing I wanted to do was an ITL Grand Prix, but it's what the people want.
For the 100th time, this is about the fans, not you. The fans want invitationals so they will get them. When it changes to people wanting non-invitationals you will see peopl follow suit.
This is NOT about you, not in the least. This is about the fans and too many players forget this all too often.
I like the show matches too, these give the fans the players they want to see duke it out without having the chance that one or both of the players get knocked out in a tourney and don't even get to play each other. Which I think is one of the reasons sponsors would probably stay away from the open style tournaments for big payouts, the viewers would dwindle if the big names got knocked out because of bad luck or a bad game. The sponsors give money so that they can receive money back from the viewers, and the viewers want exciting action packed games. This is not saying that the open tourneys do not have exciting action packed games, it is just saying that the chance of a boring game increases when the tourney is filled with people we are not familiar with.
|
On July 14 2010 02:32 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 01:18 Paramore wrote:
However, besides first-come-first-serve, what chance did lower players get to go to great events like HDH. Sure, well known community sharing people got invited along with some "better known" players. Yeah, I was okay with the first few invitationals. However, then it became a regular thing.. and occuring in tournaments with $50 prize pools, thats when I made this thread. Because if $10 tournaments become invite-only, wtf tournament is anybody ever going to participate in if you can only participate in winning 25 cents if you are invited?
True, big names draw large crowds, but do we really have to start reserving seats and inviting people to tournaments that are as so small, comparatively speaking? Like I said, what is special about any invitational, if all tournaments are invitational. If they become the norm, your viewer base will normalize and act as if they were just normal open-tournaments. Its because they are special that they get that many viewers in the first place. Once this goes "Norm" it wont be the same. Now you're trying to use a slippery-slope argument to make your point, which doesn't work. $10 tournaments won't become invite-only, because they won't be able to get the players they want. As people get better at the game, they will have to work harder to win tournaments, and practice time will be an issue--why risk a $10000 prize pool to win $50? In the long run, small tournaments cannot afford to be invite-only, simple as that. Just look at the Korean SC1 pro scene. Progamers were disallowed by their teams from entering the GOMTV Classic, which had a $40,000 USD prize pool in part because it would interfere with their existing practice schedules too much (those same teams still sent B-teamers, which, consequently, ended up getting some good air time). Also, go back to the poker analogy. Do you see top Poker players wasting their time with $1 Sit 'n' Gos? Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 02:26 Paramore wrote:
Sigh*** another person who has not read the entire story... oh well... anyways... I'm not going to be further replying to those that think this thread is about me or that I'm whining to be invited. The thread isn't about that. Those that think it is should probably re-read the OP and all the following posts. If so many people think that way, you might want to try harder at not *sounding* like you're whining.
You do realize the reason I made this thread was because a $50 tournament had reserve seating in it right? Thats why I said, it shouldn't become the norm... tournaments with small prizes like $50 was surprising to me. The $10 tournament was an exaggeration... $10 and $50 aren't exactly that different, not in my eyes anyways.
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 14 2010 03:02 Paramore wrote:
You do realize the reason I made this thread was because a $50 tournament had reserve seating in it right? Thats why I said, it shouldn't become the norm... tournaments with small prizes like $50 was surprising to me. The $10 tournament was an exaggeration... $10 and $50 aren't exactly that different, not in my eyes anyways.
I realize this. I'm saying that those tournaments are only sustainable in the short term because the level of play is extremely low right now compared to where it will be a year after release. Right now, players can afford to play in those small tournaments without drastically jeopardizing their chances in bigger ones. When the level of play advances higher, and players have to practice much harder for tournament wins, this is less likely to be the case.
No legitimate competitive scene has its top players competing for pocket change like that. If the best SC2 players in the world are accepting $50 invitationals a year from now, the scene has much bigger problems.
|
Jebus this is a dead horse being beat.
