Starcraft is big enough for TV to ignore. And why we should avoid TV
Note: I have nothing against the author - i have never met him. But i feel it very important that we all be on one educated track when it comes to discussing the possibilities of Starcraft broadcasts in the future. I welcome any response or criticism of what i've writen
These are my personal opinions, not those of Teamliquid.net. + Show Spoiler +
The author sure is a...ok i'm done.
I've been following esports and networking with esports organizers, journalists and personalities for about 6 years and the notion of “increased viewers = good on TV” is one that comes has come up often. Without sounding too patronizing, it usually comes from new esports journalists who haven't followed the inner workings of the scene closely or don't know enough about esports history and the companies/people that surround it. Unfortunately for the author, he failed to recognize that esports has been broadcast on television multiple times, receiving millions in investment and failed catastrophically.
Why numbers don't matter (right now). Starcraft 2 viewership numbers aren't really anything to write home about. CPL events were doing 100k viewers easily in 2007 when there were no services like justin.tv or ustream to help them out. WCG was/still is pulling in those kinds of numbers They ran/load balanced their own broadcasts – i'll have to ask Slasher what the stability of the streams was like. The prizes were bigger. The viewers were bigger. Many organizations embraced CS1.6/Source as their flag for taking esports to the mainstream and they failed. GGL Failed. CGS Fails. CPL Failed. ESWC Failed...should I go on? Starcraft 2 should not be on TV.
1) CGS. This was detailed perfectly by djWheat on Reddit and he does a far better job of explaining the circumstances than I would.
I'm only mildly informed on some of the financial/organizational issues that plagued CGS so i'll leave those alone, but the insider stories i've heard truly sound like what happens when “uneducated senior management” put their inevitable - but necessary spin on a product. The #1 reason I hated CGS was because of what it represented – XFL/Slamball meets Gaming. Whenever TV productions get involved there is a strong push to target the most casual of markets by dumming down the experience and adding a lot of flash to draw in casuals. It's a business – you need to be able to prove that the audience is extendable and that there is a strong attach rate for 1st time viewers becoming long time supporters. Some will argue that Husky et co already proved this is possible....but did they really prove an attach rate for viewers ignorant of Starcraft "the game" or an attach rate for viewers who knew what Starcraft was but didn't know it was an E-Sport...this is important, and I can only assume that a massive portion of VOD/Stream fans already knew what Sc was or had played it in their youth. I do not believe that Starcraft Esports Broadcasting is extendable to an audience who has little interest in Starcraft the game.
2) When broadcasting a "new" product, one needs to keep things simple (read: dumbed down) in order to attract a casual base immediately. If you cannot prove potential success within a few broadcasts you are done (see midseason cancelations of every show on network TV ever).
This leaves the existing hardcore fan raged while still the broadcast remains confusing to the casual demo. Why? Because Esports broadcasts on Television have proven one thing, you can target a casual market, or you can pray that your existing hardcore demographic transfer over - you cannot have both. Any marketing or business student will explain to you that this is ultimately doomed to fail or enjoy only marginal success.
Yet again and again, new esports figure heads attempt to target both. With a game like Starcraft, "simple" isn't a key word. How do you simplify one of the most complex games on the market...by cutting things down. While one could argue that CS wasn't “made for broadcast” the way that Starcraft 2 was, it is still overwhelmingly complicated for a new viewer. I can watch poker and UFC with my dad who has no interest in either...understanding GSL by himself? Probably not going to happen. This leaves a niche product that isn't extendable to a new audience.
3) The CGS was very inaccessible by the very nature of it being a subscription on DirectTV – I didn't even consider getting the service until I was comfortable that it was a good product. Like most gamers though, when I realized that most of the flare of “true” CSS/1.6 events was gone I decided it was doomed to fail – it shut down about 6 months later (i'm sure it was predicted by many others).
Why Starcraft should never be on Western Television.
In order for a TV game show to be viable, it needs a few things which Starcraft cannot provide without being shit.
1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative. Unlike a broadcasted strategy game like poker where the scene (television scene, not community) is compact (1 hand, 1 hand, commercial, 1 hand, 2 hands, commercial etc.) and easily interchangeable, Starcraft does not allow quick or easy editing decisions. Without former Starcraft players on hand in an editing both, you would be left with a chopped down product – missed building placements, missed timings, and a raging viewer base. This isn't really a negotiable point. Games would HAVE to be edited and cut to allows for a commercial in the middle. A TV station simply cant run a 45 minute game without commercials in North America and still remain profitable.
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 and casual TV audiences simultaneously.
3. Social Networking While Teamliquid can't take full credit for any one production's success, the nature of having a very central hub where one can come and find live events quickly is a huge benefit to live broadcasts. Social media hubs like facebook/twitter and sites like reddit also contibute heavily, but I find it ignorant to suggest that this would be scalable when applied to a television. The social platform which impassions viewers on Teamliquid simply doesn't exist on television. The Starcraft Esports scene is very niche despite it's size – do not mistake size for accessibility. These new viewers came to esports via the promise of Starcraft 2's launch, they found Esports along the way.
Predicition Time“Where We Goin” - Bobby Kelly
Within the next 5 years or so I expect Justin.TV, Ustream and others to fully embrace IPTV-like features. With a tailored dashboard for featured high quality productions, I think IPTV is the only acceptable course for Starcraft and esports. The matches themselves are only about 50% percent of what keeps Starcraft games interesting – the rest is the social experience of knowing you are communicating with thousands of others live and being able to comment on the action at hand. Imagine having a 1080p stream on your tv and a few of your friends webcam streams all watching simultaneously. With easy access to live chat, and whatever medium our forum evolves to.
Want to poll your audience to increase interactivity? “Who is going to win Idra/Huk” then selecting your score/vote live on screen and having immediate feedback. Why do threads like MLG hit over 900 pages in comments and over 1.5 million viewers – because of the story, because of the attachment fans feel to players and the knowledge that thousands of others are sharing in that experience - live.
Additionally this opens a number of marketing opportunities during events for sponsor plugs (ability to show a direct clickable link to sponsor site/ordering page that would open in a satellite window on the TV to order/promote/whatever). I think it will become increasingly easy to generate revenue through IPTV and for broadcasts to promote sponsors with more interactivity and ease (Although, the cost of IPTV broadcast may remain high for some years). The entry barrier for amateur productions has dropped drastically over the last 2 years, and within the next 5 will drop further while allowing for scaled up production values.
The most important thing for Starcraft esports has nothing to do with the game itself. It is 100% about the narrative of events and players, and this NEEDs to be the focus for content and event producers starting right now if players hope to grow the scene. I found the videos that CSN, AskJoshy and others produced for MLG Dallas to be excellent – I hope they continue to advance it, and increase their production values through editing, lower thirds etc.
Side
This promotion has nothing to do with the actual fight – it's about the narrative/story of the fighters. This kind of emotion and narrative is what event producers should be striving to create online and on IPTV in the future.
So back to the Article There is a reason MLG is no longer on ESPN. I don't know what it is, but MLG is no longer on ESPN. Would Starcraft 2 help? It's doubtful considering the size of the casual Halo base compared to Starcraft2. Our community is a global one - in Canada i didn't even have access to MLG's broadcasts on TV.
The author ultimately draws many flawed comparisons between existing Television and live internet streams. He comments on the viewership of Starcraft events/leagues versus the viewers on Fox Soccer channel and similar "niche" markets...This argument is flawed because Soccer is the most popular sport on earth and has a potential viewer base of hundreds of millions (World Cup?). The author has compared the very minimum that a Soccer channel can hit to the very maximum that Starcraft 2 broadcasts are hitting. He has compared one of the strongest television sports broadcasts to an industry that has only experienced television failure....
a good response. i feel bad that dickward has been the target of some insults today but, mostly, his article has been the catalyst for several intelligent, in depth responses from people with a great deal more knowledge than most in the esports community. im glad he wrote it and im glad for the back and forth that has come out of it.
Well put sir Kennigit. I agree completely. What Starcraft 2 needs is multiple avenues of exposure some for casuals/introductory stuff and stuff for the hardcore players/watchers. You can never appease both at once, it's a losing battle if you try.
Good read and eye opening for ignorant me. It strikes me that conventional television is a bit of a dated medium anyways. Not that it's going anywhere any time in the next few years but it's not exactly cutting edge. Starcraft broadcasts are already where conventional TV is heading.
Couldn't agree more, babysteps needs to be taken with mainstream media. IPTV is probably the smartest way to go about broadcasting sc2 on a large scale.
After the failures that were CGS, I really don't want sc2 going down that path.
Starcraft 2 viewership numbers aren't really anything to write home about. CPL events were doing 100k viewers easily in 2007 when there were no services like justin.tv or ustream to help them out. WCG was/still is pulling in those kinds of numbers
Sweet 100k viewers for tournaments with +4 bands of games...... TSL was half that with only what? Thats right just Starcraft 2. This is to big to ignore more like it. Not to sure if i can agree but when it comes to the age group its hard to decide.
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 is true too. I don't (and most of my friends) don't watch TV in primetime anymore - we use hulu and other stuff etc. I'm in hs fyi.
Anyway, I think the general trend is that TV will eventually be on the internet. I also don't think sc2 being on tv would be a step up from the computer - I would probs only watch sc2 on the tv once or twice for the novelty before moving back to my computer.
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 so much. I feel like we are really shifting away from TV.
I agree completely, I don't get why so many people are let down by this though. Starcraft will always be in that niche market, and frankly I don't mind at all
A TV station simply cant run a 45 minute game without commercials in North America and still remain profitable.
I know you said North America, but soccer matches are 45 minutes each half and typically broadcasted without commercial breaks until half-time. The way around it is doing the exact same thing justin.tv or ustream do: show ads at the bottom while the game is still running.
I do have a question for you Kennegit, assuming the viewership is there, do you see the possibility of an MBC Game, or Ongamenet type channel coming to cable television in the west?
There are plenty of very niche cable channels that manage to stay alive like the Military Channel or G4 (though G4 isn't hard core video game coverage) or the Biography channel, or Investigation Discovery. I do admit that I have no idea the inner workings, profit/loss etc etc of these channels.
Or is it simply a cultural divide between something Korea has thats unique to Korea, and immensely difficult to replicate outside of Korea? (the fact that StarCraft is essentially Korea's past time and that you need to reach past-time status to sustain traditional television type programming)
On April 12 2011 11:25 chobopeon wrote: a good response. i feel bad that dickward has been the target of some insults today but, mostly, his article has been the catalyst for several intelligent, in depth responses from people with a great deal more knowledge than most in the esports community. im glad he wrote it and im glad for the back and forth that has come out of it.
On April 12 2011 11:36 echO [W] wrote: I do have a question for you Kennegit, assuming the viewership is there, do you see the possibility of an MBC Game, or Ongamenet type channel coming to cable television in the west?
There are plenty of very niche cable channels that manage to stay alive like the Military Channel or G4 (though G4 isn't hard core video game coverage) or the Biography channel, or Investigation Discovery. I do admit that I have no idea the inner workings, profit/loss etc etc of these channels.
Or is it simply a cultural divide between something Korea has thats unique to Korea, and immensely difficult to replicate outside of Korea? (the fact that StarCraft is essentially Korea's past time and that you need to reach past-time status to sustain traditional television type programming)
I think North American culture is too different to draw any kind predicition about an MBC/OGN type station. Video Gaming still has far too much stigma around it, and even within gaming culture E-Sports is quite niche. Look at G4 which targets a very broad group of gamers and still has to include casual content like Cops to help ratings.
Anybody who would watch SC2 on TV would also watch it online. It seems pretty pointless to have it on TV anyway. It's the same reason why music isn't played as much on radio as it used to- because people have ipods.
very interesting points, but i'd still love one day to be able to turn on the tv and watch 2 of my favorite pros battling it out for a large sum of money. kinda like a boxing match or something
This really changes my perspective on esports becoming televised, It seems like it'd be much more successful gaining popularity through the current streaming mediums.
On April 12 2011 11:36 echO [W] wrote: I do have a question for you Kennegit, assuming the viewership is there, do you see the possibility of an MBC Game, or Ongamenet type channel coming to cable television in the west?
There are plenty of very niche cable channels that manage to stay alive like the Military Channel or G4 (though G4 isn't hard core video game coverage) or the Biography channel, or Investigation Discovery. I do admit that I have no idea the inner workings, profit/loss etc etc of these channels.
Or is it simply a cultural divide between something Korea has thats unique to Korea, and immensely difficult to replicate outside of Korea? (the fact that StarCraft is essentially Korea's past time and that you need to reach past-time status to sustain traditional television type programming)
I think North American culture is too different to draw any kind predicition about an MBC/OGN type station. Video Gaming still has far too much stigma around it, and even within gaming culture E-Sports is quite niche. Look at G4 which targets a very broad group of gamers and still has to include casual content like Cops to help ratings.
Not that I care if SC2 makes it on TV, in fact I'd rather have it live streamed on the internet mainly because I'm the guy with multiple monitors watching GSL, IEM, and some pro-gamer stream all at once while chatting on the various chat channels and TL IRC.
However, what you wrote in response I would say is StarCraft 2 in the short run (say next 10 years?), perhaps maybe with StarCraft 3 (yeah I know, we still have a long ways to go, give it 25 years) we may see an MBC Game or an OnGameNet in the west?
Props to writing the response. Nice to see someone speak who has been in the scene for a long time.
On April 12 2011 11:46 jtbem wrote: TV is so overrated. who actually watches TV nowadays? everything you want to watch on TV can be watch on the internet.
The only problem with watching everything online is greedy ISPs and their bandwidth caps to either save money by not having to upgrade their networks to support the massive use of bandwidth, or forcing customers of Netflix and other streaming content providers to have to go pay for traditional content delivered via TV usually from the same ISPs.
I would happily give up my TV subscription in lieu of a faster internet speed than what I have and watch everything over the internet. There is just so much more flexibility.
nice read....totally agree....and anyway what is tv?!? i stopped watching tv 3 years ago....it would be a real shame to see a diamond of entertainment like tsl between all those shit what usually comes on tv.....the whole idea of private tv stations is to make ridicvulous money by commercials, commercials who tell us to buy stupid plastic goods we dont need....keep our precious starcraft away from this shiT!!!
i am a 29 year old german, i got a huge ass TV, and i only plug it in every 2nd year for the Soccer european championship and the Worldcup, thats it....
And even that is fading with more and more HQ streams even by the Broadcasting Stations being provided.
The way isnt bringing internet streams to the TV,i fully expect TV to get closer to the Internet streams.
I love you Kennigit. As much as it would be awesome to see on television, it would never work in Western society. Possibly one day, one a niche channel like G4 (that I have never met a single person that has watched a minute of any program on that station, myself included) it might be possible to show leagues like NASL or something team based akin to the new TeSL which also have the added storyline to them needed to bring in the viewership numbers, but its never going to be primetime on Fox or ABC.
And I watch all my television shows online anyway, no ratings from me.
Well said Kennigit! I agree 100% with everything. I much prefer the internet streams to conventional TV anyways (except when there's stream problems =( )
Not only do you make the answer so clear, you do it in a really well thought out way; i am inclined to agree with what you have to say. I like the IPTV idea, and as long as there is an option to extend in some format i will be happy. I suppose with a growing social integration with online material the "must get on TV craze" will probably fade; i think organisations can feel they have "made it" without having to destroy a product by marketing it through mass mass media.
Your post brings up some great points, and really changed my mind about the subject. I just assumed, like the author of the article does that tv showing = best thing for SC
I'm curious, now, how do MBC and OGN do it? I don't know anything about the logistics of the BW scene, so maybe I'm missing something stupid, but why don't the reasons (Like the impossibility of commercial breaks and general inaccessibility of the game) that seem to logically preclude SC2 on Western TV apply to the Korean TV stations? Is there something fundamentally different about them?
only place where SC2 has a legitimate opportunity on television is Korea and that is due to Korea's cultural acceptance. NA and EU are not anywhere close to Korea's acceptance for watching people play games.
I'd agree with some of both articles. The main point I have to contribute is that you make the claim that a tv channel could not go 45 minutes without showing a commercial. I'd have to disagree with this, soccer. A half is 45 minutes, and the world cup showed that the sport has a spot in this countries tv. I'd also make a point that they could incorporate sponsorships more. Possibly by putting advertisements on the maps they play on? Sounds weird I know, but most sports put some advertisements around the edge of the playing field. Also mentioning advertisements, or have a statistics pop up at the beginning of the game with some advertisements on them like most sports do. Not trying to whore out esports, but I do believe that lack of advertising time should really be an excuse. Overall though, I definitely believe it would be tough to be on tv.
