|
yeah I agree. While the community is growing, its just all new level for TV to broadcast SC2.
There has to be continually at lest 50.000 people tuning in when SC2 is on and it has to be able to grow.
I mean we see that even in Korea, Seoul, the biggest e-sports country and city there is still small number of people watching SC2.
Yes there may be 100k people from all over Korea watching live the final and about 50k people globally watching the final live, but its the peak and not the standard.
As we see with the TSL3, some days there are just 30k people at peak times and other days 50k people, for MLG 2010 there were 15k viewers, for MLG 2011 Dallas there were 70k viewers.
So its kind of volatile right now and realistically speaking SC2 needs to pull 15 million copies sold just to form a stable and solid community that is going to last.
Last time I checked SC2 had only sold 5 million units all over the world and its been almost a full year so far.
As we have seen with SC1 where e-sports is actually reducing in size, rather than increasing.
For example in 2004, 2005 and 2006 there were able to gather 20.000 people live at a one place to watch the finals in person, plus the hundreds of thousands that watched it on TV.
The final I saw in 2009 had only 2500 people in the building and I saw quite a bit of empty seats.
So yeah I agree with the article and I don't think we'll be seeing any SC2 TV boom anytime soon.
|
I wholeheartedly agree with most all of your points Kennigit. With the current state of eSports, it's unmarketable to the masses.
Do you think that over a number of years, the stigma behind competitive gaming could be dissolved and leave us with a culture more akin to South Korea's eSports community?
On another note, I think people will watch anything if the stakes for the people competing are high enough. I think thats probably the only reason that people who don't know a damn thing about poker can still watch a lot of it. When you know that a single hand can be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, it suddenly turns a bunch of guys sitting around playing cards into a spectacle that millions can enjoy.
If tomorrow the US decided that money was no longer allowed to be awarded to poker players, how much do you think their casual viewership would plunge?
Obviously Hockey has decades of success to build off of, but right now each game costs the teams ~1.2 million dollars in players salaries to play (~560,000$ for each team). There are an average of 3 games played a day across NA. If you had 3 Starcraft BO7's every day that had $1,200,000 on the line, the game's popularity would absolutely explode across the country. This isn't ever going to happen; the point I'm trying to make is that as the stakes increase so will the viewship of casuals.
I told one of my friends about the GSL, and she couldn't believe that the finals had more than $80,000 dollars on the line. She may not understand his crisp 4 gate timings, but when she sees MC's "laser guys" overpowering his opponent, she still gets super excited because someone is about to walk away with $80,000 and their opponent isn't. Over time she may become more interested, and learn what a 4gate actually is.
I agree with the fact that we should avoid TV right now. It just doesn't make any sense from a business perspective to have something on TV that won't be watched by enough people. However, as the stakes increase, so will the number of casual viewers. Advertisers will get more viewers at bigger events, which will generate more money, which will bring more people, which will bring even bigger advertisers. We're growing ever closer to a fantastic cycle.
In the future I don't think we will be able to avoid being on TV.
|
Somewhat of a sidequestion, but what does The american TV channels do with real sports and comercials if they would have to have breaks every 8 minutes in sc2? I mean atleast in norway a soccer match on TV goes 45 minutes without comercials.
Anyway going to echo what most people have already said, the straight up normlal TV Will probably pretty soon become a medium of the past, as services like netflix\hulu and other stuff starts taking over more and more, and schedueled programming will probably take a backseat to a more internet like approach.
|
Television wouldn't hurt. As Kennigit pointed out, you need to find somebody who is willing to give the time and investment to make it grow. The bigger problem is that the risk is way too big if it does fail. If the show gets canceled, that's essentially a gigantic vote of no-confidence. Once you go into television and you lose the television deal, the perception will be that you have no product. The level of patience required to build this thing simply doesn't exist in a world where a handful of corporations control television and their commercial setups aren't conducive to it, anyway. Not unless you somehow pull a soccer and convince sponsors to pay obscene amounts of money for in-play ad-space.
|
On April 12 2011 12:45 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +i never use to know alot of the rules for sports. But i can still watch the game and instantly understand what is going on and the goals of both sides. If someone tunes into a sc match in the first 5 mins of a game where its mostly just building with maybe a few pokes..if you never played the game you wouldnt have a clue. Surely someone tuning into a RTS game can figure out the basic goal (it's military, so kill the other guy) if they have basic knowledge of what an RTS is; similarly, most people who tune into sports on TV already have very basic knowledge about ball sports; score goals, somehow, with defensive and offensive positions, etc.