Invitationals bring in the people and money, hence why organizers host them. As everyone has said over and over, it's about entertainment. We want to see high levels of play and we know that the players invited are capable of high levels of play.
Your concern is that these players might not be the very best of the best on a particular day, so you want everyone to have a fair shot at it? In an ideal world, this would be great. The problem is that this won't bring in views or cash and will never be publicized unless it did. It's simply a pipe dream.
I agree we need a ranking system that can rank everyone and not the division thing blizz has going. Regardless, it's possible RIGHT NOW to get noticed through the available tournaments. It won't be easy, but that's kinda the point isn't it?
|
this might be slighty unrelated, but IdrA plays 12 hours a day according to his interview with artosis.
|
On July 14 2010 02:38 Uncertain wrote:
Since I got into Beta Phase 1 I started watching every tournament I could find online. The first one that I watched was the HDH Invitational and honestly I enjoyed all of the matches. I have also watched some tournaments that had games that were pretty boring to watch these were open tourneys. If the games in open tourneys were as exciting as the games usually are in the invitationals and showmatches then I would agree that there need to me more open tournaments, but with the viewer aspect in mind I prefer watching the invitationals just because they are more action packed and exciting.
I am pretty bad at SC2 but I guess that is expected since I did not play SC1 and this is really my first RTS game that I have played online however, from a players standpoint I am sure that if my skill was the caliber of those that are high ranked diamond players that may be able to compete with the big names I would prefer to have the open format tourneys so that I could have a chance to play them and possibly win.
So all in all, from a viewer standpoint (which the tourneys tend to favor as they are what brings the money in) invitationals are more exciting and action packed because we KNOW the big names will usually have good games while the open tourneys are not always as exciting.
I have read through all 15 pages of this thread and I do not feel that Paramore is arguing just because he wants an invite to these tourneys, I feel he is arguing and posing this question because he is more of a player than a viewer and wants the tournaments to be more fair towards the unknowns that may be as good or better than the big names that we viewers love to watch play.
This guy pretty much got it right on the money with his closing paragraph. I'm arguing from a player's stand-point I guess. To me, it was never about the $$ or the viewer count, honestly, I make more money at my summer part time job than IdrA ever will at playing any RTS game... so I never knew money was THIS BIG of a deal. I mean, I knew it mattered, I just didn't know that it was the main reason anybody did anything around here. I totally understand viewer count, but I think that some organizers are confusing what makes a popular tournament (ie. more viewers).
Its really not about WHO is in it as much as HOW GOOD the people are. If people continually watch a tournament with 'no-names' using high-level strats, pulling off high-level micro, regardless of their brand/image or name, then people will watch your show. Yeah, its easier to place a bunch of pros in a room and say, this is high-level, but that only gets you so far and the player pool doesn't expand if you don't give no-names a chance.
The "best of SC2" today aren't that far better than the rest of the diamond players. This isn't like SCBW where players have been playing for 10+ years and are veterans with CLEAR CUT skill gaps. This is 2nd phase of beta where everybody is up in the air, including the "best of the best" right now. Yeah, there will be those players that have great work ethic and play 10+ hours a day, but others with great potential and only the time to play 4+ hours a day.. or 2+ hours a day, and still win tournaments.
SCBW mentality is kind of stagnating the scene. Maybe not stagnate, but its seriously annoying as hell when Apollo, a pro CC3 player, and TLO a pro Supreme Commander player are the ONLY TWO people who are recognized as good outside of the SCBW RTS community. Don't even get me started about WC3 players, they get the least respect out of everyone. Just because there is barely any macro mechanics in WC3, doesn't mean the players themselves don't know how to macro. Either way, getting off topic.
I think viewers, as a community, should really tune into the tournaments and see the greatness that lies within them. In a final round between HuK and Morrow in the so-called Open Wolf Cup 2 that "barely anybody watched" according to some people, it was still a final between two great players, and they got there without being seeded there, which makes it all the more worthwhile to watch. Before those finals, there were equally amazing games to be found between lesser-knowns.