I just want to write here so I can say I posted in a legendary thread.
I read on twitter that you were going to write up a post but this is really incredible, great work.
Everyone should follow this man on twitter if they don't already, I know he just made it like 2 weeks ago, but www.twitter.com/Kennigit should have thousands, no jokes.
Thanks for the insight, Kennigit. In a way I agree with the fact that western culture may not be ready for this kind of contemporary entertainment.
Kind of off-topic but I've been watching TV for a large number of years, and I can tell you, in my opinion everything that's on TV is pure unadulterated SHIT. So in that regard I look forward to the day this archaic medium dies painfully & miserably.
On April 12 2011 11:56 ronpaul012 wrote: I'd agree with some of both articles. The main point I have to contribute is that you make the claim that a tv channel could not go 45 minutes without showing a commercial. I'd have to disagree with this, soccer. A half is 45 minutes, and the world cup showed that the sport has a spot in this countries tv. I'd also make a point that they could incorporate sponsorships more. Possibly by putting advertisements on the maps they play on? Sounds weird I know, but most sports put some advertisements around the edge of the playing field. Also mentioning advertisements, or have a statistics pop up at the beginning of the game with some advertisements on them like most sports do. Not trying to whore out esports, but I do believe that lack of advertising time should really be an excuse. Overall though, I definitely believe it would be tough to be on tv.
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.
I think this is very true. I don't even have cable TV anymore and most of my friends don't even watch TV.
Very nicely done article. As someone who is heavily invested in internet television as an industry, I think you addressed a lot of very good reasons why something like SC2 is just all-around better off as an internet stream and not something that should try to conform to conventional television standards.
One other thought I think is good to consider as well is that the target demographic for an SC2 broadcast tends to just not be that big on watching television. When we do watch an actual TV series, we tend to download the episodes or watch them on something like hulu or netflix, instead of tuning into them live. It's not like this is a terribly small demographic either, it's just a demographic that doesn't care about television. Why should we? We grew up on the internet.
On April 12 2011 11:55 imareaver3 wrote: I'm curious, now, how do MBC and OGN do it? I don't know anything about the logistics of the BW scene, so maybe I'm missing something stupid, but why don't the reasons (Like the impossibility of commercial breaks and general inaccessibility of the game) that seem to logically preclude SC2 on Western TV apply to the Korean TV stations? Is there something fundamentally different about them?
Because gaming is much more socially acceptable in South Korea than in the US. You may be surprised to know that an overwhelming majority of fans at live OSL/MSL matches are girls...who don't even have a true appreciation for what is going on. The Korean BW scene masterfully constructed narrative and emotion around the players, and teams. There are so many other shows on MBC/OGN not even related to the matches themselves but rather the casters, players, teams etc. That is what keeps viewers watching MSL/OSL.
It is fundamentally different because in Korea you can market gamers with sex appeal/mystique. When IGN released their new promos for IPL i almost had a heart attack that they are trying something similar - it doesn't work in the west.
CGS was a catastrophe, it pretty much killed Counter Strike 1.6 as the breakthrough eSport. (It's still alive and kicking, but it would of been MUCH bigger. It's no where near as big as it was). So you know how i feel about this...
This isn't the same situation as that, but it still comes with the terrority. Corporate TV interference will only harm the purity of SC2. SC2 would only work on a dedicated channel, like a MBC/OGN for example. I doubt we are ready for that either. Some of the drivel G4 has to put out to sustain viewers is yeah....
On April 12 2011 11:56 ronpaul012 wrote: I'd agree with some of both articles. The main point I have to contribute is that you make the claim that a tv channel could not go 45 minutes without showing a commercial. I'd have to disagree with this, soccer. A half is 45 minutes, and the world cup showed that the sport has a spot in this countries tv. I'd also make a point that they could incorporate sponsorships more. Possibly by putting advertisements on the maps they play on? Sounds weird I know, but most sports put some advertisements around the edge of the playing field. Also mentioning advertisements, or have a statistics pop up at the beginning of the game with some advertisements on them like most sports do. Not trying to whore out esports, but I do believe that lack of advertising time should really be an excuse. Overall though, I definitely believe it would be tough to be on tv.
Blizz won't allow ads on maps.
maybe not the ads on maps then, but when they do pre-game, or even early game stats showing they could throw an ad on or something.
On April 12 2011 11:36 echO [W] wrote: I do have a question for you Kennegit, assuming the viewership is there, do you see the possibility of an MBC Game, or Ongamenet type channel coming to cable television in the west?
There are plenty of very niche cable channels that manage to stay alive like the Military Channel or G4 (though G4 isn't hard core video game coverage) or the Biography channel, or Investigation Discovery. I do admit that I have no idea the inner workings, profit/loss etc etc of these channels.
Or is it simply a cultural divide between something Korea has thats unique to Korea, and immensely difficult to replicate outside of Korea? (the fact that StarCraft is essentially Korea's past time and that you need to reach past-time status to sustain traditional television type programming)
I think North American culture is too different to draw any kind predicition about an MBC/OGN type station. Video Gaming still has far too much stigma around it, and even within gaming culture E-Sports is quite niche. Look at G4 which targets a very broad group of gamers and still has to include casual content like Cops to help ratings.
Hell, just yesterday wasn't it that Colbert jokes about his skilless writers playing starcraft? I don't know how the stereotype will ever go away. It's pretty unfortunate.
On April 12 2011 11:56 ronpaul012 wrote: I'd agree with some of both articles. The main point I have to contribute is that you make the claim that a tv channel could not go 45 minutes without showing a commercial. I'd have to disagree with this, soccer. A half is 45 minutes, and the world cup showed that the sport has a spot in this countries tv. I'd also make a point that they could incorporate sponsorships more. Possibly by putting advertisements on the maps they play on? Sounds weird I know, but most sports put some advertisements around the edge of the playing field. Also mentioning advertisements, or have a statistics pop up at the beginning of the game with some advertisements on them like most sports do. Not trying to whore out esports, but I do believe that lack of advertising time should really be an excuse. Overall though, I definitely believe it would be tough to be on tv.
Blizz won't allow ads on maps.
maybe not the ads on maps then, but when they do pre-game, or even early game stats showing they could throw an ad on or something.
Because those don't pay anywhere near what commercials do, and most TV productions need ample commercials+extras.
On April 12 2011 11:55 imareaver3 wrote: I'm curious, now, how do MBC and OGN do it? I don't know anything about the logistics of the BW scene, so maybe I'm missing something stupid, but why don't the reasons (Like the impossibility of commercial breaks and general inaccessibility of the game) that seem to logically preclude SC2 on Western TV apply to the Korean TV stations? Is there something fundamentally different about them?
Because gaming is much more socially acceptable in South Korea than in the US. You may be surprised to know that an overwhelming majority of fans at live OSL/MSL matches are girls...who don't even have a true appreciation for what is going on. The Korean BW scene masterfully constructed narrative and emotion around the players, and teams. There are so many other shows on MBC/OGN not even related to the matches themselves but rather the casters, players, teams etc. That is what keeps viewers watching MSL/OSL.
It is fundamentally different because in Korea you can market gamers with sex appeal/mystique. When IGN released their new promos for IPL i almost had a heart attack that they are trying something similar - it doesn't work in the west.
Remember that what is "socially acceptable" will change relatively quickly. There is an entire generation of kids that are growing up and they consider being good at SC2 or any other game as impressive as being good at basketball.
On April 12 2011 11:56 ronpaul012 wrote: I'd agree with some of both articles. The main point I have to contribute is that you make the claim that a tv channel could not go 45 minutes without showing a commercial. I'd have to disagree with this, soccer. A half is 45 minutes, and the world cup showed that the sport has a spot in this countries tv. I'd also make a point that they could incorporate sponsorships more. Possibly by putting advertisements on the maps they play on? Sounds weird I know, but most sports put some advertisements around the edge of the playing field. Also mentioning advertisements, or have a statistics pop up at the beginning of the game with some advertisements on them like most sports do. Not trying to whore out esports, but I do believe that lack of advertising time should really be an excuse. Overall though, I definitely believe it would be tough to be on tv.
Blizz won't allow ads on maps.
maybe not the ads on maps then, but when they do pre-game, or even early game stats showing they could throw an ad on or something.
Because those don't pay anywhere near what commercials do, and most TV productions need ample commercials+extras.
Yeah its almost silly that ads can cost hundreds of thousands if not millions for 30 seconds, whereas a banner on certain websites will get as much viewership and cost <2% that
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
On April 12 2011 11:56 ronpaul012 wrote: I'd agree with some of both articles. The main point I have to contribute is that you make the claim that a tv channel could not go 45 minutes without showing a commercial. I'd have to disagree with this, soccer. A half is 45 minutes, and the world cup showed that the sport has a spot in this countries tv. I'd also make a point that they could incorporate sponsorships more. Possibly by putting advertisements on the maps they play on? Sounds weird I know, but most sports put some advertisements around the edge of the playing field. Also mentioning advertisements, or have a statistics pop up at the beginning of the game with some advertisements on them like most sports do. Not trying to whore out esports, but I do believe that lack of advertising time should really be an excuse. Overall though, I definitely believe it would be tough to be on tv.
Blizz won't allow ads on maps.
maybe not the ads on maps then, but when they do pre-game, or even early game stats showing they could throw an ad on or something.
Because those don't pay anywhere near what commercials do, and most TV productions need ample commercials+extras.
Yeah its almost silly that ads can cost hundreds of thousands if not millions for 30 seconds, whereas a banner on certain websites will get as much viewership and cost <2% that
yeah, but at the same time we cant forget that the cost to produce a starcraft game would not be nearly as high as most sports. So you wouldn't have the need to make as much revenue.
I'm excited for the possibility of IPTV and not constantly hooking my computer up to my TV through tedious cable switching, but I also know that the economics behind it won't be too great for awhile (in other words, I'm too young to have the money to blow on the early implementations, lol).
On April 12 2011 11:55 imareaver3 wrote: I'm curious, now, how do MBC and OGN do it? I don't know anything about the logistics of the BW scene, so maybe I'm missing something stupid, but why don't the reasons (Like the impossibility of commercial breaks and general inaccessibility of the game) that seem to logically preclude SC2 on Western TV apply to the Korean TV stations? Is there something fundamentally different about them?
Because gaming is much more socially acceptable in South Korea than in the US. You may be surprised to know that an overwhelming majority of fans at live OSL/MSL matches are girls...who don't even have a true appreciation for what is going on. The Korean BW scene masterfully constructed narrative and emotion around the players, and teams. There are so many other shows on MBC/OGN not even related to the matches themselves but rather the casters, players, teams etc. That is what keeps viewers watching MSL/OSL.
It is fundamentally different because in Korea you can market gamers with sex appeal/mystique. When IGN released their new promos for IPL i almost had a heart attack that they are trying something similar - it doesn't work in the west.
Ya, I couldnt ever imagine gamers being considered sex symbols in the west. That would be such a huge change from how things are now.
On April 12 2011 11:55 imareaver3 wrote: I'm curious, now, how do MBC and OGN do it? I don't know anything about the logistics of the BW scene, so maybe I'm missing something stupid, but why don't the reasons (Like the impossibility of commercial breaks and general inaccessibility of the game) that seem to logically preclude SC2 on Western TV apply to the Korean TV stations? Is there something fundamentally different about them?
Because gaming is much more socially acceptable in South Korea than in the US. You may be surprised to know that an overwhelming majority of fans at live OSL/MSL matches are girls...who don't even have a true appreciation for what is going on. The Korean BW scene masterfully constructed narrative and emotion around the players, and teams. There are so many other shows on MBC/OGN not even related to the matches themselves but rather the casters, players, teams etc. That is what keeps viewers watching MSL/OSL.
It is fundamentally different because in Korea you can market gamers with sex appeal/mystique. When IGN released their new promos for IPL i almost had a heart attack that they are trying something similar - it doesn't work in the west.
Remember that what is "socially acceptable" will change relatively quickly. There is an entire generation of kids that are growing up and they consider being good at SC2 or any other game as impressive as being good at basketball.
A large percentage of that same generation are still going to grow up watching Western TV like Jersey Shore, and music with the message of "Get money, get ho's." A generation of people who don't see gamers as geeks, nerds and losers is far, far away in my opinion.
On April 12 2011 11:56 ronpaul012 wrote: I'd agree with some of both articles. The main point I have to contribute is that you make the claim that a tv channel could not go 45 minutes without showing a commercial. I'd have to disagree with this, soccer. A half is 45 minutes, and the world cup showed that the sport has a spot in this countries tv. I'd also make a point that they could incorporate sponsorships more. Possibly by putting advertisements on the maps they play on? Sounds weird I know, but most sports put some advertisements around the edge of the playing field. Also mentioning advertisements, or have a statistics pop up at the beginning of the game with some advertisements on them like most sports do. Not trying to whore out esports, but I do believe that lack of advertising time should really be an excuse. Overall though, I definitely believe it would be tough to be on tv.
Blizz won't allow ads on maps.
maybe not the ads on maps then, but when they do pre-game, or even early game stats showing they could throw an ad on or something.
Because those don't pay anywhere near what commercials do, and most TV productions need ample commercials+extras.
Yeah its almost silly that ads can cost hundreds of thousands if not millions for 30 seconds, whereas a banner on certain websites will get as much viewership and cost <2% that
yeah, but at the same time we cant forget that the cost to produce a starcraft game would not be nearly as high as most sports. So you wouldn't have the need to make as much revenue.
Not really. It's still expensive as hell for a TV station to run a baseball game they don't do anything other then broadcast for. You would still need sat trucks, a studio, ample quality help, etc to broadcast to TV. You can't just fire up Xsplit and enter the cable station's RMTP server and go.
Plus you would have to have board meetings about it, and focus groups, and blah blah blah.
Agree, I was there during the CPL and CS1.6 boom and watched it fail miserably, and the viewership for those games through HLTV and the like were much higher than SC2 currently. I think the impossible task of editing SC2 and the international fan base really make it unlikely to see the game on TV, and I'm honestly OK with that.
so i just read both articles - the sixjax one is about numbers and numbers only - kinda annoying - i mean they matter sure - but thats basicly about it - no depth no 2nd view about whats goign on behind the scenes
i liked that kennigit was talking about the alternative IPTV - i would love to see some more on that part - the reason because the starcraft community is so big is the internet -
but still i think there are some possbilities for sc2 to be broadcasted on tv in the next 1-5 years. i'm not talking something like ESPN SCII or something similar (btw im not that familiar with the american tv scene) but i think, there is always a niche - something like the weather channel might still be sort of mainstreams, but there are actually quite a lot of tv channels out there in the whole wide world - so why not just add another sc channel - im not talking beeing super professional with 10s of thousands of viewers im talking on a more amateur level
one example here in berlin is a tv channel called "tv berlin" and on that tv channel you can apply for some air time. im not sure if this is still true but it was like 9 years ago (i dont watch it anymore) but our high school had some sort of talk show going on where we were discussing gouvernment funding of the school system - 1 week later i saw 2 guys throwing tennisballs at each other for 2 hours. the show had great feedback btw!
and if this can happen everything can happen. its all about expectations. no need to go super global, national or even regional. why not start with local? have live sc2 event been broadcasted on super small tv station where it doesnt even matter what they broadcast because those guys arent doomed to bring in some numbers etc. having a show of 2-3 hours run once a week on a thursday at 4 pm or smth liek that
why am i talking about this? i just want to say that there are a lot of possibilites out there in the whole wide world saying 'wootz, our numbers are so great we should be on cable' (and yeah comparing footbal (some people call it soccer, LOL) with sc2 is just ridiculously absurd) but saying this will and should not happen on regular tv atm. maybe on iptv later is the only soultion, is an opionen i cannot absolutly concure. Ya there is tv programm and ya there are tv channels out there that demand a certain amount knowledge - its not all super duper casual friendly.
im just saying a lot of/all projects that were run in the past to bring sc/esports on tv might have been run in the wrong time/country/format. this could change
But i think - hey its the internet - its easy to access easy to use and everybody finds what he or she wants to find - sc2 will get bigger but this will happen because of people like you (you reading this post) and me not because we are on tv.
Although I agree that Starcraft isn't really built for television I don't see commercials being a problem. Why not just run a flexible commercial schedule the way Ongamenet does? are the ways TV advertising is handled really that different between Korea and the US that that style couldn't be emulated?
Was waiting for this as soon as I saw the original comment on twitter. A lot of good points made, and a lot of misconceptions brought into perspective!
I have seen BW games I think casted by Tastesless on TV. Way back when, I had this channel that showed nothing but video game(gameplay) on dish network. They had all kinds of tournament content on that channel. From counter strike to halo. I liked it but it doesn't exist any more.
