EPT[Q&A] Official NASL Thread - Page 28
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Before you post, read the title of this thread slowly and out loud. | ||
|
jeremycafe
United States354 Posts
| ||
|
Eternalmisfit
United States643 Posts
I have a question regarding the online open qualifiers for the 16th spot in the 16 man tourney. Would the people in the division play, who failed to secure a spot in the 16 man tournament, be allowed to participate in the open tournament? Technically, since it is an open tournament, all people who have not qualified should have a chance to take part on the tournament. However, allowing the lower ranked division players (35 of them) take part in them pretty much ensures that someone among them will go ahead and secure the win and take the final spot. In short, will the open tournament end up being a spot which new and upcoming people (not in NASL yet) to have a chance in getting to top 16? Or, is it a second chance of the remaining 35 people who did not make it to the 16 man tournament? | ||
|
BladeRunner
United States407 Posts
On February 24 2011 00:48 floor exercise wrote: I don't mind the live recording thing at all, no one complains that late night shows aren't live when they are filmed in the afternoon. In fact I think it's the best possible thing to do for online play. It just needs tremendously good production. A real set with proper lighting, good editing, good effects. And by that I don't mean a dude with Sony Vegas doing the post processing. While your point is valid, the two things aren't really comparable - non-live casts always make the most important thing suffer: the game. Sync issues make it a downer to watch, and inevitably someone will be spoiling the chat so we can't go there either. Joining the live chat of a live match is the pinnacle of esports spectating, and watching a recording (especially if the VOD of that recording is not free) is going to be extremely annoying. I don't understand why it's a "given" that it can't be live.. how they can dismiss all the home casts that SirScoots has done with amazing transitions, multiple camera views, green screen, etc etc... and it's all live!!! | ||
|
AimForTheBushes
United States1760 Posts
| ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:11 BladeRunner wrote: While your point is valid, the two things aren't really comparable - non-live casts always make the most important thing suffer: the game. Sync issues make it a downer to watch, and inevitably someone will be spoiling the chat so we can't go there either. Joining the live chat of a live match is the pinnacle of esports spectating, and watching a recording (especially if the VOD of that recording is not free) is going to be extremely annoying. I don't understand why it's a "given" that it can't be live.. how they can dismiss all the home casts that SirScoots has done with amazing transitions, multiple camera views, green screen, etc etc... and it's all live!!! I think that they're trying to be up-to-par with sporting events, and not SC2 events, and that's why they want the delay to do post-processing. I'm not sure if chat is the pinnacle of esports spectating - but then again, I've only been on chats for esports events twice, and used to watch BW vods on youtube, so maybe I'm just not experienced enough in the matter to know. Spoiling can be an issue, but the people who know the results are going to be staff/players. Hopefully they don't spoil it for us! | ||
|
MechaCthulhu
United States136 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:11 BladeRunner wrote: While your point is valid, the two things aren't really comparable - non-live casts always make the most important thing suffer: the game. Sync issues make it a downer to watch, and inevitably someone will be spoiling the chat so we can't go there either. Joining the live chat of a live match is the pinnacle of esports spectating, and watching a recording (especially if the VOD of that recording is not free) is going to be extremely annoying. I don't understand why it's a "given" that it can't be live.. how they can dismiss all the home casts that SirScoots has done with amazing transitions, multiple camera views, green screen, etc etc... and it's all live!!! Commentary is going to be live so there will be no sync issues. Though the broadcast isn't going to be live, no one will have seen it before it streams for the first time--exactly like a live game. There won't be any spoilers, unless one of the players or someone from NASL leaks the results beforehand. They're even working with Blizzard to make sure people won't be able to find the results from match history. Basically, the only difference between what they're planning on doing and an actual live broadcast is that the players who played the game can tune in to watch it as well. | ||
|
Z-R0E