Even the ITC last night had some pretty great matches. If it comes down to the viewers, then I would ask the viewers to tune in more to the rest of the community, and stop tunnel-visioning their way to e-sports, because invitationals, while great, are not all there is to the scene.
|
Money is a big deal cause it allows organizers and players to devote more time to SC2, including promoting it. The more money they bring in, the more tournaments we'll be seeing.
Viewing matches costs time, a resource many viewers have limited amounts of. Watching 128 matches for 5 or 6 good ones isn't possible all the time. Watching an invitational with 4 good matches out of 16? That's not as hard to swing on a busy schedule.
|
On July 14 2010 00:51 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Ok I said this earlier and I will say it again. No matter how much the players want to feel cool and powerful this is for one thing and one thing only.
The fans.
Without them you would be getting $0 to play this game and just be like some guy that's really good at D2 PvP. It's something that a lot of players are forgetting recently.
The fans like invitationals, the fans will get them. Once fans stop liking them than maybe we won't see as many.
And I said it before I think this is horribly wrong. I as a fan don't want to see those same people duking it out between themselves every day of the week. It just feels shallow. Of course people have earned their spot but a good tournament is about how you are performing right here right now and not how you have performed in the past. A lot of the tension comes from this.
Right now a lot of people seem to like invitationals a ton but the thing is that the best organized tournaments with the most publicity were invitationals so this might be a misperception. Just take a look at the poll in the OP.
On July 14 2010 02:38 Uncertain wrote:
Since I got into Beta Phase 1 I started watching every tournament I could find online. The first one that I watched was the HDH Invitational and honestly I enjoyed all of the matches. I have also watched some tournaments that had games that were pretty boring to watch these were open tourneys. If the games in open tourneys were as exciting as the games usually are in the invitationals and showmatches then I would agree that there need to me more open tournaments, but with the viewer aspect in mind I prefer watching the invitationals just because they are more action packed and exciting.
The problem is that those small open tourneys are not as well organized and have small prize pools and therefor they can't attract a lot of good players. This is why the viewing experience is sometimes not very satisfying but this can be changed by hosting more attractive open tournaments accompanied by a well organized shout cast.
|
Although we are all using the term 'invitational' it really could be 'seeding' in a different context. If you take tennis as an example, the top players earn their invitation and a seeded spot through years of competing and climbing their way up the ranks. At the same time there are always some wild card slots and places that are played off for in qualiying matches. This really isn't that different to what is happening with a lot of the SCII tournaments atm and past reputation in SC and performance in SC II beta so far are being used as defacto ways of determining seeding. It's probably the lack of a clear overall ranking system for SCII that makes the seeding process subjective that is causing the contention but it is only beta after all.
edit: as for audiences .. the quality/reputation of the commentators can have quite an impact as well not just the underlying game
|
Invitationals are almost never about who's the best player. In order to find the best player, you'd have to have some sort of long running completely open league and have the top people in that league qualify for a tournament and go on from there. I'm sure once SC2 is actually released and with the auto-matchmaking on B.Net 2.0 (assuming that hacking doesn't run rampant), we'll start to see who's actually the best of the best when we see the ladder and I'm sure the people invited to these tournaments will change depending on that.
I completely agree with you that invitationals should definitely not be the standard. Just keep in mind that most people view invitationals simply as exhibition matches. Why on earth do you think people like Boxer get invited to Brood War invitationals? Everyone knows he's going to lose and there are plenty of better gamers. But fans want to watch him play and for an exhibition, that's what counts.
|
I think you're misusing the poker analogy there. If you were to relate this to real poker, you would compare something like the PokerStars sit'n'go system, wherein competitors can earn their way to big weekly tournaments (invites) via participating in a series of sit'n'goes. Basically to get to a $1500 buyin tournament you would have to win a step 1 sit'n'go, a step 2, a step 3 and a step 4, with the tiered approach meaning you need to buyin at step 1 to get a free ride to step 2, etc. Placing high can get you another attempt at whatever step you are at, and so on.