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 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.
I dont think esports is ment for tv. I was there for all of cgs and the "flagship" for esports at the time cs failed miserably and was cut down for the second season because the viewership didnt understand what was going on. And i had a chance to talk to some of the players and what they were telling me....eeeek
I think tv is slowly dieing so why would you want something that needs to grow to use a "outdated" tool. Sure it will be a long time before tv's arent around anymore...but i will say the one good thing about the cgs is you actually got to see the passion tweens and younger had for gaming, it was pretty amazing and shows that esports has a bright future. Getting SC on tv wont instantly make it blow up its going to take a long time and have a viewer base who grew up with it for it to get huge.
On April 12 2011 12:19 The_Piper42 wrote: Although I agree that Starcraft isn't really built for television I don't see commercials being a problem. Why not just run a flexible commercial schedule the way Ongamenet does? are the ways TV advertising is handled really that different between Korea and the US that that style couldn't be emulated?
No, not even close, that's not how American Television works. It's all about the commercials and $$$.
Personally, I would be fine if SC stayed on streams, youtube videos, ect. I mean, to be honest, I have completely stopped watching Television all together. Streams come with an internet connection and are cheaper then television channel packages.
Korea seems a lot stricter on the use of frequent advertisements in their programming. I doubt you would ever see that here.
Korea, South
Under the current rules, terrestrial channels cannot take in-program commercial breaks. So, the advertisements are usually put between the intro and the start of a program, and between the end credits and the end of the program. Terrestrial channels often divide some longer-length films like The Ten Commandments into parts and consider each part as an individual program. Terrestrial channels can take commercial breaks during breaks in action during sporting events.
Pay-television channels can take in-program commercial breaks, although some pay channels schedule advertisement in the same way that terrestrial channels do.
I think SC2 will fail if it were to be on TV, but I think that you could make commercials work. They would have to be like ads on youtube, where there is a little pop up at the bottom of the tv screen. Yes that would be annoying, and I think you would have to get the commentators say the sponsors name a lot like tasteless does on GSL. but I think it could work with the pop ups, you wouldn't miss the game, and you would still have commercials to pay for it.
Traditional commercials can't work with SC2. "Dick" mentioned sports as a comparison. The reason that it works with sports if that they have timeouts and fouls and official reviews etc that "PAUSE" the game. I don't know how an official pausing of a SC2 game would work, or if for the sake of TV you give players the ability to take "Timeouts" to sort through their thoughts or whatever, but I don't think it will work with SC2 on TV.
The reason I think it will fail is people associated with the game are typically at their computers, and not on their TV. Ratings will suffer and it will fail and get cancelled. tbh I find out about things by twitter and clicking on TL or surfing Reddit. I can't do that on my TV (If I had a google tv, which I don't, I could.)
On April 12 2011 11:55 imareaver3 wrote: I'm curious, now, how do MBC and OGN do it? I don't know anything about the logistics of the BW scene, so maybe I'm missing something stupid, but why don't the reasons (Like the impossibility of commercial breaks and general inaccessibility of the game) that seem to logically preclude SC2 on Western TV apply to the Korean TV stations? Is there something fundamentally different about them?
Because gaming is much more socially acceptable in South Korea than in the US. You may be surprised to know that an overwhelming majority of fans at live OSL/MSL matches are girls...who don't even have a true appreciation for what is going on. The Korean BW scene masterfully constructed narrative and emotion around the players, and teams. There are so many other shows on MBC/OGN not even related to the matches themselves but rather the casters, players, teams etc. That is what keeps viewers watching MSL/OSL.
It is fundamentally different because in Korea you can market gamers with sex appeal/mystique. When IGN released their new promos for IPL i almost had a heart attack that they are trying something similar - it doesn't work in the west.
Remember that what is "socially acceptable" will change relatively quickly. There is an entire generation of kids that are growing up and they consider being good at SC2 or any other game as impressive as being good at basketball.
For some reference, baseball was considered a stupid game for kids for the first half century of its existence, decades after the first professional teams were formed. The first part of the Ken Burns documentary has a ton of great quotes from super early famous player's parents talking about how much they hate their choice to try to play a game for a living.
Ultimately I don't know if I agree with the conclusion of "never", but that time is certainly not now and its certainly not in our near future. Stigmas get lessened every year etc etc, I do think it will eventually hit a point where these kinds of stories are possible but its decades away at best.
Very good writeup.
This promotion has nothing to do with the actual fight – it's about the narrative/story of the fighters. This kind of emotion and narrative is what event producers should be striving to create online and on IPTV in the future.
This has always bugged the shit out of me, people in production for video games totally miss that story a huge percentage of the time. Every game I've ever played, I've stayed in the community and followed what happens because of the narratives and personalities involved. I don't know shit about MMA but enjoy watching fights because I get to see the next chapter of each person's story unfold. This should be obvious to anyone in marketing and management but all too often with video games we get people trying to tell us why the game itself is all thats relevant.
Actually awhile back, TV shows used to never show commercials in program either in the U.S. until someone thought it was more profitable to show more commercials
Whats wrong with having commercials in between games? Also I think everything is fine just the way it is... There is already tv on the internet and pretty soon people will only watch it on the computer so I think that starcraft is already a head of the game
On April 12 2011 11:55 imareaver3 wrote: I'm curious, now, how do MBC and OGN do it? I don't know anything about the logistics of the BW scene, so maybe I'm missing something stupid, but why don't the reasons (Like the impossibility of commercial breaks and general inaccessibility of the game) that seem to logically preclude SC2 on Western TV apply to the Korean TV stations? Is there something fundamentally different about them?
ogn/mbc aren't limited to the broadcasting limitations they have to deal with in the western world. unlike the cgs, they aren't forced by their parent companies to limit their production into time blocks to fit scheduling requirements (a benefit of being a cable channel), therefore no stupid ass modifications having to be done. also as some said, korea does advertisements differently compared to the west (longer period of time, but not as often).
Yeah, getting SC2 on TV doesn't quite have the same meaning as getting e-sports on TV 6-7 years ago.
You know, I just sat down and tried to remember when was the last time I've actually watched something from Start to finish on TV, and the last time I can remember doing that was 3 years ago, and I live in Australia where I don't have conveniences like Hulu and only recently have we started to get internet plans that have exceeded 30gigs in bandwidth (at a reasonable price range)
Putting some more thought into it, I think the amount of TV I've watched in the last 2 years is probably close to 2 hours... I can't even remember the last time I actually watched TV 0o (in the last two years or so)
On April 12 2011 11:55 imareaver3 wrote: I'm curious, now, how do MBC and OGN do it? I don't know anything about the logistics of the BW scene, so maybe I'm missing something stupid, but why don't the reasons (Like the impossibility of commercial breaks and general inaccessibility of the game) that seem to logically preclude SC2 on Western TV apply to the Korean TV stations? Is there something fundamentally different about them?
Because gaming is much more socially acceptable in South Korea than in the US. You may be surprised to know that an overwhelming majority of fans at live OSL/MSL matches are girls...who don't even have a true appreciation for what is going on. The Korean BW scene masterfully constructed narrative and emotion around the players, and teams. There are so many other shows on MBC/OGN not even related to the matches themselves but rather the casters, players, teams etc. That is what keeps viewers watching MSL/OSL.
It is fundamentally different because in Korea you can market gamers with sex appeal/mystique. When IGN released their new promos for IPL i almost had a heart attack that they are trying something similar - it doesn't work in the west.
Remember that what is "socially acceptable" will change relatively quickly. There is an entire generation of kids that are growing up and they consider being good at SC2 or any other game as impressive as being good at basketball.
A large percentage of that same generation are still going to grow up watching Western TV like Jersey Shore, and music with the message of "Get money, get ho's." A generation of people who don't see gamers as geeks, nerds and losers is far, far away in my opinion.
I agree, Brad. I just went to CES this weekend, and I still got crap for being a nerd/loser from my friends and family. Granted, they weren't being totally serious, but the sentiment is still there. Even though people these days are growing up with video games, it doesn't mean COMPETITIVE gaming will be socially acceptable. There is more of an influence of the things brad described than of video games.
So yeah, it would be very hard to bring in a casual audience to TV. A lot of people would take one look at a professional videogame competition (they would NOT think "ESPORTS", but "people playing games") and likely change the channel immediately. Or at least that is what the people I know would do.
Besides, as people before me have mentioned, a lot of the target audience solely watches TV online. Its what I do. I barely use my cable package (except for things like Michigan sports away games!), and that is the general trend for a lot of people. Something like streaming (or IPTV) is likely the best option for StarCraft's target audience.
Overall, very well written Kennigit. I agree with pretty much everything you said. This definitely needed to be written.
On April 12 2011 12:33 lunick wrote: Whats wrong with having commercials in between games? Also I think everything is fine just the way it is... There is already tv on the internet and pretty soon people will only watch it on the computer so I think that starcraft is already a head of the game
Consider the fact that starcraft does not lend itself to television broadcast [in the western episodic sense] for a number of reasons.
compared to conventional sports like hockey or football, a single Bo3 of starcraft could last anywhere from 15mins to 2hours +. While the hockey and football matches will last 60mins of gametime [with the occasional overtime]. Professional sports have been tailored to television over the years with planned TV timeouts and breaks between periods. This simply won't work with StarCraft; as one cannot take a timeout or break in the middle of an hour long macro slugfest. [As kennigit was pointing out]
Is this expansion going to go up? We will find out.... after this commercial break! Fuck that ^^
Seriously though, e-sports/ sc2 on television doesn't seem like it's that big of a deal. Whether or not it becomes more acceptable in American culture, having e-sports on TV seems like such a short sited dream.
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.
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.
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.
Perhaps I'm trying to compare two things that are too different, but i hope people understand this.
Kickass writeup. I wholeheartedly agree that SC has no chance on television, but I think the most important aspect, like many others have said, is that television is becomming totally irrelevant to the average starcraft fan. I am perfectly happy keeping the current state of streams/VODs as the method of exposure.
On April 12 2011 11:55 imareaver3 wrote: I'm curious, now, how do MBC and OGN do it? I don't know anything about the logistics of the BW scene, so maybe I'm missing something stupid, but why don't the reasons (Like the impossibility of commercial breaks and general inaccessibility of the game) that seem to logically preclude SC2 on Western TV apply to the Korean TV stations? Is there something fundamentally different about them?
Because gaming is much more socially acceptable in South Korea than in the US. You may be surprised to know that an overwhelming majority of fans at live OSL/MSL matches are girls...who don't even have a true appreciation for what is going on. The Korean BW scene masterfully constructed narrative and emotion around the players, and teams. There are so many other shows on MBC/OGN not even related to the matches themselves but rather the casters, players, teams etc. That is what keeps viewers watching MSL/OSL.
It is fundamentally different because in Korea you can market gamers with sex appeal/mystique. When IGN released their new promos for IPL i almost had a heart attack that they are trying something similar - it doesn't work in the west.
Remember that what is "socially acceptable" will change relatively quickly. There is an entire generation of kids that are growing up and they consider being good at SC2 or any other game as impressive as being good at basketball.
100%. I should have written "it doesn't work in the west...yet"
Recently I have been contemplating the "editing" challenges that RTS games present (because of the huge playing field) and I think the only answer is to have companies begin to build in better observer tools that allow different points of view. I think that being able to zoom out further from the action would be helpful when observing positional play. It would also be nice to be able to do some PiP or something.
This would also extend to Halo which I find difficult to watch after short periods of time because of the first person view. It's kind of the same as watching pro-level replays from their POV as they jump all over the map.
Kennigit, you make lots of sense. Hopefully these points are taken into consideration by anyone looking to enhance the viewer experience of SC2.
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.
If NASL was on TV, I couldn't watch it because I don't have cable. Since it's on the internet, I can stream it on my HD television. internet 1-0 tv
On April 12 2011 11:55 imareaver3 wrote: I'm curious, now, how do MBC and OGN do it? I don't know anything about the logistics of the BW scene, so maybe I'm missing something stupid, but why don't the reasons (Like the impossibility of commercial breaks and general inaccessibility of the game) that seem to logically preclude SC2 on Western TV apply to the Korean TV stations? Is there something fundamentally different about them?
Because gaming is much more socially acceptable in South Korea than in the US. You may be surprised to know that an overwhelming majority of fans at live OSL/MSL matches are girls...who don't even have a true appreciation for what is going on. The Korean BW scene masterfully constructed narrative and emotion around the players, and teams. There are so many other shows on MBC/OGN not even related to the matches themselves but rather the casters, players, teams etc. That is what keeps viewers watching MSL/OSL.
It is fundamentally different because in Korea you can market gamers with sex appeal/mystique. When IGN released their new promos for IPL i almost had a heart attack that they are trying something similar - it doesn't work in the west.
Remember that what is "socially acceptable" will change relatively quickly. There is an entire generation of kids that are growing up and they consider being good at SC2 or any other game as impressive as being good at basketball.
On April 12 2011 11:18 Kennigit wrote: A TV station simply cant run a 45 minute game without commercials in North America and still remain profitable.
Out of curiosity, how do they handle this in Korea?
A few people have posted in more detail a page or 2 back, but Korean TV Stations don't have the same kind of broadcast/commercial regulation as in the west. If you take a 60 minute program in North America, you can almost guarantee when the commercials will be, and that the show itself is cut down to 42 minutes long. Korea doesn't have those types of restrictions.
On April 12 2011 12:36 Dommk wrote: Yeah, getting SC2 on TV doesn't quite have the same meaning as getting e-sports on TV 6-7 years ago.
You know, I just sat down and tried to remember when was the last time I've actually watched something from Start to finish on TV, and the last time I can remember doing that was 3 years ago, and I live in Australia where I don't have conveniences like Hulu and only recently have we started to get internet plans that have exceeded 30gigs in bandwidth (at a reasonable price range)
Putting some more thought into it, I think the amount of TV I've watched in the last 2 years is probably close to 2 hours... I can't even remember the last time I actually watched TV 0o (in the last two years or so)
This totally I actually was sort of in the mindset of Starcraft on TV would be a good thing when I started to read this because last time I even thought about e-sports on TV was a book I read about Counter-Strike trying to get on TV (I'm a bit too young to have paid attention as it happened) and I had always sort of just equated TV to being the big next step and legitimizer of e-sports but then I did what this guy did, I stopped and thought about how much stuff I've watched on TV as compared to computer recently, and now I'm just thinking about how I'm sitting on a couch in front of a TV that I don't even have a cable box for because I only use it for Xbox/Gamecube, so really yeah TV doesn't have to be the end goal anymore and this response really shows why.
I know some former CGS employees actually post on TL, it would be great if they could be interviewed on this topic, but i doubt that would ever come to fruition. I would love to hear what Jason Lake would say. Seeing how he was one of the biggest advocates in pushing eSports to the mainstream.
i think, some people have something quite different in mind - MONEY. i mean, alot of people saying some casters etc should be appreciated for promoting esport, but deep down do they really care about esport? :3 if esport grows, good for everyone, and they will be praised as some important figures XD; if esport fails, it is 'natural'.
as well as i think that kennigit have made some very good and valid points, some people may fail to see that, someone is just using sc2 to grab some $$$ from the VC. it is just simple as that.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
Great article, Kennigit. I couldn't agree more. In my opinion, streams are better than TV anyway, from a viewers perspective. Think how terrible the TSL RO32 would have been if right in the middle of the Thorzain vs. Fruitdealer game Day[9] had said: "And we'll resume this epic duel after these messages!"
On April 12 2011 13:17 ander wrote: 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).
It theoretically could. But tv execs who own multi million dollar companies wont shell out their money without fiddling with things and their thoughts on what will draw in the biggest audience....and thats how you get the cgs
Thanks for smoothing that out Kennigit. I agree that, in the west, we cannot have the same sort of televised games that they do have in Korea, however this IPTV thing is really interesting.
It wasn't that long ago we was in SC2 beta hosting $50 tournaments. Things are moving so quickly right now, it's scary. I remember back in the day, progression in pro-gaming was a slow process, and even then monumental mistakes were made. Things like fraud were very prevalent.
Only time will tell which route SC2 is destined to take. Hopefully it's the right one.
i expect a scathing counter counter article with a new build order within the week from sixjax; but anyways, i do not understand this notion of why starcraft 2 need to be on TV. Personally, I prefer to watch TV on my computer. While im watching GSL I can check reddit, chat with others, skype with people, or do any other number of things (like check TL.net :D). While I am watching television I have to sit by myself mostly and watch 3-4 2 minute ads (im in USA).
I will start by saying that I do agree SC2 won't make to TV, and if it did, it would fail miserably.