United States147 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:11 BladeRunner wrote: While your point is valid, the two things aren't really comparable - non-live casts always make the most important thing suffer: the game. Sync issues make it a downer to watch, and inevitably someone will be spoiling the chat so we can't go there either. Joining the live chat of a live match is the pinnacle of esports spectating, and watching a recording (especially if the VOD of that recording is not free) is going to be extremely annoying. I don't understand why it's a "given" that it can't be live.. how they can dismiss all the home casts that SirScoots has done with amazing transitions, multiple camera views, green screen, etc etc... and it's all live!!! What "sync issues" can there be? How can the games be spoiled, unless spoiled by the players themselves? (in which case they'd be monetarily penalized by the league). Just because the NASL won't be broadcasted live, it'll be recorded live. The casters will be in the game with the players as they play, not casting a replay. The players will be playing on dummy accounts (provided by Blizzard) so that people can't check history records to spoil the outcome. If you were not specifically told this wasn't being broadcasted live, you wouldn't even know. | ||
|
BladeRunner
United States407 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:18 jaearess wrote: Commentary is going to be live so there will be no sync issues. Though the broadcast isn't going to be live, no one will have seen it before it streams for the first time--exactly like a live game. There won't be any spoilers, unless one of the players or someone from NASL leaks the results beforehand. They're even working with Blizzard to make sure people won't be able to find the results from match history. Basically, the only difference between what they're planning on doing and an actual live broadcast is that the players who played the game can tune in to watch it as well. Everybody says this, and yeah I agree in theory it should work that way, but in practice there is ALWAYS a sync issue that completely ruins it for me. Basically every tourney I've watched that was cast from replays has had this issue unless it was a single person (Day9's razer tourney comes to mind). And yeah I totally forgot about LIVE viewing at a LAN but again, that's LIVE not from a recording... That is the pinnacle of esports viewing but next to that, online viewing in the live chat is it. If they've got a workaround to avoid spoilers, that's great, but it still leaves the sync issue... Even in the TLOpens, which I'd say have gone through enough iterations to have improved more than most, sync issues occur... | ||
|
BladeRunner
United States407 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:20 Z-R0E wrote: What "sync issues" can there be? How can the games be spoiled, unless spoiled by the players themselves? (in which case they'd be monetarily penalized by the league). Just because the NASL won't be broadcasted live, it'll be recorded live. The casters will be in the game with the players as they play, not casting a replay. The players will be playing on dummy accounts (provided by Blizzard) so that people can't check history records to spoil the outcome. If you were not specifically told this wasn't being broadcasted live, you wouldn't even know. So you're saying this isn't going to be cast from replays? If so then that's a different story I guess. From watching the showmatch with the massive overlays plus insanely unbearable sync issues I assumed it was from a replay. | ||
|
FreddYCooL
Sweden415 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:22 BladeRunner wrote: Everybody says this, and yeah I agree in theory it should work that way, but in practice there is ALWAYS a sync issue that completely ruins it for me. Basically every tourney I've watched that was cast from replays has had this issue unless it was a single person (Day9's razer tourney comes to mind). And yeah I totally forgot about LIVE viewing at a LAN but again, that's LIVE not from a recording... That is the pinnacle of esports viewing but next to that, online viewing in the live chat is it. If they've got a workaround to avoid spoilers, that's great, but it still leaves the sync issue... Even in the TLOpens, which I'd say have gone through enough iterations to have improved more than most, sync issues occur... They wont cast of replays, they clearly stated that they will be live casting the games as observers but the games wont be broadcasted untill the next day. So dont worry, there wont be any sync issue | ||
|
MechaCthulhu
United States136 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:22 BladeRunner wrote: Everybody says this, and yeah I agree in theory it should work that way, but in practice there is ALWAYS a sync issue that completely ruins it for me. Basically every tourney I've watched that was cast from replays has had this issue unless it was a single person (Day9's razer tourney comes to mind). And yeah I totally forgot about LIVE viewing at a LAN but again, that's LIVE not from a recording... That is the pinnacle of esports viewing but next to that, online viewing in the live chat is it. If they've got a workaround to avoid spoilers, that's great, but it still leaves the sync issue... Even in the TLOpens, which I'd say have gone through enough iterations to have improved more than most, sync issues occur... THEY ARE NOT BEING CAST FROM REPLAYS, THEY ARE BEING CAST LIVE. Really sorry for the caps, but it didn't seem like you would understand it unless I really made it stand out. "Cast live" means that they will be cast (or "commentated", if you prefer) live, but the resulting video won't be broadcast until a later time. | ||
|
Jazzyluv
United States36 Posts
Live games add to the excitement, its an amazing placebo, i would certainly recommend it to be live despite the time problems with euros. Whenever i watch a game live on GSL, you feel tension, the feeling that this is happening "right now". | ||