This is similar to the way an SC2 player earns their way into invitationals: participating in smaller events such as the Craft or Zotac cups and doing well consistently may get you invited to an invitational with a smaller prize pool, while continuing to do well in these smaller invitationals will get you invites to things like the HDH or GGI. Consistently getting invites to the big tournys is akin to having the bankroll to enter into the weekly tournaments without worrying about the smaller steps, etc.
Anyway, I don't really understand your argument here - you personally think that some players getting invites don't deserve them and that others need more chance to prove themselves? That basically comes down to a matter of time, and its likely that the number of Craft Cups or ITC's will only grow with release together with the number of Invitationals so there will be plenty of opportunity to get noticed.
With that in mind, what's the problem with invitationals? They get sponsors, help grow the scene and there are ample opportunities to get noticed and work your way towards an invite. They're also far easier to organise than massive tournaments which give the first to sign up a chance at the money. So, why hate on invitationals?
|
I think the people that are heavily biased towards invitationals are ignoring the amount that the prospect of becoming a pro brings to the excitement of the game. The reason basketball and football are popular sports in the US are not only because people like to see dudes smash into eachother, it's because they played competitively in high school and they want their kids to grow up and play sports and be competitive.
When you have tournaments that are open to everyone (or at least everyone with a pre-requisite skill level), it generates interest from the people that want to play at that level. If you couldn't compete, and go to State and if there weren't goofy things like the McDonald's all-American team, professional sports would die.
I know that I'm the kind of person who only plays multiplayer games when I feel I can compete at them. If I feel there's a roadblock between advancing competitively (i.e. only invitationals) and where I am now, I'll stop playing and stop following the game. I know a lot of other people will as well.
That said, I'm not supporting tournaments where anybody can join. Having new players playing in tournaments is a waste of time. As I advocated before, open tournaments with a minimum rating are the best choice.
|
I think the best format is the one used for the TSL2, it gives everyone a shot at participating, but still ends up with top players in the tournament. Right now its so hard to organize something like that however.
|
Wow... that was a long read... anyways, first off i want to reply directly to Paramore, regardless of that you claim you aren't writing this for your own benefit, it comes off that way. It sounds like you are mad because turnament organizers don't think you are as good as the "known" pro-base, or atleast not as fun to watch.
Now, for me, i consider myself more of a viewer then a player, and I honestly have to say I want to see the players that I've allready heard about play it out. That way I can have a favorite to cheer for. With that said I do agree about the fact that if the scene turns to only invitational it will get stale and every turnament will be the same thing all over. However I realy think using the invitational with 4 spots open for qualifying is a great way to give newcomers a chance to be in the spotlight. If they are good enough they should pass the first or maby even second round and eventually knock one of the old "pro-players" from the invitational list.
|
In an OP with a spicy topic such as yours methinks you should have been completely neutral regarding your participation in said tournies. If your op was correct, all you had to do was list the numbers. Instead you inserted your opinion and inferred that you deserved to have a chance in those tournaments.
More then a few people have outlined in posts that the bottom line comes down to sponsorship and viewer following. Fair competition for everyone sounds spiffy but average sc2 players are not going to draw numbers like TLO and other big name players. You want completely non invite tournies? You can have them, without any sponsorship(or at least limited ones). Oh and by the way, grats, you've been promoted to the new event manager 
As others have said, if you work hard enough you'll be recognized for it and one of those invite seats could become yours?
|
I think its cool with invite tours etc..but not to often as OP says.
HOWEVER I do think its retarded to have multiple invite tours during a beta..the game isnt finished, its not ready.
Some players we think are really good now might just be mediocre in retail, and others who are completly unknown (perhaps havent even touched the beta..) will be the best player in the world.. I understand invite tours for games that have stood the test of time, sc2 hasnt (yet) :d
|
First of all - great topic.