BUT, I think it is more of a cultural thing to the USA (maybe North America) which is not representative of "The West".
On point:
1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative.
It is easy to edit. Look what recent tournaments are using, they add smaller videos to dead areas of the screen, add promotional banners and stuff.
As someone pointed, we have 45 min Soccer half-times. There are commercials squeezed in when the play is slow, and there are many such occasions on SC2 to squeeze commercials (long macro moments, right at the beginning, etc). It would be the work of casters/observer to sneak those adds in the slow moments. Or even put then in the smaller dead spaces across the screen.
2. Able to target core demographic and casuals simultaneously.
This is only an issue (at least in Brazil) if you're talking about open TV. If you're on Cable, then even a small amount of viewers (much smaller then current SC2 viewership) can keep it a profitable business. There are Channels (on cable) that get a few thousand viewers, tops, and SC2 can manage a few tens of thousands of viewers at the same time.
You could target the HARDCORE demographic and slowly try to make the masses understand the game.
In Brazil there are MANY Sports that are unknown, like Golf, Baseball, even BASKETBALL. What does the TV stations do when there are major games? They dedicate a good 15~30 min to explaining the fucking game before each transmission. They explain the rules, the rivalries involved, hype the players... each and every transmission.
Eventually, some people grow used to those sports and start following then, but in the end Brazil is still a one sport nation and most (80%+) of people only know follow and know Soccer. But the point being, this 20% is some 40 million fucking people. That is a HUGE amount of viewers and money that is untapped. They want entertainment, but not Soccer, shouldn't we give then an option?
3. Social Networking
I've experienced many times that TV transmissions can (and will) foment social networking responses. Like a SC2 match in the middle of the day would create a fuck-ton of Community and Hassle in Orkut (largest social network in Brazil), some top TTs in twitter (Brazil is known for putting topics in the TTs lighting fast) and create many, many comments on facebook.
By the very nature of these social networks people who don't have a clue what the hell is starcraft would hit some knowledgeable person who would then explain it and propagate the message.
Of course this is not guaranteed to happen (nothing is) but this is as likely a scenario as you paint. We don't have SC 2 experience on TV, we DON'T know how it would go. I personally think it would fail, for completely different reasons, one being that I am the target audience for this kind of show and I only turn on the TV on MAJOR, MAJOR events/shows. And even those events I get to know about because of internet and/or word of mouth.
On the other hand, it could flourish because we (Brazil, and to an extent "the west") have AWFUL internet connections and streams very often lag terribly (UStream, for example, TSL is unwatchable).
I'm literally playing devil's advocate here, but because I think the Kennigit's attitude is Immature and even if I though he was right I don't think it is the way to critize someone who put effort into writing something to try to help the SC community. He should have respected other people's opinions like this site tells us to.
I have seem people be banned for only half the criticism he expresses here, even with good arguments, and he gets all the praise in the world for it? Sorry I don't buy these two weights thingy.
Even though my post is probably be deleted/edited and I perma banned I HAD to say this, because it would NOT be funny if the TL staff was being ridiculed on another site.
PS: And YES, I'm mad with this attitude. Censor me for expressing my opinion.
Excelent point of view imo, StarCraft 2 is good the way it is, unless a TV Channel would allow their programation to be as unpredictable as a StarCraft match is in terms of times, TV is secondary, and even tertiary by the fact StarCraft is not a simple understandable game, korea is one country, one culture, western TV are Continents and multiple cultures and StarCraft 2 is not so popular talking about this numbers of people.
We are good as we are right now, also I dont watch TV anymore xD if I want to watch any series or something, Internet has it all, is just that I dont have a LCD or Plasma TV to watch it in HD =P. Is to us not to be decived by the "TV Potential", in fact I would say TV is starting to die as we know it.
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.
Exactly.
I'm 20 and watch soccer and sc2, both online. Like so many others posting, I don't even own a tv.
It sounds like "getting on tv" has been the goal towards which some esports supporters are running without any concrete idea of why. Maybe that's a relic of the early part of the last decade, when esports was still just budding into existence and television was still a relevant way of broadcast to 20somethings.
Either way, the sc2 scene is still exploding online, and you can just thumb through this thread and realize that a number (which at this point seems rather large) of online viewers would not be tuning into televised broadcasts of sc2, even if it were prime hours of the day. Making an argument from the raw numbers of online viewers without getting a good survey of how many of those viewers would choose televised events over online events is downright silly.
There's some of us, myself included, that would keep watching online even if ESPN sold its soul to esports, and it goes without saying how astronomically ridiculous that very notion is.
When I think about esports growth, I think about a little over a year ago, when I was racing home with my beta key in hand, my heart pounding, the piece of paper with those sacred numbers etched on it dampened by the sweat of my palms, and how I was absurdly enthusiastic about the scene. But if a cop had pulled me over for being too damn happy and told me "son, this time next year, the foreign scene will be gearing up for a north american star league that will attract the top korean players," I would've laughed until I shit my pants. The bottom line (at least for me) is that I'm excited and proud to be an esports fan at a time like this, and to be frank, I don't give a flying shit about being on foreign tv when former OSL and current GSL champions are crossing the pacific to play on foreign soil.
I'm sick and tired of all the chatter about how the industry is growing and what the future holds. Television deals usually being at the top of dreamers' wishlists. We don't need televised matches. We can survive without it. It's not us being narcissistic, although it may come across that way. It's the reality of the situation and it goes a lot further than viewership as Ken pointed out.
I'm sure other cable companies will attempt to do it again, but they will find out quickly for all the reasons Ken listed that logistically it isn't possible. For one, live matches won't be feasible. Everything would have to be pre-recorded.
On April 12 2011 13:18 r3clipse wrote: The author had it backwards. eSports moving to TV isn't the future, TV moving onto the internet is the future.
I don't even watch TV any more, I get everything from livestreams/Hulu/etc.
Amen.
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.
How do you sleep at night? There is a big difference between OGN and MBC compared to your ESPNs, FOX Sports, NBC Sports, (insert any American sporting channel here).
As for your comments on MMA and the UFC in particular. You don't help your situation when you come off as one of those stereotypical prehistoric boxing elitists. My suggestion to you is stick to what you know. You find MMA boring. Great, that's your opinion. Too bad there is a lot of evidence to counter everything you said.
I agree with these points except it seems to encompass all Western media while at the same time the points brought up (such as requiring it be chopped up and edited) seem to apply mostly to American media. I do think that it is still possible in Europe, possibly Sweden or Germany.
I've always been a person who wanted gaming on television but i've never put much thought behind the success it would have with ratings and so forth. Personally, i think if they ever decide to try and bring esports to the public on television they should do it slowly. Maybe if they just added a show on some channel thats already known for gaming like G4 that is a short 30 minute show. Maybe it goes over recent tournaments? Short games of sc2, WoW, halo, cod those sort of games. Test the waters if you would. Obviously any games would be pre-recorded so that you could fit them in. Now the quality of the games would hurt the esports scene due to the 7-10 minute length required on a game. Some people may not think that represents the community as it should so that would be a possible problem.
My point i'm trying to get across here is that starting small is the key if they did want to venture out to do this. Not going straight gaming channel or a league like these other operations have tried.
I remember watching g4tv back a few years ago when they had so much more gaming and more quality game analysis. I loved watching those shows. Shows like Cinematech (i think?) which was only the cut scenes from video games. I remember this show coming on late at night (same time as shake weight, barbecue grill ads). I would think that a show like that gains sponsorship from the games that give it rights to use the cut scenes.
I think if you could get money to run a show that is purely cinema's from video games that 30 minute show of e sports (not just sc2) would be doable. Once again pointing out that you don't go bull rush the station and start doing every match from NASL or something. If the viewers of the channel respond well after testing the product, possibly experiment into a bigger program.
I think there's a lot to learn here from the world of chess, which has for decades faced almost identical problems with the transition to TV. Chess is at least as difficult to convey to the unacquainted viewer; you don't even have the pretty explosions to fall back on, and the tension between the players is all beneath the surface. Nonetheless, major chess events have been televised before and continue to be. With the right commentators, it can work. The problem in my eyes occurs when people try to turn it into something that it's not - a cheap thrill that's accessible to anyone and can be flicked on or flicked off whenever you like. Chess doesn't work that way, and nor does SC2. In fact the attempts to make chess more appealing to a wider audience in recent years (mostly by shortening time controls) have come at the cost of game quality.
So, let me get this straight. TV won't work, but IPTV will because I can watch my friends on a webcam while watching the game. Kennigit, you really are a total nerd aren't you? Ever heard of a SuperBowl party? What about Monday night football? You realize there are plenty of examples where people actually meet in person to watch things, which is vastly superior to a bunch of nerds behind web cams. Hell, a bunch of the guys at the office watch SC2 games together almost daily, and we'd totally throw parties to watch the game on TV as well if it there were decent games on at decent times. Slapping an IP on the front of TV doesn't make it change everything. It's not like you can't watch your friends on a webcam on your PC while watching TV today. While I don't agree with "dick" as you call him, you are just as much of a tool.
What is great about your response to the article is that network TV is/will not become the right venue for eSports. The right venue for eSports is online. That said, what people need to realize is that TV and Online are no longer truely seperate.
Over the next few years we will see a dramatic increase in the quality/viewer size of online content because advertisers are moving their dollars online. The fastest growing market in advertising is online video. This includes in-stream, branded content, and pre-roll. Web enabled televisions are exploding on the market and predicted to increase by over 500% in the next few years. This means that you and I will be watching starcraft on our TVs without having to use a Roku, Apple TV, or other set-top device. New networks that are exclusively online will begin to see major corporate backing. And SC2 will/should be at the forefront of this entertainment revolution.
Kennigit is right....if we try to push SC2 on to network or cable television it will simply fail again. Not because it isn't worthy or interested but because its audience isn't watching the tv. It's audience is online. But it's audience will grow as more and more consumers and advertisers realize the value of online video content.
Advertisers and major networks are paying attention to these numbers. And as a result online advertising spend specificaly within online video is predicted to increase in 2011 by more then 30%. Advertisers are hungry for digital content because digital media is more engaging and it is more effective then traditional media.
Yes SC2 should not be on TV soon in the traditional sense. What is great about that is Traditional TV is quickly becoming less valuable and digital content is quickly becoming the hotest and most desireable media. Networks are scared and they are looking for ways to capitalize on digital media but they cannot agree on how it should be done. While they fight, SC2 and other digital media entrepreneurs will become forces to be reconed with.
Kennigit, I'm glad to see you've got your eye on the real prize.
On April 12 2011 13:46 unaliased wrote: So, let me get this straight. TV won't work, but IPTV will because I can watch my friends on a webcam while watching the game. Kennigit, you really are a total nerd aren't you? Ever heard of a SuperBowl party? What about Monday night football? You realize there are plenty of examples where people actually meet in person to watch things, which is vastly superior to a bunch of nerds behind web cams. Hell, a bunch of the guys at the office watch SC2 games together almost daily, and we'd totally throw parties to watch the game on TV as well if it there were decent games on at decent times. Slapping an IP on the front of TV doesn't make it change everything. It's not like you can't watch your friends on a webcam on your PC while watching TV today. While I don't agree with "dick" as you call him, you are just as much of a tool.
IPTV was a suggestion. lmao
There have been many Ottawa lan events where Ken has been in attendance bud. In fact, there are tons of TL gatherings all the time. I can assure you this guy isn't a tool and he's tough as nails. Not the kind of guy you would want to pick a fight with that is for sure.
On April 12 2011 13:26 Jotoco wrote: I will disagree with you Kennigit.
I will start by saying that I do agree SC2 won't make to TV, and if it did, it would fail miserably.
BUT, I think it is more of a cultural thing to the USA (maybe North America) which is not representative of "The West".
On point:
1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative.
It is easy to edit. Look what recent tournaments are using, they add smaller videos to dead areas of the screen, add promotional banners and stuff.
As someone pointed, we have 45 min Soccer half-times. There are commercials squeezed in when the play is slow, and there are many such occasions on SC2 to squeeze commercials (long macro moments, right at the beginning, etc). It would be the work of casters/observer to sneak those adds in the slow moments. Or even put then in the smaller dead spaces across the screen.
2. Able to target core demographic and casuals simultaneously.
This is only an issue (at least in Brazil) if you're talking about open TV. If you're on Cable, then even a small amount of viewers (much smaller then current SC2 viewership) can keep it a profitable business. There are Channels (on cable) that get a few thousand viewers, tops, and SC2 can manage a few tens of thousands of viewers at the same time.
You could target the HARDCORE demographic and slowly try to make the masses understand the game.
In Brazil there are MANY Sports that are unknown, like Golf, Baseball, even BASKETBALL. What does the TV stations do when there are major games? They dedicate a good 15~30 min to explaining the fucking game before each transmission. They explain the rules, the rivalries involved, hype the players... each and every transmission.
Eventually, some people grow used to those sports and start following then, but in the end Brazil is still a one sport nation and most (80%+) of people only know follow and know Soccer. But the point being, this 20% is some 40 million fucking people. That is a HUGE amount of viewers and money that is untapped. They want entertainment, but not Soccer, shouldn't we give then an option?
3. Social Networking
I've experienced many times that TV transmissions can (and will) foment social networking responses. Like a SC2 match in the middle of the day would create a fuck-ton of Community and Hassle in Orkut (largest social network in Brazil), some top TTs in twitter (Brazil is known for putting topics in the TTs lighting fast) and create many, many comments on facebook.
By the very nature of these social networks people who don't have a clue what the hell is starcraft would hit some knowledgeable person who would then explain it and propagate the message.
Of course this is not guaranteed to happen (nothing is) but this is as likely a scenario as you paint. We don't have SC 2 experience on TV, we DON'T know how it would go. I personally think it would fail, for completely different reasons, one being that I am the target audience for this kind of show and I only turn on the TV on MAJOR, MAJOR events/shows. And even those events I get to know about because of internet and/or word of mouth.
On the other hand, it could flourish because we (Brazil, and to an extent "the west") have AWFUL internet connections and streams very often lag terribly (UStream, for example, TSL is unwatchable).
I'm literally playing devil's advocate here, but because I think the Kennigit's attitude is Immature and even if I though he was right I don't think it is the way to critize someone who put effort into writing something to try to help the SC community. He should have respected other people's opinions like this site tells us to.
I have seem people be banned for only half the criticism he expresses here, even with good arguments, and he gets all the praise in the world for it? Sorry I don't buy these two weights thingy.
Even though my post is probably be deleted/edited and I perma banned I HAD to say this, because it would NOT be funny if the TL staff was being ridiculed on another site.
PS: And YES, I'm mad with this attitude. Censor me for expressing my opinion.
You have some interesting points there. About the internet connections though, dunno why you use Brazil as example. We have plenty options of decent internet connections here and most of them don't even have a bandwidth cap.. I'm guessing its the same for many other similar countries.
Great writeup and, honestly, is nice to read. When I saw that I was thinking that was just the absolute worst way to approach this.
That said, there are ways to make things like this work. E.g. IndyCar is a series that doesn't really take breaks at all. Best you can do is break during caution laps. However, they basically use a side-by-side displaying system where ads on the right and action on the left. This lets them come back immediately if something goes wrong and you're not like "wait, what just happened?!"
That said, it's nowhere near a perfect system and SC2 doesn't really have any reason to go to traditional TV.
I think it is obvious that the people who do MMA production reels with the epic side stories on the players have better production value than GSL or MLG or any other Starcraft II league out there right now (Chill did an above average one for TSL without any player dialogue in it though). Just strikes me as odd, considering all the amazing content people from TL can create, yet it goes into songs about Day[9], Husky ...etc.
Just think of a storyline setup like this(Pre-match video):
IdrA vs Huk
1. Chill/Day[9] talk about the history of their playstyles etc>video shows some massive battles with IdrA on 5+ bases with amazing creep spread.
2. Cut to a clip of IdrA discussing the ZvP matchup, after talking about how dumb it is that protoss has better buildings than his race...he calls Huk a cheesy faggot who can't play a single game without a 4-6 gate timing/Deathball (mostly made up of hallucinated units).
3. Cuts to a clip of Huk pulling off some beautiful forcefields, while the commentators talk about the transformation of Huk into an more Korean super-aggro style after moving to SK for the GSL.
4. Cuts to clip of Huk having a half smirk while talking about how he beats IdrA over 80% of the time on ladder.
Maybe some video clips of them training, other famous players talking about the rivalry...etc.
I think the video clips Kennegit shows in the OP are what the people producing hype/side story videos should strive for. I got pumped about MMA just from watching those examples and I am not a wrestling fan at all.