If they have a basic knowledge of a rts. Thats asking alot...realisticly rts is a pretty unpopular game type when compared to fps's or mmos(like 12x less popular(based on sales) and both of those have failed on tv). And most people who tune into ball sports haev a basic knowledge of those sports because you grow up in school where you are forced to play(gym) or at least be around with every school having at least 1 team for each game. Not the same for games.
Other than that, I don't think someone new to football would understand why one team can keep trying to advance over and over while the other team had to stop; my parents sure didn't, as the only sport they have decent knowledge about is basketball, which is quite the different ball sport than football. In basketball, I don't know what all the markings on the court mean/restrict/indicate, for example the key near the hoop and all those lines. People who aren't familiar with basketball would not be able to easily figure out what all those mean; why did he suddenly stop defending? The commentators don't really talk about such things, and there are so many markings that it would be difficult to figure out which line means what because you can't even see them that well.
I think thats a bit of over exageration...you dont know what the markings on the court are...but you know the techinical term for the key is? really.
And your right all those markings...4.......are confusing but you dont need to understand the markings to understand the game. And you dont need to understand any of the rules to see where the skill comes in. Watching a rts youd have no clue whats hard or not to do.
Similarly, someone with only basic knowledge of an RTS may not figure out why people are doing these "small" attacks aka drops/harassment instead of attacking the opponent's army directly. They may not know what minerals are or buildings are, and they won't easily figure out what each thing does unless the commentators teach some newbie things so that the audience will learn or else they would have to look them up.
Again you say basic knowledge of rts as its a common thing or thats the general audience...and it really isnt.
edit: also another big thing if you turn on a sports game and the score is really close there can be a instant feeling of tension especially if the time is running down. In SC its hard to tell when a game is really close and the tipping point can happen at anytime unless you have a deep undestanding of the game.
|
My question to you Kennigit is: Why haven't you spotlighted your post yet?
It definitely deserves it. Great work. Such a thorough and well thought-out post. I feel the exact same way. I think G4TV is a good example of this, too. If you look at the shows on there, you can tell they are trying to appeal to a wider, casual audience. It feels like they aren't able to fulfill their original intent.
And G4 hasn't been very successful either, imo. I'm basing this on the fact they got dropped by DirectTV so I can't even watch it anymore, but I never watched them in the first place.
Edit: 999th post
|
On April 12 2011 12:08 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:lol... Show nested quote +2. Able to target core demographic and casuals simultaneously.
The very strategic nature of Starcraft alienates a lot of viewers. I think we have made huge strides opening the door over the past few years via the work of Day[9], Husky, the SC2GG guys – but it's really not enough. As a viewer, I need to be able to be flicking by a station and within 2-3 minutes understand exactly whats going on even if i've never played. Again though, i believe there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to suggest that "hardcore" games are not able to target hardcore games and casual TV audiences simultaneously. You are able to tune into a sport like football and know the strategy and how to play it? I sure don't know all the basic rules to pretty much every major sport. Also, when he said "IPTV" i thought it stood for IGN Proleague TV for a second, aww ;( lol
I think the difference is that the narrative of games like Baseball, Football, Basketball, etc. are much easier to pick up on than the narrative of an RTS like SC2.
In football, (American), one team is trying to get the ball down field, and the other is trying to stop them. When they reach the goal, they score points. Simple. You don't need to know anything other than that to understand the narrative. Ball in endzone=points. The rest is just details. And the action is relatively easy to follow. For football, the game is broken into discrete steps, and after each one, you know where the ball is. Baseball's the same. For basketball, soccer, and hockey, you just watch the ball/puck and look at the scoreboard. In all cases, the camera just stays on the guy with the ball the whole time with the occasional replay. No jumping around.
SC2, OTOH, is nothing but details. Yes, "kill the other guy" is easy. But it's a non-linear process getting there. You need to pressure. You need to expand. The camera jumps around from one base to the next then to the middle where one army is doing something. Then everything comes together, half of it dies, and then we're told that someone is winning, but it's the guy who just lost his army because he has an extra expansion up. WTF? All his shit just died! That makes no sense!
Trust me. I've tried getting non-fans (even casual SC2 players) to watch broadcasted matches and explain what's going on. It's incredibly difficult for them to follow. If they enjoy it, it's because I'm practically shitting myself watching FruitDealer make an ass-load of ultralisks for the best comeback ever, and that's funny to watch.
So yeah. It's niche. And the way to grow it is to keep churning out great products aimed at the niche market that have better production values and do a better job of engaging casual SC2 fans/players. TV is not the answer.
|
On April 12 2011 11:25 LoLAdriankat wrote:
Pretty sure the 14-25 age group doesn't even care about TV anymore anyway. That age group watches their stuff on Hulu, Youtube, etc.
