|
On November 04 2012 13:16 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 13:06 TechNoTrance wrote:
I never understood why they hold on to extended series so tightly either despite overwhelming community opposition. It is the same reason that Blizzard doesn't listen to the community regarding maps (remember Slag Pits?) and took so long to put something on maps to prevent the ramp from being blocked by Pylons or Bunkers. Some companies just think they know better than their fans... they forgot the customer is always right.
Slag pits... LOL!
|
On November 04 2012 12:30 dcemuser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 12:27 jobber123rd wrote:On November 04 2012 12:10 emythrel wrote:On November 04 2012 11:47 NOOBALOPSE wrote:
Create a poll for what should replace it. I think if it's 2:1, perhaps something with the map choice could be the advantage that the player gets. If it's 2:0 I think the winner should get a 1 point lead.
MLG already had to creat the most convoluted bracket system ever just to keep their baby while not pissing off the players and fans of sc2 too much. Now you can only have an extended series in group play and the semi-finals of the champ bracket. They did this by completely changing the bracket system so that there are two completely separate brackets of both winners and losers that only ever allow people to play again in the event they both make the semi finals. Instead of doing the simple thing and just removing extended series and having the usual double elim rules (the player from losers has to win 2 bo3's to win the finals) they just made shit more complicated and stupid. Basically, MLG knows that they players and fans don't like the extended series, but its a hallmark of MLG so they won't get rid of it completely so instead they create a more complex system so as to avoid the situation as much as possible. The splitting of the Championship bracket wasn't to protect extended series. It was done in order to make the Grand Finals a straight Bo7 always, which arguably makes for a better spectacle than either true DE Grand Finals or extended series Grand Finals. The NCAA made a similar move for their Division I baseball tournament (College World Series) in 1988, in order to have a final that was more predictable (in terms of length) for spectators and television networks. Finally somebody understands. Extended series or no extended series doesn't matter - the old MLG finals were NEVER fun to watch because double elimination finals feel very gimmicky.
Ah well. This is a great point. I back down to this logic.
|
Loser's Bracket: 2x the amount of Games. In my opinion absolutely enough of a "punishment" for a lose.
Ex. Series makes no sense there, give the Group Finals and Grand Finals the Bo3 if Loser wins Bo7 thing and everything would be fine.
|
Well, its fair to say that it kind of doesnt matter, the better player might make it through, just like + Show Spoiler + and + Show Spoiler + did today vs their opponents who had the better record.
|
I'm actually kind of against it ever since TB brought it up. It's not a very good idea I feel, the mental disadvantage should be enough?
|
So I have to ask: if the concern is that the finals will be bad, why not just use single elimination after group stages, like every other SC2 tournament? Why have double elimination in the first place?
|
You guys chill out, I called the Waaambulance and its coming to get all of you
|
It's obviously fair for the players but it makes for some bad finals when it happens.
|
I still fail to see the advantage compared to a separate bo3. The loser bracket is here to give you a second chance, because technically you need to lose two series to be eliminated. With the extended series, you only get an half ass second chance.
|
On November 08 2010 06:14 Kennigit wrote:
It's "fair" but like Huko said, it shouldn't be used....just don't like it :\
Yep, this is how I feel about it. Almost always, the better player wins but it's a bitch to watch for the spectator. You see someone enter a series 0-2 and you know that there's no way in hell that they're winning. Even if they win the first game, you're like "cool, now you just have to win three more games in a row..." Really takes away some of the life of the tournament I think.
|
I was strongly against the extended series rule...
But in fact, I am now supporting it wholeheartedly. It's fair to the player, it just that it's not excellent from a spectator point of view. But I prefer fairness.
I'm really glad Leenock and Flash pulled it off, and I think that if they had just won a bo3, it would have been a "cheap" victory.
|
On November 04 2012 15:13 fezvez wrote:
I was strongly against the extended series rule...
But in fact, I am now supporting it wholeheartedly. It's fair to the player, it just that it's not excellent from a spectator point of view. But I prefer fairness.
I'm really glad Leenock and Flash pulled it off, and I think that if they had just won a bo3, it would have been a "cheap" victory.
How can the extended series be "fair"? Explain it to me, because the loser already has to play more games and is punished for that AND each match should start with a clean slate and not an advantage for one participant.
|
On November 04 2012 15:13 fezvez wrote:
I was strongly against the extended series rule...
But in fact, I am now supporting it wholeheartedly. It's fair to the player, it just that it's not excellent from a spectator point of view. But I prefer fairness.
I'm really glad Leenock and Flash pulled it off, and I think that if they had just won a bo3, it would have been a "cheap" victory.