On April 12 2011 13:57 Demonace34 wrote: I think it is obvious that the people who do MMA production reels with the epic side stories on the players have better production value than GSL or MLG or any other Starcraft II league out there right now (Chill did an above average one for TSL without any player dialogue in it though). Just strikes me as odd, considering all the amazing content people from TL can create, yet it goes into songs about Day[9], Husky ...etc.
Just think of a storyline setup like this(Pre-match video): IdrA vs Huk 1. Chill/Day[9] talk about the history of their playstyles etc>video shows some massive battles with IdrA on 5+ bases with amazing creep spread. 2. Cut to a clip of IdrA discussing the ZvP matchup, after talking about how dumb it is that protoss has better buildings than his race...he calls Huk a cheesy faggot who can't play a single game without a 4-6 gate timing/Deathball (mostly made up of hallucinated units). 3. Cuts to a clip of Huk pulling off some beautiful forcefields, while the commentators talk about the transformation of Huk into an more Korean super-aggro style after moving to SK for the GSL. 4. Cuts to clip of Huk having a half smirk while talking about how he beats IdrA over 80% of the time on ladder.
Maybe some video clips of them training, other famous players talking about the rivalry...etc.
I think the video clips Kennegit shows in the OP are what the people producing hype/side story videos should strive for. I got pumped about MMA just from watching those examples and I am not a wrestling fan at all.
Yeah, for sure. It would be nice to TSL start the wagon with this. Maybe from the Round of 8 onwards. It would be great.
On April 12 2011 13:26 Jotoco wrote: I will disagree with you Kennigit.
I will start by saying that I do agree SC2 won't make to TV, and if it did, it would fail miserably.
BUT, I think it is more of a cultural thing to the USA (maybe North America) which is not representative of "The West".
On point:
1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative.
It is easy to edit. Look what recent tournaments are using, they add smaller videos to dead areas of the screen, add promotional banners and stuff.
As someone pointed, we have 45 min Soccer half-times. There are commercials squeezed in when the play is slow, and there are many such occasions on SC2 to squeeze commercials (long macro moments, right at the beginning, etc). It would be the work of casters/observer to sneak those adds in the slow moments. Or even put then in the smaller dead spaces across the screen.
2. Able to target core demographic and casuals simultaneously.
This is only an issue (at least in Brazil) if you're talking about open TV. If you're on Cable, then even a small amount of viewers (much smaller then current SC2 viewership) can keep it a profitable business. There are Channels (on cable) that get a few thousand viewers, tops, and SC2 can manage a few tens of thousands of viewers at the same time.
You could target the HARDCORE demographic and slowly try to make the masses understand the game.
In Brazil there are MANY Sports that are unknown, like Golf, Baseball, even BASKETBALL. What does the TV stations do when there are major games? They dedicate a good 15~30 min to explaining the fucking game before each transmission. They explain the rules, the rivalries involved, hype the players... each and every transmission.
Eventually, some people grow used to those sports and start following then, but in the end Brazil is still a one sport nation and most (80%+) of people only know follow and know Soccer. But the point being, this 20% is some 40 million fucking people. That is a HUGE amount of viewers and money that is untapped. They want entertainment, but not Soccer, shouldn't we give then an option?
3. Social Networking
I've experienced many times that TV transmissions can (and will) foment social networking responses. Like a SC2 match in the middle of the day would create a fuck-ton of Community and Hassle in Orkut (largest social network in Brazil), some top TTs in twitter (Brazil is known for putting topics in the TTs lighting fast) and create many, many comments on facebook.
By the very nature of these social networks people who don't have a clue what the hell is starcraft would hit some knowledgeable person who would then explain it and propagate the message.
Of course this is not guaranteed to happen (nothing is) but this is as likely a scenario as you paint. We don't have SC 2 experience on TV, we DON'T know how it would go. I personally think it would fail, for completely different reasons, one being that I am the target audience for this kind of show and I only turn on the TV on MAJOR, MAJOR events/shows. And even those events I get to know about because of internet and/or word of mouth.
On the other hand, it could flourish because we (Brazil, and to an extent "the west") have AWFUL internet connections and streams very often lag terribly (UStream, for example, TSL is unwatchable).
I'm literally playing devil's advocate here, but because I think the Kennigit's attitude is Immature and even if I though he was right I don't think it is the way to critize someone who put effort into writing something to try to help the SC community. He should have respected other people's opinions like this site tells us to.
I have seem people be banned for only half the criticism he expresses here, even with good arguments, and he gets all the praise in the world for it? Sorry I don't buy these two weights thingy.
Even though my post is probably be deleted/edited and I perma banned I HAD to say this, because it would NOT be funny if the TL staff was being ridiculed on another site.
PS: And YES, I'm mad with this attitude. Censor me for expressing my opinion.
You have some interesting points there. About the internet connections though, dunno why you use Brazil as example. We have plenty options of decent internet connections here and most of them don't even have a bandwidth cap.. I'm guessing its the same for many other similar countries.
Not everywhere and it can get pretty expensive.
I myself pay about R$100,00 for internet! And it is a measly 4mbit. (Although I can run HD Justin.TV streams no problem, my only problem is with a few streams). But then again, what is the percentage of people that can pay for that kind of internet? And on top of that we have Throttling and traffic shaping that kills video streams 50% of the time.
But that is besides the point. I still think SC2 is NOT meant for TV, as TV is in a descent to oblivion.
To be completely honest, as a 18-30 year-old American male, to me traditional TV really feels like a dying technology. I hardly ever watch anything on television. Although I pay for basic cable, I never watch it. Everything I do is on or from the internet. I am somewhat curious what the break down of TL.net is in this regard.
Poll: How much (traditional, non-internet) television do you watch per week?
0-1 hrs/week (61)
75%
1-7 hrs/week (15)
19%
21+ hrs/week (3)
4%
7-14 hrs/week (1)
1%
14-21 hrs/week (1)
1%
81 total votes
Your vote: How much (traditional, non-internet) television do you watch per week?
this was a fantastic post. It is a shame that SC2 will not be on prime time television, but i am pretty sure that is a good thing. Very interesting points. Thanks for taking the time to write this!!
I voted 14-21.. now that i think about it probably should have done 21+. Honestly for me TV is still awesome.. But I watch sports 24/7 plus shows like House, jersey shore which i don't care to find streams/downloads for those online. I'd rather spend my time on the net playing/watching sc2 or watching youtube clips and facebooking lol.
On April 12 2011 13:57 Demonace34 wrote: I think it is obvious that the people who do MMA production reels with the epic side stories on the players have better production value than GSL or MLG or any other Starcraft II league out there right now (Chill did an above average one for TSL without any player dialogue in it though). Just strikes me as odd, considering all the amazing content people from TL can create, yet it goes into songs about Day[9], Husky ...etc.
Just think of a storyline setup like this(Pre-match video): IdrA vs Huk 1. Chill/Day[9] talk about the history of their playstyles etc>video shows some massive battles with IdrA on 5+ bases with amazing creep spread. 2. Cut to a clip of IdrA discussing the ZvP matchup, after talking about how dumb it is that protoss has better buildings than his race...he calls Huk a cheesy faggot who can't play a single game without a 4-6 gate timing/Deathball (mostly made up of hallucinated units). 3. Cuts to a clip of Huk pulling off some beautiful forcefields, while the commentators talk about the transformation of Huk into an more Korean super-aggro style after moving to SK for the GSL. 4. Cuts to clip of Huk having a half smirk while talking about how he beats IdrA over 80% of the time on ladder.
Maybe some video clips of them training, other famous players talking about the rivalry...etc.
I think the video clips Kennegit shows in the OP are what the people producing hype/side story videos should strive for. I got pumped about MMA just from watching those examples and I am not a wrestling fan at all.
Yeah, for sure. It would be nice to TSL start the wagon with this. Maybe from the Round of 8 onwards. It would be great.
I believe NASL is wants do things like this. That's the whole point of recording matches live and then putting it all into post-production.
Voted 0-1 in the poll. I can get everything from TV on my computer and much more.
Awesome write up kennigit. I will agree that it is important for starcraft to focus on the medium that works for it the best, but also I believe that starcraft would benefit from a wider spread of awareness. Even now a lot of people in the starcraft community have NO idea wtf the NASL, the GSL, the TSL are.
Like they have NO idea what an amazing world they are missing out on. Why? because they're casual dudes that like massing battle crusiers before attacking at the 25 min no rush game. Something wrong w/ that? No. But its important to keep these people in mind. There needs to be advertising for the sc events. Banners, TV ads on cable TV *shits pretty cheap tbqh*
But really. There needs to be penetration of the global media market, we have an awesome thing going here, but what kills markets more than any thing, is a lack of awareness *read: Firefly*.
On April 12 2011 13:57 Demonace34 wrote: I think it is obvious that the people who do MMA production reels with the epic side stories on the players have better production value than GSL or MLG or any other Starcraft II league out there right now (Chill did an above average one for TSL without any player dialogue in it though). Just strikes me as odd, considering all the amazing content people from TL can create, yet it goes into songs about Day[9], Husky ...etc.
Just think of a storyline setup like this(Pre-match video): IdrA vs Huk 1. Chill/Day[9] talk about the history of their playstyles etc>video shows some massive battles with IdrA on 5+ bases with amazing creep spread. 2. Cut to a clip of IdrA discussing the ZvP matchup, after talking about how dumb it is that protoss has better buildings than his race...he calls Huk a cheesy faggot who can't play a single game without a 4-6 gate timing/Deathball (mostly made up of hallucinated units). 3. Cuts to a clip of Huk pulling off some beautiful forcefields, while the commentators talk about the transformation of Huk into an more Korean super-aggro style after moving to SK for the GSL. 4. Cuts to clip of Huk having a half smirk while talking about how he beats IdrA over 80% of the time on ladder.
Maybe some video clips of them training, other famous players talking about the rivalry...etc.
I think the video clips Kennegit shows in the OP are what the people producing hype/side story videos should strive for. I got pumped about MMA just from watching those examples and I am not a wrestling fan at all.
Yeah, for sure. It would be nice to TSL start the wagon with this. Maybe from the Round of 8 onwards. It would be great.
I believe NASL is wants do things like this. That's the whole point of recording matches live and then putting it all into post-production.
Voted 0-1 in the poll. I can get everything from TV on my computer and much more.
I know what you mean, but instead of post-production...most of these hype/side story videos can easily be made before a game has ever been played. The post production is mostly to cut out the waiting in between games, like in the GSL....5 min breaks and Tastosis having to come up with crap to talk about on the top of their head.
On April 12 2011 13:57 Demonace34 wrote: I think it is obvious that the people who do MMA production reels with the epic side stories on the players have better production value than GSL or MLG or any other Starcraft II league out there right now (Chill did an above average one for TSL without any player dialogue in it though). Just strikes me as odd, considering all the amazing content people from TL can create, yet it goes into songs about Day[9], Husky ...etc.
Just think of a storyline setup like this(Pre-match video): IdrA vs Huk 1. Chill/Day[9] talk about the history of their playstyles etc>video shows some massive battles with IdrA on 5+ bases with amazing creep spread. 2. Cut to a clip of IdrA discussing the ZvP matchup, after talking about how dumb it is that protoss has better buildings than his race...he calls Huk a cheesy faggot who can't play a single game without a 4-6 gate timing/Deathball (mostly made up of hallucinated units). 3. Cuts to a clip of Huk pulling off some beautiful forcefields, while the commentators talk about the transformation of Huk into an more Korean super-aggro style after moving to SK for the GSL. 4. Cuts to clip of Huk having a half smirk while talking about how he beats IdrA over 80% of the time on ladder.
Maybe some video clips of them training, other famous players talking about the rivalry...etc.
I think the video clips Kennegit shows in the OP are what the people producing hype/side story videos should strive for. I got pumped about MMA just from watching those examples and I am not a wrestling fan at all.
Yeah, for sure. It would be nice to TSL start the wagon with this. Maybe from the Round of 8 onwards. It would be great.
They already started doing that with Chill's hype video for the round of 16 and it sounds like Ken and Chill will be doing more.
I'm pretty sure "small-time" television like g4 would be an ideal place to try at least mayby doing highlights? or whos winning what? you could have a segment on the overall scene say on AotS or something.. its definately feasable to have something of that sort at the very least (in fact im very suprised they havent already, that i know of anyways)
To be quite honest I could live easily without television, I certainly use the internet more than i use my cellphone and computer combined, hell half the time if i want to head over to a friends house or something i can just hit them up on vent and not even bother calling them / texting them. So i could see where TV isnt growing as fast because of things like mobile/internet multimedia. Granted if these internet caps get serious.. idk how much online media i'll be able to watch.. but thats another issue.
I dont think Primetime TV is ever going to have much sc2 coverage but certainly it could have things like portions of time on say G4 .. or On demand? <-- no shit that would be really good actually, i havent read everything on the thread except for the first couple of posts / last page, does anyone think that would be a good idea? on demand sounds pretty baller actually, in fact i even remember G4 had some sc2 beta preview coverage in their on demand section (which i only saw when i had comcast, not sure if they even have it anymore)
On April 12 2011 13:17 ander wrote: 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).
This is a good idea to be honest; have it available to watch via stream, TV and VOD's. The quality and quantity of content would have to go up in order for this model to work, but it's feasible in my opinion.
Right on Kennigit, you described my SC2 experience perfectly. I came to SC2 because I loved the starcraft universe and I wanted to see more storyline. I became enthralled by multiplayer, and had to become better, much better. I found team liquid, when googling starcraft 2 strategy. Through team liquid I found esports and the community, and I haven't left since.
If you had found me back at the initial purchase of SC2, before I knew anything about starcraft esports, I would never have cared about some random game on TV since I barely watch it anyways. Esports would have meant absolutely nothing to me.
Even now, the main reason I watch tournaments is because I just log onto TL whenever I have time to see if any tournaments are going on at the moment, without this site I would find NOTHING, and I wouldn't search too hard to find it either. Your analysis seems spot on to me, my experiences match what you said pretty well I would say.
great write up! at first I did not understand why TV would be so bad but you make valid points. However, I believe SC2 is not like WC3, CS 1.6, or DotA. I believe it is more and can do better than it's predecessors. No esport game has had a major (I said major, like BW in Korea major) running in TV, I hope that one day SC2 will break that curse in the West. You are so right in saying that there is a different element, a social and interactive element, within esports online. So true! However, why can't we have both? Online tourneys with streams and a little TV. We will see.
I think perhaps SC2 might be still not refined enough in many departments to be televised consistently, but having a special program here and there for a major tournament wouldn't be so bad.
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
you know that they need to get the ball in the end zone for 7 points and do plays n shit don't you? Someone unfamilier w/ starcraft wouldn't know that you ahve to mine anything to get units, wouldn't know why somethign that 1 dude did was gosu or anything like that. They just don't have the experience to ever know what makes sc really hard.
Story telling is great and all, I just hope it doesn't evolve into a cesspit of drama and testosterone. Mainstream television already has that covered pretty well...
On April 12 2011 12:08 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: lol...
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
you know that they need to get the ball in the end zone for 7 points and do plays n shit don't you? Someone unfamilier w/ starcraft wouldn't know that you ahve to mine anything to get units, wouldn't know why somethign that 1 dude did was gosu or anything like that. They just don't have the experience to ever know what makes sc really hard.
I was so confused with your post until I realised you were talking about handegg. IMO, handegg is not that easy to understand - it's relatively technical with its stops/starts (great for advertisers, not great for normal viewers who will flick through the channels if nothing is interesting). On the other hand, sports like football, basketball and tennis are very easy to understand and have very few rules, therein lying their elegance.
SC2 is definitely not ready for mainstream TV. I don't know about cable TV since almost nobody watches cable TV in Australia.
Having shown pro SC2 (mostly GSL) to friends, I have to say that I doubt that it really has the appeal to be viable on television. Even some of my friends who have played the game don't care about or understand the genius behind what progamers are actually doing, they just think it's boring unless there's a battle going on. Casual players obviously know what each unit does, but they find it boring to see "oh he hallucinated an immortal" when they don't really understand why it's clever, and the threshold for understanding what makes that interesting is way too high for television. It's the same reason that chess isn't on TV, and while Starcraft has explosions and stuff, 90% of the gameplay isn't appealing to a non-hardcore audience.
On April 12 2011 13:47 Innovation wrote: Kennigit is right....if we try to push SC2 on to network or cable television it will simply fail again.
"Trying to push SC2 on to a network" is also a totally stupid american way of doing it. "The numbers" are GLOBAL numbers and not US numbers and the fluctuation in them really doesnt make it worthwile for any TV station. Those same stations would obviously want to "monopolize" the content to be the only provider, but that also means people will be locked out because they simply cant get that channel.