|
MechaCthulhu
United States136 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:24 BladeRunner wrote: So you're saying this isn't going to be cast from replays? If so then that's a different story I guess. From watching the showmatch with the massive overlays plus insanely unbearable sync issues I assumed it was from a replay. As has been stated over and over again by absolutely everyone involved with the league, the show match was not NASL. It was a way of announcing it, but it was not a showcase of how they're going to do things. | ||
|
TheAura
96 Posts
if they didnt specifically tell you this detail you probably wouldn't even notice that this was happening. | ||
|
bullic
4 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:12 AimForTheBushes wrote: Let's assume that EG gets 5 guys invited in..would the other players on the team be eligible to enter to get the online Open Qualifier spot in the LAN, or be exempt because of the team rule? That would be my worst nightmare. I don't think EG deserve 5 spots in the a tournament where you feature top 50 foreigner players. I think that should be Teamliquid's problem where they have 6 top players Jinro Ret Tyler Huk Haypro TLO. Even Haypro's struggle in Korea he showed that he can compete with Top NA EURO players. | ||
|
jeremycafe
United States354 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:27 jaearess wrote: As has been stated over and over again by absolutely everyone involved with the league, the show match was not NASL. It was a way of announcing it, but it was not a showcase of how they're going to do things. That is not true. This was their test run for the most part. The technology they used was a showcase of what is to come (with gradual improvements) | ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 24 2011 02:02 jeremycafe wrote: That is not true. This was their test run for the most part. The technology they used was a showcase of what is to come (with gradual improvements) It actually wasn't. Have a listen at yesterday's SOTG. It wasn't a showcase of their technology whatsoever. | ||
|
Poocs
94 Posts
On February 24 2011 01:00 goiflin wrote: Difference; white-ra has shown that he can reliably show up for tournaments that he signs up for. Jim-bob of team Neckred can't show that he's going to be a reliable participant because he has no prior experience, and his team is not only unsponsored (giving him no monetary motivation to actually show up), but unknown and wouldn't really be worth a slot that could go to someone that has proven themselves to be reliable. Aren't the preliminary rounds online anyways? If Jim-bob makes it to the finals to play for $100k, I'm pretty sure he'll show up. Or if he doesn't, is that such a big deal? Idra didn't show up for GSL March... | ||
|
PetRockSteve
United States70 Posts
On February 24 2011 00:33 jeremycafe wrote: So basically you guys create exceptions for non team members (who make a website for themselves to say they are on a team)? I have seen you say 2 people are qualified even though they dont have teams (they have their "own" solo teams). Then you tell another person if he does the EXACT same as the 2 that you qualified to play, he wouldnt be able to play. I think the point that Xeris was making was that just because you are eligible doesn't mean that you will be picked to play. On February 24 2011 01:04 Eternalmisfit wrote:Would the people in the division play, who failed to secure a spot in the 16 man tournament, be allowed to participate in the open tournament? I believe they said that those players could not compete in the open tournament. On February 24 2011 01:12 AimForTheBushes wrote: Let's assume that EG gets 5 guys invited in..would the other players on the team be eligible to enter to get the online Open Qualifier spot in the LAN, or be exempt because of the team rule? Yes. The same holds true for players not on a team. Question If the NASL is successful in its first few seasons, will you consider increasing the number of competitors to 60 or 70 (still having groups of 10)? This could allow you to increase the limit of players per team without having them in the same division (it's still an arbitrary cutoff point, but would remain consistent with the number of groups). I know that it would also mean more casting, but not necessarily more days. It seemed like the format would have one game per group per night (each group playing all games that week on one map). If so, that would mean more games cast per night which would be awesome from my end. | ||
|
papaz
Sweden4149 Posts
On February 23 2011 19:48 Xeris wrote: There is no Korean cap... I've already said that. You should put this in the OP. The OP is still: Koreans: We're not GSL. Bringing in all the Koreans will just make this event the GSL. We are focusing on the growth of Western ESPORTS, by providing players and storylines that are more relatable to our audience. These are the small things you can do, Xeris, to increase the credibility of the organization behind NASL. "The korean cap" has been talked to death in this thread, specially by me  Seeing your statement "There is no Korean cap... I've already said that" made me happy but please update the OP because the OP right now contradicts your statement on page 23. The OP should be the official standpoint of NASL I believe, correct me if I am wrong?! | ||
| ||