There's lots of faces to this problem, but ideally a compromise, a middle solution, should be found.
On July 14 2010 02:26 Paramore wrote:
Its really not about WHO is in it as much as HOW GOOD the people are
This is really wishful thinking - the hardcore viewers might tune in to watch lesser known players, but the mass will only come when there's big names playing. That it 'should' or 'might' be otherwise isn't really a hypothesis worth discussing.
Secondly, there's this idea that seems to be flying throughout the thread
On July 14 2010 02:38 Uncertain wrote:
unknowns that may be as good or better than the big names that we viewers love to watch play
Some may not like it, but there's a strong connection between 'talent' (or acquired skill) and 'recognition'. Going around saying otherwise is simply untrue (I am talking about the highest tier of players, of course), and won't bring this discussion anywhere.
Now, for me, the problem is - what about that 2nd tier of players? The ones that in every Go4sc2, in every ZOTAC and CraftCup cause a few upsets, they reach the top four, but rarely or never the finals, even though they show amazingly good games?
For them, the most obvious/easiest solution would be to keep playing these 'low-stakes' tournies until they get a certain recognition (This might be a problem, since it appears that even your casual 'Friday Night SCII $15 and a Hug' now comes off as an invitational; but I digress).
However, the organisers of big events could throw in a hand as well (note that I do understand the work involved in managing a big event with sponsors, streamers, angry players and so on) by simply reserving 4 of those, say, 16 spots to players who earn them through qualifiers. This is such common practice in every other eSport (especially CS huge LAN tournies, I guess) that it seems weird that no one did it yet - basically, you make sure you get your viewer base happy by getting 12 of the best 12 possible, but you also give a chance to that 2nd tier player (which I could name SO many of, at least here in EU) who could put up a good fight or even take out a 'well-known-player'.
Anyway, /rant ended. Hope someone who matters thinks about this, and tries making everyone happy in those up-coming-big-ass invitationals.
|
On July 14 2010 19:59 n0ise wrote:First of all - great topic. There's lots of faces to this problem, but ideally a compromise, a middle solution, should be found. Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 02:26 Paramore wrote:
Its really not about WHO is in it as much as HOW GOOD the people are
This is really wishful thinking - the hardcore viewers might tune in to watch lesser known players, but the mass will only come when there's big names playing. That it 'should' or 'might' be otherwise isn't really a hypothesis worth discussing. Secondly, there's this idea that seems to be flying throughout the thread Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 02:38 Uncertain wrote:
unknowns that may be as good or better than the big names that we viewers love to watch play Some may not like it, but there's a strong connection between 'talent' (or acquired skill) and 'recognition'. Going around saying otherwise is simply untrue (I am talking about the highest tier of players, of course), and won't bring this discussion anywhere. Now, for me, the problem is - what about that 2nd tier of players? The ones that in every Go4sc2, in every ZOTAC and CraftCup cause a few upsets, they reach the top four, but rarely or never the finals, even though they show amazingly good games? For them, the most obvious/easiest solution would be to keep playing these 'low-stakes' tournies until they get a certain recognition (This might be a problem, since it appears that even your casual 'Friday Night SCII $15 and a Hug' now comes off as an invitational; but I digress). However, the organisers of big events could throw in a hand as well (note that I do understand the work involved in managing a big event with sponsors, streamers, angry players and so on) by simply reserving 4 of those, say, 16 spots to players who earn them through qualifiers. This is such common practice in every other eSport (especially CS huge LAN tournies, I guess) that it seems weird that no one did it yet - basically, you make sure you get your viewer base happy by getting 12 of the best 12 possible, but you also give a chance to that 2nd tier player (which I could name SO many of, at least here in EU) who could put up a good fight or even take out a 'well-known-player'. Anyway, /rant ended. Hope someone who matters thinks about this, and tries making everyone happy in those up-coming-big-ass invitationals.
Well, we're doing that
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