Simple common sense why TV wont work for eSport ... it is global and not national.
Wow the points you make about the future of SC2 streaming / broadcasting are spot on! I dont think that the viewing experience will be the same without going on TL and discussing the players tactics and the overall game. Lets get more events like clash of the titans instead, there they managed to hype it up like it realy was a boxing match ( the story part you talked about)
On April 12 2011 13:47 Innovation wrote: Kennigit is right....if we try to push SC2 on to network or cable television it will simply fail again.
"Trying to push SC2 on to a network" is also a totally stupid american way of doing it. "The numbers" are GLOBAL numbers and not US numbers and the fluctuation in them really doesnt make it worthwile for any TV station. Those same stations would obviously want to "monopolize" the content to be the only provider, but that also means people will be locked out because they simply cant get that channel.
Simple common sense why TV wont work for eSport ... it is global and not national.
Uh, he was saying it wouldn't work. And why do you have to put "stupid american" in there? It has nothing to do with the post... Sc2 won't work on TV because there is no way to get audiences to watch it who have never played or know about the game, they would be lost in the lingo. Getting SC2 on TV is like getting Metalcore on the radio, it's just not everyones cup of tea.
I definitely agree with many of the points made, especially those focusing on the authors flawed logic and perspective, but I also disagree with some things that you and Wheat said.
On April 12 2011 11:18 Kennigit wrote: I'll refer to “dick” as “the author” The author sure is a...ok i'm done.
Uhh.. am I misinterpreting this, or are you calling the author of the article a dick (or at least implying it). If that's the case... I'm not sure why, but its definitely unwarranted, and not the best way to start out a post in which you want to appear professional... that's just my opinion and does not to pertain to the discussion itself, so feel free to ignore it if you would like.
On April 12 2011 11:18 Kennigit wrote: 2) When broadcasting a "new" product, one needs to keep things simple (read: dumbed down) in order to attract a casual base immediately. If you cannot prove potential success within a few broadcasts you are done (see midseason cancelations of every show on network TV ever).
This leaves the existing hardcore fan raged while still the broadcast remains confusing to the casual demo. Why? Because Esports broadcasts on Television have proven one thing, you can target a casual market, or you can pray that your existing hardcore demographic transfer over - you cannot have both. Any marketing or business student will explain to you that this is ultimately doomed to fail or enjoy only marginal success.
I just can't agree with this. Tasteless has said many times that he focuses on the "noobier" parts of the game, explaining many simple (and ultimately obvious) facts to the audience, and him and Artosis do a great job of appealing to both groups. Regardless, keeping the casts "hardcore" friendly can still appeal to more casual gamers. Maybe we won't get the 70 year old grandpa's interested if they have to figure out a bit, but just like with many sports, there will be plenty of terminology you have to know if you want to understand the game.
When I first watched football (American Football) I didn't hear the announcer explain how the game is played or get a very basic explanation as to why something was the best decision, they simply spoke about the game as they would with another fan, and eventually the viewer picks up on it. Of course SC2 is much more complex... but I wouldn't say it is TOO complex. I am NOT referring to the intricacies in strategy, the meta game, etc... I am talking about from a casual viewers perspective (even like those who watch now). What it basically boils down to is both sides building a base and killing each other, with the announcers talking about their decisions.
Even if you don't understand exactly why they get each unit the very first time, it's fine because you can still enjoy watching the game... and you can pick up on it slowly. I only say this because one of my friend recently (entirely on his own) came across sc2 even though he never plays PC games and has begun watching games from many casters even though he knew nothing of the game and still doesn't play it.
To summarize... I think that saying "SC2 is too complex... anyone who listens to Tastosis and doesn't play the game will not enjoy it at all" is completely false. Maybe it wasn't worded exactly like that, but that seems to be the general idea of what is being said. Since Artosis gives a deep analysis of the game, it must be boring to watch, but I disagree. It is easy for viewers to enjoy what they can see and understand, as well as listen to the play by play commentary while hearing the excitement in the casters voices.
Why Starcraft should never be on Western Television.
In order for a TV game show to be viable, it needs a few things which Starcraft cannot provide without being shit.
1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative. Unlike a broadcasted strategy game like poker where the scene (television scene, not community) is compact (1 hand, 1 hand, commercial, 1 hand, 2 hands, commercial etc.) and easily interchangeable, Starcraft does not allow quick or easy editing decisions. Without former Starcraft players on hand in an editing both, you would be left with a chopped down product – missed building placements, missed timings, and a raging viewer base. This isn't really a negotiable point. Games would HAVE to be edited and cut to allows for a commercial in the middle. A TV station simply cant run a 45 minute game without commercials in North America and still remain profitable.
I think this is an absolutely terrible argument. We can already follow what the players are doing off screen with things like a production tab, and if for some reason it were necessary, you could have extra viewers in the game to spot anything that might be necessary... though I don't think so.
If you are going to say something like "well we can't see exactly where the building placement is" can we see that on a stream if they aren't looking there (just as it would be on TV?) No. Why isn't this an issue at all? It's simple, something minuscule like a building placement just isn't important enough... especially if the viewers can see that it is being built due to the production tab.
Despite that you might say something like "well people will complain anyway even if it doesn't seem to be a big deal, and it just won't be possible to fix" but the fact is you can say that for anything. When I have watched poker, they weren't able to show 2 players facial expressions at the same time during a conversation, and you could say "Poker is not good for TV because when two people were talking, you couldn't see both their facial expressions" and then people could go somewhere and complain about it. I guess the point I am getting at is, claiming that a small issue is a contributing factor as to why it shouldn't be on TV is just ridiculous to me.
As for the 45 minute thing... some sports already do this... I believe Soccer for example. They can run adds around the border and casters can plug sponsors throughout. Also if they have it pre broadcasted they can cut to commercial breaks in.
Overall I simply think this entire comment is weak. The one thing I kind of skipped over was "missed timings" which I guess I will address quickly. Timings can easily be noticed by a good caster, and can also be seen by spectators with the production tab... regardless, sports announcers miss small details for many of the players who are away from all the attention ALL THE TIME and it isn't a big deal... AT ALL.
I think you are over-analyzing the situation. Most people won't rage if they didn't see what time the +1 upgrade started, especially if there would be a large casual audience... and some people will bitch and moan about anything, so if you are looking to please everyone with anything, you will always fail.
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 and casual TV audiences simultaneously.
I already addressed this a bit above (2 quotes up) but I quickly wanted to say that I do agree people flipping away after 2-3 mins of not understanding what's going on may be a problem, but once again the same can be said for football. If the casters do a good job of keeping the game exciting and explaining what is going on play by play, it can still be interesting to people who have no clue what is going on. You don't have to know how to play football to be excited by it... same with SC2.
3. Social Networking While Teamliquid can't take full credit for any one production's success, the nature of having a very central hub where one can come and find live events quickly is a huge benefit to live broadcasts. Social media hubs like facebook/twitter and sites like reddit also contibute heavily, but I find it ignorant to suggest that this would be scalable when applied to a television. The social platform which impassions viewers on Teamliquid simply doesn't exist on television. The Starcraft Esports scene is very niche despite it's size – do not mistake size for accessibility. These new viewers came to esports via the promise of Starcraft 2's launch, they found Esports along the way.
I won't bother quoting the rest, but I will say I mostly agree with it. Having a place to meet up socially is a big factor, but I do want to go back to the football argument once again. I believe that if people could get involved in a community while watching football, it would be even more appealing.
What I am saying is that the added social benefits that you mentioned we have here on TL.net is definitely a great way of improving esports viewing, and while I do understand that views from hardcore viewers would likely go down if it were on TV (at least over time... as a single event on TV would probably be very exciting and attract many viewers) I don't think it is the best argument to make against putting it on TV other than to say "look... we may have X viewers, but we would probably have less than X viewers because many of those X viewers are watching because they enjoy talking about it on TL while they watch" or something along those lines.
I'm going to leave it at that. I'm feeling sick and I took some Nyquil so I'm surprised I made it through all that. Hopefully it made sense... I really don't have the energy to proofread it now though... I will probably proofread it tomorrow and laugh at myself as I do so... so if some of it doesn't make sense today and you feel like responding to other parts, then feel free to wait.
On April 12 2011 13:47 Innovation wrote: Kennigit is right....if we try to push SC2 on to network or cable television it will simply fail again.
"Trying to push SC2 on to a network" is also a totally stupid american way of doing it. "The numbers" are GLOBAL numbers and not US numbers and the fluctuation in them really doesnt make it worthwile for any TV station. Those same stations would obviously want to "monopolize" the content to be the only provider, but that also means people will be locked out because they simply cant get that channel.
Simple common sense why TV wont work for eSport ... it is global and not national.
Uh, he was saying it wouldn't work. And why do you have to put "stupid american" in there? It has nothing to do with the post... Sc2 won't work on TV because there is no way to get audiences to watch it who have never played or know about the game, they would be lost in the lingo. Getting SC2 on TV is like getting Metalcore on the radio, it's just not everyones cup of tea.
"Stupid american" has everything to do with the topic, because only the USA matters for most citizens (and apparently "dick" - the author of that article which Kennigit criticized - is one of them) of the USA. They invented globalization but are too lazy to adjust to it if something truly global comes along.
Btw. ... I am fully agreeing with Kennigit and Innovation in that it wont work because it has to work in ALL countries with a significant potential viewership and not simply the US.
On April 12 2011 16:13 corpuscle wrote: Having shown pro SC2 (mostly GSL) to friends, I have to say that I doubt that it really has the appeal to be viable on television. Even some of my friends who have played the game don't care about or understand the genius behind what progamers are actually doing, they just think it's boring unless there's a battle going on. Casual players obviously know what each unit does, but they find it boring to see "oh he hallucinated an immortal" when they don't really understand why it's clever, and the threshold for understanding what makes that interesting is way too high for television. It's the same reason that chess isn't on TV, and while Starcraft has explosions and stuff, 90% of the gameplay isn't appealing to a non-hardcore audience.
I honestly think people are on a high horse when it comes to SC2. I have a friend who doesn't play SC2 but enjoys watching games (he will probably buy it soon, but he has been watching for about 4-5 months now) and he is perfectly capable of figuring things out on his own. I don't think it takes a genius who has played the game extensively to figure out that the hallucination is meant to soak up damage... it's just common sense an intuition. Besides, that would be the caster's job to explain why it is so clever and act interested in it so the viewer can recognize it is an exciting moment.
On April 12 2011 11:52 Baerinho wrote: i am a 29 year old german, i got a huge ass TV, and i only plug it in every 2nd year for the Soccer european championship and the Worldcup, thats it....
And even that is fading with more and more HQ streams even by the Broadcasting Stations being provided.
The way isnt bringing internet streams to the TV,i fully expect TV to get closer to the Internet streams.
I'm pretty much in the same boat. I have a huge Samsung sitting in my living room, but I only really use it watch Blu-rays, play my consoles or stream Netflix (an internet related service, hurr). Major sporting events are watched at my friend's house.
Starcraft 2 viewership numbers aren't really anything to write home about. CPL events were doing 100k viewers easily in 2007 when there were no services like justin.tv or ustream to help them out.
These are over-exaggerations. CPL only had one main event in 2007 which was lackluster. CPL prime was probably around 04-05 but even then, HLTV spectators were around 30k, not like the "easily 100k" you mentioned.
I am pretty sure current sc2 viewership is the largest any e-sport (outside BW) has ever seen. If you count GSL then there is no question about it.
On April 12 2011 13:47 Innovation wrote: Kennigit is right....if we try to push SC2 on to network or cable television it will simply fail again.
"Trying to push SC2 on to a network" is also a totally stupid american way of doing it. "The numbers" are GLOBAL numbers and not US numbers and the fluctuation in them really doesnt make it worthwile for any TV station. Those same stations would obviously want to "monopolize" the content to be the only provider, but that also means people will be locked out because they simply cant get that channel.
Simple common sense why TV wont work for eSport ... it is global and not national.
Uh, he was saying it wouldn't work. And why do you have to put "stupid american" in there? It has nothing to do with the post... Sc2 won't work on TV because there is no way to get audiences to watch it who have never played or know about the game, they would be lost in the lingo. Getting SC2 on TV is like getting Metalcore on the radio, it's just not everyones cup of tea.
"Stupid american" has everything to do with the topic, because only the USA matters for most citizens (and apparently "dick" - the author of that article which Kennigit criticized - is one of them) of the USA. They invented globalization but are too lazy to adjust to it if something truly global comes along.
Btw. ... I am fully agreeing with Kennigit and Innovation in that it wont work because it has to work in ALL countries with a significant potential viewership and not simply the US.
The way you worded your post it didn't make sense to me but I get it now, thanks, but just because he neglected to say the numbers were global doesn't mean that he only cares about he USA, he may have simply not taken into account the numbers were global. The article was written from the point of view of getting e-sports on AMERICAN television like it is on in Korea. So if you are going to say that then you may as well say "stupid koreans" because they are doing what the author wants to do in the USA.
Great post kennigit. While we all secretly want sc on TV (at least I do), you do an excellent job laying it all out. I wish I disagreed with you but I don't, Sc probably does not have a future on TV.
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 so much. I feel like we are really shifting away from TV.
^ Agreed. I own two 56 inch TV's and a huge projector and I watch 0-2 hours of TV a week and when i do it's me skipping through all the commercials. The only exception is UFC PPV fights which I invite a bunch of people over and we watch it on the projector. My computers are kind of the central hub of my house. My sound system is setup wireless so i can listen to music in any room and i can stream basically anything I would normally watch on TV
Maybe I'm a minority on this, but if they had SC2 on TV, I'm not sure if it would be as good as it is now. I like that I have 6 user streams up at 1 AM on a Tuesday morning that I can choose from on one monitor and i can be playing a game on a second monitor.
Very nice article and I totally agree. I think so many people severely overestimate the popularity of SC2 in the grand scheme of things in the media/entertainment world. The sad truth is that it just isn't that popular and will rarely draw in viewers who don't already know what it is/have played it before.
I can't disagree more with Kennigit and that's why:
1. You are talking about US TV and not about the TV in EU. Here we are used to watch football games that are 45 min long without commercials. I am not referring to the actual sport but only to the time period TV stations run without commercials. And the average SC2 game is something like 15 min (real time ) so there is no problem with that at least as i see it.
2. Someone earlier made a point about starting small and than going big. In you example Kennigit you are talking about nationwide US TV. This indeed is way too far ahead but at least here in EU with every cable TV packet you get at least some stupid stations that "no one watches". It's easy and cheap to pay for air time on some of them at least. Yes you will have small market in the beginning but no one started big .
3. The point of watered down content because of the noobs is way off too. I will give an example with myself starting to watch american football a few years back. At the start i didn't have any idea of the rules, yea i new there are offence and defence but nothing more actualy. At that point the commentators sounded really smart and insidefull for me and i learned quite fast most of the common rules. Now after quite some time i understand how basic is the commentary and how much of the actual game you are missing in you don't understand it. The same is with any sport (or e-sport of you like) you need basic commentary and some "in dept" form ex pro that sounds intelligent but don't give anything new for the really advanced person watching the game (in SC2 terms say masters player).
4. Social networking is something that traditional media (TV or radio) can't provide because of it's very nature (internet based) but what TV can bring is (for SC2 at some future point and for other sports now) going out with friends to the pub and watching "The game".
I will not try to add anything about commercials on the actual maps that are played because i have no idea how it will work with IP rights.
P.S. Something i forgot to add is that it does not matter what any of us think about World of Warcraft this game is so popular that it made gaming as a whole mainstream and this is helping SC2 immensely to become bigger :D
Would be awesome to have you talk about this on State of the Game as well. Really interesting point and it does come up a lot. I think you have a good view on the matter.
As for the content? I agree, even thought we would all like the prestige of TV, we are a different generation. A new one, the digital one and we are just now becomming of age. We will dictate the mediums of the future, we give them the power to become great.
TV is a different audience, a different generation, a different system. I do have to bring up a football match though, they have commercials. When you miss a goal during it don't you get the replay of it after the commercials are done? That might work if you can chop it up, or even if they have both the 45min halfs with a big break in the middle. But eitherway it probably won't work for Starcraft 2 because the internet is perfect, it's where it belongs, it's where the people are.
I don't know how IPTV works or anything but I can say that the feeling of watching it live with others around the walk, talking and reading peoples opinions or comments in chat, asking questions or anwering questions from sincere people who are new and only now are starting to experience the magic of Starcraft's competitive aspect, is amazing.
So stoked, the streaming platforms have definitely improved a lot in the past year and made a ton of things possible. It opened my eyes when you predicted them to continue evolving in the future. I can't wait until that day. It would be paving the way not only for ourselfs as a community but also for many other smaller communities in different subjects to say, we don't need TV anymore, we have our own now.