This exactly. TV isn't cable anymore, and anyone who graduated middle school in the last 30 years knows if you REALLY want to sit on your couch to be entertained you just buy a computer/tv monitor adaptor and run your 90 inch plasma as your monitor.
Idra/Jinro showmatch on giant plasma? Hell yes. Idra/Jinro showmatch with commercials interjected and entire portions cut out? Hell no. Who needs TV anyways.
|
On April 12 2011 12:59 Earll wrote:
Somewhat of a sidequestion, but what does The american TV channels do with real sports and comercials if they would have to have breaks every 8 minutes in sc2? I mean atleast in norway a soccer match on TV goes 45 minutes without comercials.
usually what happens is they wait for the play to stop and then the game goes on "pause"(tv timeout) where the athletes just stand and wait around and then after the break the game starts back up. Which is why a hr long game lasts at least 2 hrs on tv....and if theres any kind of injury or delay in the game...instantly to commericals.
|
I disagree. There's a reason that TV shows are canceled based almost solely on TV numbers. It's just a much, much larger crowd. I do believe we are slowly going away from them, and more towards TV online, but I don't believe we need to skip over the idea of TV as good advertisement and a stimulant for growth in E-sports completely. Mainstream television is a tool that I think we could use to further E-sports greatly. It doesn't have to be one or the other, it can be both to great affect. Because the cable and primetime TV is still a much larger portion of watchers than you probably give merit.
|
Way to lay down some truth, that was an excellent post, it sums up what I think perfectly and goes further. I do agree that the future of media in general is only through an on demand format and e-sports would do well to consolidate this market slowly but surely. I think the TSL numbers speak for themselves but I definitely think that it cannot be expanded out of an online format. I think that the market is shifting towards more on demand and online features; DVR's with internet, televisions with internet, apple tv etc, Hulu, etc. If SC2 can gain a firm foothold on this format and maintain I think it will be very successful.
|
The reason MLG isn't on espn anymore is because it was a huge PR mess with all the net neutrality people coming out and pooping on the whole event effectively. Espn brought out the truck and it was a great stream the whole weekend and espn had a great stream as well too so it was a really great weekend but sundance just decided to go with his community and kill the deal with them.
and they where only on the espn internet stream anyway not like they where ever on television anyway.
|
So why does the Korean model work for korea and not the west? Alot of your points refer to limitations in the game itself but its on television in Korea.
I think if Westerners tune into UFC then they might possibly tune into any garbage on TV. UFC is basically watered down and unentertaining version of boxing and while I realize its a dying industry its still on TV for the time being.
|
This thread should be re-titled "Starcraft is big enough to ignore TV". I think that the notion that we need to have e-sports on TV in order for them to be considered 'successful' is unture. YouTube and various livestreaming programs are, if not replacing TV, at least displacing it as they grow larger - and 'niche markets', like the SC2 scene, probably have more interest in online media than television.
|
On April 12 2011 13:09 Jayrod wrote:
So why does the Korean model work for korea and not the west? Alot of your points refer to limitations in the game itself but its on television in Korea.
I think if Westerners tune into UFC then they might possibly tune into any garbage on TV. UFC is basically watered down and unentertaining version of boxing and while I realize its a dying industry its still on TV for the time being.
Because Korean broadcasting laws and standards are MUCH different as mentioned many times in this thread already.
Also UFC dying? lol. MMA is still I believe the fastest growing sport in the world. Boxing is the dying industry.
|
Thanks for applying some very well written common sense to the subject Kennigit.
|
Agreed, something like gom would work better for what starcraft is, and ohh look it does work better we have GSL going strong, (I believe gom is similar set up like IPTV seen in the video, if you go the korean website you can see the multiple programs they stream though there).
|
On April 12 2011 13:09 Jayrod wrote:
So why does the Korean model work for korea and not the west? Alot of your points refer to limitations in the game itself but its on television in Korea.
I think if Westerners tune into UFC then they might possibly tune into any garbage on TV. UFC is basically watered down and unentertaining version of boxing and while I realize its a dying industry its still on TV for the time being.
MMA is watered down boxing? WTF!!!
|
Wouldn't a model similar to UFC work? Tournaments like NASL, you pay money for an entire season; more or less a pay-per-view. I think you could have something like that on digital TV or whatever you want; pay your $25 for NASL, get the entire season's games. It could even be just the identical internet stream, just on TV. It seems that we can all agree that we want to avoid what CGS did, and the only way for SC2 to become a legitimate sport it to avoid skewing it into something it's not. If broadcasted at all, it needs to avoid any kind of normal NA TV structure. The only people who will watch will be people who would watch anyways. The only way to draw more viewers would be to dumb it down into something stupid that anyone from TL would hate (see CGS).
|
i like the way sc2 is atm gomtv is perfect
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