Dude it's pretty bullshit. Player A lost to Player B so Player A is playing better than Player B and now it's even Easier for Player A to win, Makes pretty uninteresting games. The only exception is Flash Vs Naniwa this MLG.
|
On November 04 2012 13:27 silent_owl wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 13:16 BronzeKnee wrote:On November 04 2012 13:06 TechNoTrance wrote:
I never understood why they hold on to extended series so tightly either despite overwhelming community opposition. It is the same reason that Blizzard doesn't listen to the community regarding maps (remember Slag Pits?) and took so long to put something on maps to prevent the ramp from being blocked by Pylons or Bunkers. Some companies just think they know better than their fans... they forgot the customer is always right. Slag pits... LOL!
Why are you laughing about Slag Pits? It's just the macro version of metalopolis.
-________________________________________-*
I don't know if it surprises me or not that after like 2 years of SCII at MLG they still use extended series and don't listen to the fans.
|
On November 04 2012 13:16 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 13:06 TechNoTrance wrote:
I never understood why they hold on to extended series so tightly either despite overwhelming community opposition. It is the same reason that Blizzard doesn't listen to the community regarding maps (remember Slag Pits?) and took so long to put something on maps to prevent the ramp from being blocked by Pylons or Bunkers. Some companies just think they know better than their fans... they forgot the customer is always right.
customer is always right.. are you kidding me? the customer is close to never right, and its rare to operate with that attitude in modern time anways
|
On November 04 2012 15:50 raser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 13:16 BronzeKnee wrote:On November 04 2012 13:06 TechNoTrance wrote:
I never understood why they hold on to extended series so tightly either despite overwhelming community opposition. It is the same reason that Blizzard doesn't listen to the community regarding maps (remember Slag Pits?) and took so long to put something on maps to prevent the ramp from being blocked by Pylons or Bunkers. Some companies just think they know better than their fans... they forgot the customer is always right. customer is always right.. are you kidding me? the customer is close to never right, and its rare to operate with that attitude in modern time anways
I'm pretty sure "the customer is always right" just means "when the customer is angry you should consider giving them what they want."
|
i actually like the way mlg is handling extended series meanwhile. they cant spoil the finals anymore, and semifinal series might even get more dramatic by it.
|
I think the biggest problem is this comes over from MLG's history of FPSs and fighting games, where every game can easily be taken as its own entity. The previous game rarely effects strategies of the next one. Fighting game players may change characters to try and counter a play style they lost to, but still the match is pretty much always determined as the game is being played.
In starcraft, much of the strategy is decided before the game is even started. There is a definite thread from the first game to the second game to the last which is equally, if not more, important then the skills displayed in game. The goal is to get 2 wins and that thread is going to occur according to that goal. I don't know how the players feel about it, but as a viewer you can't just snip that thread, change it's length, put a bunch of time and other games in between it, and then restart that thread as if nothing changed. Especially since you don't know if that thread is ever going to continue until much later. It just ruins a large part of what starcraft is all about.
|
On November 04 2012 15:44 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 15:13 fezvez wrote:
I was strongly against the extended series rule...
But in fact, I am now supporting it wholeheartedly. It's fair to the player, it just that it's not excellent from a spectator point of view. But I prefer fairness.
I'm really glad Leenock and Flash pulled it off, and I think that if they had just won a bo3, it would have been a "cheap" victory. How can the extended series be "fair"? Explain it to me, because the loser already has to play more games and is punished for that AND each match should start with a clean slate and not an advantage for one participant.
Because everyone is treated equally.
|
On November 04 2012 15:50 raser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 13:16 BronzeKnee wrote:On November 04 2012 13:06 TechNoTrance wrote:
I never understood why they hold on to extended series so tightly either despite overwhelming community opposition. It is the same reason that Blizzard doesn't listen to the community regarding maps (remember Slag Pits?) and took so long to put something on maps to prevent the ramp from being blocked by Pylons or Bunkers. Some companies just think they know better than their fans... they forgot the customer is always right. customer is always right.. are you kidding me? the customer is close to never right, and its rare to operate with that attitude in modern time anways
Alot of smaller, newer companies take this attitude and they are succeeding because of it. just look at Runic Games and Grinding Gear Games, they are always taking feedback from their customers and making improvements from it.
Even Blizzard is doing this atm, just look at Browder and Kim on the forums, alot of the changes are because of the customer feedback.
Although suggestions are hardly ever the best suggestion, the reason they are are suggesting anything at all comes from a legitimate problem that should indeed be addressed.
Even the whole SOPA and PIPA incident has shown how much power customers have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