Oh man I have to disagree with quite a lot of this but your points are not wrong I just don't think you are coming in with the right point of view. You seem to be highly cynical about this kind of thing and I can understand how that's possible considering the failings of other broadcasts and attempts but just because you fail once doesn't mean you give up.
The biggest reason TV isn't growing at this point can be pinned on programming in my own opinion. You have shows that are poorly written, predictable, and poorly thought of and overdone. Things like Survivor, American Idol, Two and a Halfmen(not anymore..), CSI, NCIS,Law and Order Spinoff's all of these things while not terrible and some pull in good numbers don't pull in good numbers because of the amazingly fresh writing and amazing characters.
Network TV is failing I don't think the same can be said of the paid cable and even some of the basic cable channels, for one they don't have to follow the regulations of the FCC so they get to explore new and sometimes uncommon viewpoints. Things like Dexter, Weeds, Sparticus push the limits of tv and offer something new. Of course you can find those things on dvd,netflix, and other.. sources. They are doing well however because they are not limiting the programming to the most "broad" demographic.
You can make drama, you can make stories with Sc2 you know this, I know this, and hopefully anyone who'd broadcast it on TV would take advantage of this as it doesn't take some mystic voodoo to figure out that it's not just the game itself that brings people in. Sex symbol's? You can find plenty of fairly to highly attractive sc2 players hell some of them are on Team Liquid. You can do anything with the right marketing and spin.
Niche shows can and do exist as do entire channels on cable you can fit commercial's wherever you feel or simply pop them on in sections of the overlay. You don't have to chop and remove sections of the game unless you are being placed on networks for the most part and honestly sc2 on network tv would be bad for it.
Also what's this about geek culture and gaming not being accepted in the west? Take a look at the upcoming film releases things like Green Lantern,Captain America, Thor all coming to the big screen while the TV is filled with shows filled with geek and gaming references. We are the demographic for the most part, when the worst show's on cable are re-runs of network shows or stuck safely on E! or MTV I am pretty sure we'll be okay.
Other's have pointed out how to cater to both casual and hardcore and that Tasteless does a great job reaching out to people who may not know the game as well as say you or I. Once again you don't need to have hardcore or else it ruins everything and you don't need to dumb it down to reach to people who've not seen it. That's what story building, proper caster's and good players can do quite easily. If you where broadcasting on network tv this would be the case but you wouldn't be.
The question you have to ask is does SC2 need to be on tv to be successful? Of course not, so long as fans keep watching streams and sponsor's see the potential you can have the GSL,NASL,TSL, MLG and whatever else purely online.
However if you want to have that true proper explosion having it TV won't hurt it if it's done properly.
Sorry if this didn't all come out as orderly as it should have I am a tad tired but I had to reply to this because I really feel you are missing some major things in your counterpoint to this author's article.
I think the future of the popularity/profit of SC2 and esports in general lies in the rise of Internet TV (streaming). Why? Because it's pretty much already happened. I'm not really sure why so many people are obsessed with getting games onto a format that's a little bit closer to collapsing every year -- I think the key is to expand and popularize the services we already use. Why put a dumbed-down version of the game we love on cable TV when we could just get more people into the online format NASL, GSL and pretty much every other respected tournament uses? The more devices that come along that can put Hulu, Netflix, justin.tv, ustream, etc. on to our big screen TVs, the less it matters that esports can't be accessed with an antenna.
Plus, not everybody has whatever obscure and expensive TV package (especially for viewers outside the US) it would take to get the first wave of esports, while every-freaking-body has the internet and can access websites from anywhere in the world. I mean, let's face it, ESPN probably isn't going to be the one to start broadcasting StarCraft -- it's gonna be on some out-of-the-way channel, maybe at an inconvenient time, that won't attract more than the hardcore fans anyways.
Excellent article. I totally agree that any sc2 event managed by a TV network would be absolutely terrible.
What someone else here noted is that the big sc2 tournaments have a global viewership. No TV channel can reach those. And the people they can reach in big numbers will not care about sc2 or the network will have to morph sc2 into something which we really do not want to see.
My personal wish about sc2's future is not more sc2, it is better sc2. I can watch sc2 games already 24/7 from ustream/justin/youtube/own3d. However, the real excitement is in tournaments like TSL3, GSL, dreamhack and IEM.
I mention TSL3 first since I enjoy that most and I think it has the greatest potential. I also really like the player portraits. They are a huge win for the viewers. Here the narrative starts. Viewers want to connect with the player and a portrait helps immensily. I see far to little of players in a tournament, mostly the winner appears out of nowhere in front of a microphone after the game, mumbling "...and then I built a mothership." while looking at the floor.
(And such players are fine, it's the job of the producers to wrap a narrative around the game.)
So, a big shoutout to the organizers of TSL3, teamliquid for being the sc2 hub and last but not least to all the awesome games by so many awesome players! <333
My answer is: I don't want SC2 on TV. As soon as SC2 is on TV it has sold it's right to some station which probably will be pp and won't show the games to an audience it does not target. SC2 is global, so to watch an US or whatever event i suddenly would need an american PP-Station?
No thanks.
I'm fine with Ustream/Justin/Octoshape or whatever.
On April 12 2011 11:56 ronpaul012 wrote: I'd agree with some of both articles. The main point I have to contribute is that you make the claim that a tv channel could not go 45 minutes without showing a commercial. I'd have to disagree with this, soccer. A half is 45 minutes, and the world cup showed that the sport has a spot in this countries tv. I'd also make a point that they could incorporate sponsorships more. Possibly by putting advertisements on the maps they play on? Sounds weird I know, but most sports put some advertisements around the edge of the playing field. Also mentioning advertisements, or have a statistics pop up at the beginning of the game with some advertisements on them like most sports do. Not trying to whore out esports, but I do believe that lack of advertising time should really be an excuse. Overall though, I definitely believe it would be tough to be on tv.
Blizz won't allow ads on maps.
maybe not the ads on maps then, but when they do pre-game, or even early game stats showing they could throw an ad on or something.
Because those don't pay anywhere near what commercials do, and most TV productions need ample commercials+extras.
they can do what most TV station do during football (real one) match and reduce the size of the broadcasted match for 4-5 seconds, and put the ads on bottom and right side of it, it works just fine.
and me personally think when everybody can have a connection fast enough to deliver 720p quality LIVE stream without lag then we can forget about TV as a medium of broadcast, but until that happen, TV is still the best way to give the highest quality pictures and sound possible (currently)
even GSL, the current 'best' LIVE service available looks shit when played on a 32 inch TV
On April 12 2011 17:07 kinray wrote: I can't disagree more with Kennigit and that's why:
1. You are talking about US TV and not about the TV in EU. Here we are used to watch football games that are 45 min long without commercials. I am not referring to the actual sport but only to the time period TV stations run without commercials. And the average SC2 game is something like 15 min (real time ) so there is no problem with that at least as i see it.
2. Someone earlier made a point about starting small and than going big. In you example Kennigit you are talking about nationwide US TV. This indeed is way too far ahead but at least here in EU with every cable TV packet you get at least some stupid stations that "no one watches". It's easy and cheap to pay for air time on some of them at least. Yes you will have small market in the beginning but no one started big .
3. The point of watered down content because of the noobs is way off too. I will give an example with myself starting to watch american football a few years back. At the start i didn't have any idea of the rules, yea i new there are offence and defence but nothing more actualy. At that point the commentators sounded really smart and insidefull for me and i learned quite fast most of the common rules. Now after quite some time i understand how basic is the commentary and how much of the actual game you are missing in you don't understand it. The same is with any sport (or e-sport of you like) you need basic commentary and some "in dept" form ex pro that sounds intelligent but don't give anything new for the really advanced person watching the game (in SC2 terms say masters player).
4. Social networking is something that traditional media (TV or radio) can't provide because of it's very nature (internet based) but what TV can bring is (for SC2 at some future point and for other sports now) going out with friends to the pub and watching "The game".
I will not try to add anything about commercials on the actual maps that are played because i have no idea how it will work with IP rights.
P.S. Something i forgot to add is that it does not matter what any of us think about World of Warcraft this game is so popular that it made gaming as a whole mainstream and this is helping SC2 immensely to become bigger :D
Was about to write something similar, but - this^, pretty much.
I understand from the OP why SCII would be hard to implement on TV following previous models that he mentioned (which indeed failed miserably). Not quite sure why it shouldn't be implemented steadily, pace-by-pace, and see where it goes from there.
About some of the points - commercials during games would be so easy to implement it's not even funny, not sure why that point was brought up. And still, this is considering that as the poster above said, most games are what, 15-25 minutes?
Also, about understanding the game - let's be honest, when you watched snooker for the first time, did you know how much points each coloured ball is, how much til a player gets enough points to win a frame, what's the weight of the balls or even what is an actual "snooker"? Probably not, but it was still pretty easy to understand what's going on.
In the same way, yeah, as a spectator that's into games but doesn't know anything about SC - yeah, the guy won't know how much damage marauders do and if they can shoot up or not, but he can understand what the red and blue players are up to.
Dno - this should be done careful and with a lot of thought put behind it (compared to -A LOT- of other high-level events that are currently in progress) - but there would definitely be potential in bringing SCII to TV - even if, again, it's done at a really, really slow pace.
Great write-up. I completely agree: I would much rather have SC2 as a pioneer in the flourishing future IPTV than a wounded soldier in the downhill network television.
while i think sir kennigit estimation of the situation as it is now is precised i do not agree to his conclusions on how the situation can be in the near future.
i will start from the end: why we would want sc2 on TV instead of streams ? Money. TV has money , money will make Esport explode : Production Value , Fame for players , Stronger teams and scene etc... i hope its clear to everyone why big money will be huge for esport and how it will make alot of the problems just disapear (if the best of the gamers will have a chance to be millionars the teen age fans will short follow and the cool definition as well) okay so thats the obvious why we should want to have sc2 on tv.
okay kennigit gave reasons why sc2 could never be on TV , i will try to argue otherwise:
Esport success in korea: its the most obvious reason why with the right things happening esport can have real success in the western world.
i am sorry , but nothing in the history of korea make me think why would they be able to be open to esport more then western culture . a set of events and right moves happened already there and the result were positive . a diffrent set of sets will have to happen in the west , but there is no obstical they havn't faces that we face - so simple conclusion it is possible , but stuff need to be done.
SC2 is complex: my non geek 20ish year old sister and her friend which is computerphobic came to harras me on saturday morning . i watch GSL on my TV in the living room and since i really wanted to see the end of the match i explained to them whats going on so i will get a few minute of grace before being dragged out to the harsh reality. "so those two players the cute pink guy (mkp) and the one who look like a fish (mvp) competing for 50k$ , who ever kill all the stuff the other guy have wins (war) they need to make stuff and then use it to overcome the stuff the other guy made , really not that diffrent from your avarge hollywood action movie."
in the end i got to watch the entire serias , the only complain i got was that the cute guy lost.
yes sc2 is complex , so is running a succesfull formula1 race , people can still easly enjoy the tension micro and strategy decisions of a good match, the deeper understanding can come later.
non commercial friendly: and soccer is ? TV dudes are good enough to stick commercials in anything . banners luls in match , slides ... anyone who watched any sport even know thats not really a problem (and unlike soccer most matches are not 45 min)
chat depended: oh i love LR . and love TL community BUT you can ask the lucky guys who had GSL finnal party how much fun is that . chat is nice , but if you think of the experiance of watching a sc2 match in sports bar or in the living room with friends , it for sure wont be less of an experiance.
past failures 1000 years ago some greek guy try to put wings and jumped of a moutin . he failed and died horribly . you cannot conclude from that that flying is a bad idea.
in 1996 EA made (stole) an MMO called "earth and beyond" it was closed under a year. alot of people said how MMO cannot work and is a bad idea. two year later blizzard made WoW , and we know how that ended.
you need to learn from past failiures , but sometimes the brightest idea are just implemented badly , sometimes you need to wait a year .
i don't belive "keep sc2 only to streams" is the lesson we need to learn .
i actually trully believe as Esport as mainstream entertaiment , because its just that good of a product in the end . and if LOTR and avatar can go mainstream maybe some gaming as well .
i am not sure about the timing , but i know it will not suddently happen , some good people will have to make some bold and good moves .
the reason why i wrote this longass post is i believe kennigit can be one of them
I just want to respond to your thoughts on why sc2 shouldn't be on TV.
1. You say you can't play sc2 matches on TV because you need to have breaks for commercial every five minutes. Well that's not the case outside of the US. Ever heard of soccer(or the real football)? I don't see this being a problem in Europe at all. The US is not the western scene.
2. Other sports do this just fine. You can have a play-by-play commentator just like in football(soccer...) and then an expert. You could obviously adjust the level of commentary from how many drones you need to stop at to hold a 4gate, to more general talk. But lets be honest. For the hardcore sports fan, you'll still be having your face in your palm when listening to the commentator/"experts" on TV when they talk about the game. It's good for the casuals, but as a badass nerd you'll watch what happens and think for yourself.
3. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. Yeah most new players found e-sports through the hyped launch of Sc2. But if they're introduced straight into the e-sports of Sc2, through television, I don't see what the difference will be. About the social hub, well... since when was TV ever associated with being social? If people become interested in the game and want to enjoy it apart from watching it on TV, they sit down by their computer and start searching. Also I'm sure if a TV channel were to broadcast sc2, they'd make room on their website for this show, where people can find out more about the game and communicate with eachother.
I'm not saying Sc2 on TV would be a huge hit, but I'm not really buying your arguments.
We get to watch super exciting tournaments with huuuge prize pools every week. Good teams are able to get sponsorships. Tournaments are profitable for the organizers (i guess?). I get the feeling that all this crying for TV time comes from some deep psychological need to get approval from others, in this case the mainstream.
If SC2 is a quality thing, it will spread. Things will get bigger. If TV time comes, it comes, but SC2 will grow regardlessly with everyone involved being rewarded more and more.
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 so much. I feel like we are really shifting away from TV.
Shifting towards complete and utter dependency on the internet I feel.
This article is just as bad as the other one, if not worse. I wasn't educated, I was sucked into a mindset that the author treated as absolute truth & reality.
IPTV is the way to go in my opinion. Ustream and the other streaming websites are the forefront of streaming and with Google (read Youtube Live, Google TV and full-time movies on Youtube) joining and pushing into this direction, IPTV is gonna be the future. Hell, I dont even have a TV anymore. Just a big monitor with an HTPC attached to it. Besides that I totally agree with
In order for a TV game show to be viable, it needs a few things which Starcraft cannot provide without being shit.
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 so much. I feel like we are really shifting away from TV.
Shifting towards complete and utter dependency on the internet I feel.
Money. TV has money , money will make Esport explode : Production Value , Fame for players , Stronger teams and scene etc...
If even small television channels had that much money, why are there so many crappy channels out there? Only the super popular channels have an "unlimited" amount of money. Television also needs A LOT more of an investment ... studio, good cameras, cleaning personnel, managers for the studio facility, ... all of these cost a lot and Starcraft can - so far - not give people a 24/7 high quality entertainment. Trying to mix Starcraft with other eSports is a failure as every one of those big IEM events shows ...
While some people might enjoy watching a game over and over again, most of us probably watch a game only once ... unless there is some specific thing to learn and then a replay is much more desirable. So the program could not be like those stupid news channels which repeat everything in 15 minute blocks. The bottom line: Starcraft doesnt fit in a schedule which TV stations like to have.
There is another reason why it wont work: casters! There are only so many good casters, but who would want to have them bound to a certain TV channel and not available for anything else they might want to do?(*1) Even casters can burn out so you definetely need more than one to cover an event like MLG, GSL or NASL. Thats another big investment.
(*1) To prevent casters from NOT being available the TV channel would have to contract them permanently and I think Day[9] or whoever else would be bored if he had to cover or just comment on all the little events that fill the daily TV schedule.
Hmm, interesting article. I always kind of figured e-sports was going to hit the TV sooner or later.
I wonder though, your key point seems to be (Atleast the one that seemed most significant to me) that SC2 is a "hardcore" game and therefor cannot be broadcasted succesfully on TV due to the impossibility of attracting the average viewer. (Or losing the actual SC2 fans by doing that)
That made me wonder: Why would it be harder to follow a SC2 match than follow a professional X sport match on a very basic level?
Why is SC2 bound to go into the CS direction TV-wise and not say, in the soccer direction? You give no logical arguments to back up your claims other than "Trust me, I'm a doctor"
"1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative."
Why should this be a problem? Tournaments are able to throw in online commercials? You can simply record people casting replays and pause them whenever you want?
"2. Able to target core demographic and casuals simultaneously. "
Other sports can do it, SC2 doesn't seem too overly complicated to get into. Grasping the basic idea in SC2 seems about as hard as grasping the basic idea of soccer. From my experience atleast.
I also noticed you saying this: "The matches themselves are only about 50% percent of what keeps Starcraft games interesting – the rest is the social experience of knowing you are communicating with thousands of others live and being able to comment on the action at hand."
Erhmmm, what? 1 glance at a chat window in any stream will tell you that the vaaaaast majority of people don't give a shit about chitty-chatty.
It's all about the action baby, and SC2 delivers in that department. And in my opinion it doesn't take uber rox gaming skill to see that, therefor I think the TV would still be a viable medium to spread the goods.
:Edit: Any wrong conclusions I drew in this post I will gladly attribute to my everlasting ignorance.
Just curious because Kennigit and many other posters are approaching this from a north american perspective but...
Do you guys get televised snooker, tennis or darts championships over there in the US and Canada? All of those are not exactly suited for the traditional breaks every 12 minutes style of television because games can have wildly different lengths. I mean we've got the BBC which of course has no ads and allows these types of sports to be shown.
I do agree with Kennigit and the obsession with getting esports on TV has been annoying me for years now but I was just curious.
Oddly enough the UK would be one of the best places to show televised SC if only gaming (especially PC gaming) didn't have an even bigger stigma attached to it than in other countires.
Personnaly I don't mind sc2 not being on TV at all, as I couldnt care less about TV, I barely watch it at all. Most of the stuff on it is completely stupid anyway.
First I'd like to say, great article Kennigit and I wholeheartly agree, Starcraft 2 is too complex to be followed by a nobody, look at the principles of soccer for example, it is simple.
You have 22 players on the field, 1 ball, the goal is to play it over the field and score. A Starcraft match is 2 players in a game, with the objective being to destroy each other, but the means of how they do it is not by playing a ball, it is by having a huge amount of variables(Macro, Micro, Mechanics, unit composition, Strategy, map awareness etcetera). Even if you have a caster such as Husky who can bring this over to the community surely it is not enough for them to understand why player A is winning and player B is losing. Are you going to tell a person that he is losing because his probe count is low therefore his resources are low therefore he can't produce enough zealots therefore he can't deal with the marauders therefore he loses the game? While it is incredibly easy for any gamer to understand this, it is not for a casual viewer. And the casual viewer brings in the money for advertisers.
On April 12 2011 18:45 Linkirvana wrote: I also noticed you saying this: "The matches themselves are only about 50% percent of what keeps Starcraft games interesting – the rest is the social experience of knowing you are communicating with thousands of others live and being able to comment on the action at hand."
You say that this is untrue but look at the most succesfull game in E-sports for the Starcraft Genre, Starcraft Brood War. No matter how entirely shitty the matches are which are played, the players make the game. I couldn't care less if the games are shitty if Jaedong is playing the game , I am watching that game, live. Why do so people stay up to watch the games live?Because they want to see their favorite player duke it out and share the experience with other people live. The community of Starcraft is what makes the game fun for me to watch. Players and the community is what makes E-sport fun.
On April 12 2011 11:36 echO [W] wrote: I do have a question for you Kennegit, assuming the viewership is there, do you see the possibility of an MBC Game, or Ongamenet type channel coming to cable television in the west?
There are plenty of very niche cable channels that manage to stay alive like the Military Channel or G4 (though G4 isn't hard core video game coverage) or the Biography channel, or Investigation Discovery. I do admit that I have no idea the inner workings, profit/loss etc etc of these channels.
Or is it simply a cultural divide between something Korea has thats unique to Korea, and immensely difficult to replicate outside of Korea? (the fact that StarCraft is essentially Korea's past time and that you need to reach past-time status to sustain traditional television type programming)
it has nothing to do with the culture difference other than the style of commercials. The commercial style sold in the east have more commercial time in single blocks, vs time sold in the west that has several breaks. For example, watch an mbc broadcast and count the commercial breaks, then watch a football game on american tv, youll notice right away the amount and frequency of american commercials vs korean. I do not know exactly how the inner workings go but it seems like in korea they have less types of commercials per show, so when you buy time you say i want my commercial durring this show, so thats why on breaks youll notice the same few commercials. Which makes more money im unsure, but with the volatility of sc, rebroadcasts would be nearly impossible, and live ones would be headaches. Why? Bc pvp is short, pvt is long, but can be short, same can be said for pvz, players styles cause different lengths, and their are no clocks saying you must finish in x time. This is not fox running an old episode of simpsons and family guy on sunday because their may be an over time, this any channel giving up possibly 2 or even (in extreme cases) 3 hours of not only programming but the all important commercial. Now culturally if it sells it sells, but the problem is in western culture jay lenno is seen as more profitable than connan o brien. The secret to this is that advertisement companies in the west have not figured out this generations key, so they would rather sell commercials to companies with more money and whos viewers would spend more (your not going to sell legal advise, or stock advice to the sc audience presumably.) Now is this true? Absolutely not, I am most certain that justin tv will learn to make profits far surpassing nbc primetime, because the internet is much more profitable through micro transactions. But the people with pocket books really don't get this fact yet, so they will probably try yet again, and fail yet again....im rambling at this point oh well
see no reason for sc2 to move to tv, the current internet methods of broadcasting we have just seem to make more sense. if it does, then i could see it moving forwards via some network showing the early rounds of some tournament over the internet (say something like espn3, coupled with on-demand repeats) with the semis/final on their actual network.
that said, the whole distinction of all media is blurring right now so it really doesn't make sense to try to move to tv in the first place. and yes, it'd need to be dumbed down somewhat if you want to make it to a casual audience, kennigit mentions poker in his op and that's basically unwatchable for people who have a clue (even when they're not taking half an hour to tell us a flush beats a straight) as it's moved into a format where it's just all-in all the time, rigged so that big names (i.e. hellmuth) get tv time when they shouldn't, and other games than nlhe may as well not exist as freddy fish couldn't possibly get games where you get four cards or can't bet all your money at once
edit at the above post - much the same. the only thing that i watch on tv now is football, anything else i can get online, and i'd probably do that as well if stream qualities were better when i'm not watching at the pub. i have no reason to own a tv
Im in the late 20's and I dont even own a TV... I have access to both cable and satellite if I want to, just get a tv and "hook it up", but I dont. I'd rather be behind my computer =) Besides, what can a TV give me that a computer cant?
Im wondering how many have this outlook on tv vs computer.
People will watch something for no other reason than the fact that its on TV and has a good storyline.
I think in this regard we need to make a comparison not with Football but with Chess.
Football is easy, 22 guys running around the field chasing a ball. Which is why all men everywhere understand it. Even in european football, the scene is just as much about the fans as it is about the game itself. People will go to the stadium to hear the fans sing and fight eachother and the police rather brutally.
The StarCraft 2 scene is missing EMOTION. We need more players like Idra and we need more hate, more love, more bad manner and in general more INTO YOUR FACE, attitude.
Consider American Wrestling. Its all 100% fake yet its watched because its basically an elaborate theatrical act which the american masses consume.
For people to watch something they don't understand or don't care about (RTS / Chess / Wrestling being fake) you need alot more emotion; good and bad. I'm not saying that SC2 games should be an act like the wrestling scene however.
The SC2 scene right now is incredibly stale. People will root for their own race most of the time. Also because as soon as someone tries to be bad manner he is struck down by the manner hammer of the community.
Even Idra had to publically appologize for what ? For typing some random things to his opponents ?
Think about how highly anticipated Cruncher vs Idra was because of what Idra said in his interview and how amusing it then was to see Idra lose. Thats good television !!!
If we are always forcing ourselves to be super duper good manner to eachother its impossible for fans to like or dislike. There are no grudges, there is no emotion. Watching a game between 2 players you care nothing about is absolutely pointless unless you are good enough to see the underlying strategy and tactics which very few people actually are.
The absolute only way to get SC2 on TV and make it interesting for people who don't have a strong interest in the strategy and the tactics is to add emotion.
People are already watching sports on TV where they don't need to think at all. For example the Olympics. Why do people watch the Olympics? Because all the games in the olympics are stupid so what reason is there ?
Running, jumping, throwing... Why would anyone care who can run the fastest or jump the highest ? What they care about is what country wins and how many medals their country can get. Not only that but its also about race even though nobody will talk about it. Its always amusing to see 1 white guy always come last in the running competitions behind 7 other black guys even though the reason is fairily obvious since we have evolved in 10.000 years to endure long and harsh winters not have good physical contidions for hunting.
Even in SC2 we have this; can foreigners be as good as koreans or are asians better when it comes to hand/eye coordination and strategy ? Think about what Moon said, "Koreans own white dudes". Because of this very racist remark whenwe were watching TSL / GSL we always wanted to see if foreigerns can actually do well against Koreans and they did ! And this time Moon had to swallow his words just like Idra vs Cruncher.
Again, bottom line is, our scene is very stale and is of no interest to people who want alot of emotion when watching something on TV. Emotion, both good and bad, is very good for ratings.
You have 22 players on the field, 1 ball, the goal is to play it over the field and score. A Starcraft match is 2 players in a game, with the objective being to destroy each other, but the means of how they do it is not by playing a ball, it is by having a huge amount of variables(Macro, Micro, Mechanics, unit composition, Strategy, map awareness etcetera). Even if you have a caster such as Husky who can bring this over to the community surely it is not enough for them to understand why player A is winning and player B is losing. Are you going to tell a person that he is losing because his probe count is low therefore his resources are low therefore he can't produce enough zealots therefore he can't deal with the marauders therefore he loses the game? While it is incredibly easy for any gamer to understand this, it is not for a casual viewer. And the casual viewer brings in the money for advertisers.
So you really think that being able to follow a basic SC2 match requires some sort of better understanding than what you think the casual viewer will have?
To me that sounds very elitist and also very untrue, I highly doubt that less probes > less units > losing the game is more sophisticated than tactic X in say a poker game.
Especially considering that the casual viewer of an E-sports channel (Or any casual viewer for that matter of any channel) has atleast SOME gaming background nowadays. To me your argument is invalid because of the nature of an E-sports channel. We're not talking about a primetime slot on SBS6. Because yeah, I wouldn't see that working either.
I consider myself to have started off watching SC2 as a casual viewer. The only related experience I had was I played some Brood War back when I was like 10 years old.
You say that this is untrue but look at the most succesfull game in E-sports for the Starcraft Genre, Starcraft Brood War. No matter how entirely shitty the matches are which are played, the players make the game. I couldn't care less if the games are shitty if Jaedong is playing the game , I am watching that game, live. Why do so people stay up to watch the games live?Because they want to see their favorite player duke it out and share the experience with other people live. The community of Starcraft is what makes the game fun for me to watch. Players and the community is what makes E-sport fun.
I completely disagree. Once again just open a random stream. (I just did: VTGaming, 400 viewers, 80 people in chat.)
I'm not going to say that the community is unimportant. What I'm saying here is that it's not necesarry to be entangled into the whole scene to be able to enjoy a game of SC2 on your TV.
On April 12 2011 19:09 sixfour wrote: very nice read
see no reason for sc2 to move to tv, the current internet methods of broadcasting we have just seem to make more sense. if it does, then i could see it moving forwards via some network showing the early rounds of some tournament over the internet (say something like espn3, coupled with on-demand repeats) with the semis/final on their actual network.
that said, the whole distinction of all media is blurring right now so it really doesn't make sense to try to move to tv in the first place. and yes, it'd need to be dumbed down somewhat if you want to make it to a casual audience, kennigit mentions poker in his op and that's basically unwatchable for people who have a clue (even when they're not taking half an hour to tell us a flush beats a straight) as it's moved into a format where it's just all-in all the time, rigged so that big names (i.e. hellmuth) get tv time when they shouldn't, and other games than nlhe may as well not exist as freddy fish couldn't possibly get games where you get four cards or can't bet all your money at once
edit at the above post - much the same. the only thing that i watch on tv now is football, anything else i can get online, and i'd probably do that as well if stream qualities were better when i'm not watching at the pub. i have no reason to own a tv
Well according to Nielson 750,000 people tune in on nbc here to watch Poker After Dark it's airs at 2am Mo-Sat.
On April 12 2011 18:45 Linkirvana wrote: Hmm, interesting article. I always kind of figured e-sports was going to hit the TV sooner or later.
I wonder though, your key point seems to be (Atleast the one that seemed most significant to me) that SC2 is a "hardcore" game and therefor cannot be broadcasted succesfully on TV due to the impossibility of attracting the average viewer. (Or losing the actual SC2 fans by doing that)
That made me wonder: Why would it be harder to follow a SC2 match than follow a professional X sport match on a very basic level?
Why is SC2 bound to go into the CS direction TV-wise and not say, in the soccer direction? You give no logical arguments to back up your claims other than "Trust me, I'm a doctor"
"1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative."
Why should this be a problem? Tournaments are able to throw in online commercials? You can simply record people casting replays and pause them whenever you want?
"2. Able to target core demographic and casuals simultaneously. "
Other sports can do it, SC2 doesn't seem too overly complicated to get into. Grasping the basic idea in SC2 seems about as hard as grasping the basic idea of soccer. From my experience atleast.
I also noticed you saying this: "The matches themselves are only about 50% percent of what keeps Starcraft games interesting – the rest is the social experience of knowing you are communicating with thousands of others live and being able to comment on the action at hand."
Erhmmm, what? 1 glance at a chat window in any stream will tell you that the vaaaaast majority of people don't give a shit about chitty-chatty.
It's all about the action baby, and SC2 delivers in that department. And in my opinion it doesn't take uber rox gaming skill to see that, therefor I think the TV would still be a viable medium to spread the goods.
:Edit: Any wrong conclusions I drew in this post I will gladly attribute to my everlasting ignorance.
Ok 1. Because games very in length. PVP is short, sometimes, Pvt is long, sometimes, you cant broadcast that with comercials in the west because unlike eastern tv, we dont have block commercial times. We sell our times to be spread out over a program. You cant evenly make that call when ur watching sc, because there is not clock, no 4 minutes left in the 4th quarter. Games can be 6 minutes, or 45 and you may guess sometimes very well you cant really call it (lol proleague has gone over 2 and a half hours once) 2. Compare the rules in football to the rules in Sc2-Youll see here that where as yes one guy wins and the other guy loses will be easy to get into, whats hard is, why did he win why did he lose. Starcraft is much more subtle than I think you realise. This isn't ok well barcelona possesses the ball more and create more chances so thats why they won. Explaining i timing attack is much more than ok he droned the whole game he won, or hes been attacking so he won (jeez i cant even do examples very well its so difficult.) So initially yes, viewers may be like ok this is new. But true attachment will be much lower, why, because youll see a guy win, and then youll say i like that guy, but then hell lose, a lot, and you will not be able to figure out why, and so it becomes moot. So yes initially it will be very easy to understand, but unless you get that subtley very hard to keep watching, unless your extremely attached to the narrative 3. You must be new here. Read any live stream thread, it tends to generate about 40-80 for small events. Thats pages of text of people interacting. The whole reason anything with sc2 is even happening is becuase of the vast majority of interactions. I would venture to bet that 50% is a low ball number when you look at it. Trolls tend to lock down chat, but in reality skype, vent, or simply having people in your room, is how most of sc is watched
yeah I don't even own a TV. I'm at college and bought a laptop which enables me to do my school work, watch all the shows I want online, play video games, and watch SC2
if SC2 did move to the TV i would most definitely go to a friend's place and force mah bronze/silver league friends to watch it tho :D
but yeah I think the target demographic which sc2 appeals to is perfectly fine with watching from online seeing as most of us are online for hours a day.
On April 12 2011 19:13 decemberTV wrote: You forgot to add in the following factor.
People will watch something for no other reason than the fact that its on TV and has a good storyline.
I think in this regard we need to make a comparison not with Football but with Chess.
Football is easy, 22 guys running around the field chasing a ball. Which is why all men everywhere understand it. Even in european football, the scene is just as much about the fans as it is about the game itself. People will go to the stadium to hear the fans sing and fight eachother and the police rather brutally.
The StarCraft 2 scene is missing EMOTION. We need more players like Idra and we need more hate, more love, more bad manner and in general more INTO YOUR FACE, attitude.
Consider American Wrestling. Its all 100% fake yet its watched because its basically an elaborate theatrical act which the american masses consume.
For people to watch something they don't understand or don't care about (RTS / Chess / Wrestling being fake) you need alot more emotion; good and bad. I'm not saying that SC2 games should be an act like the wrestling scene however.
The SC2 scene right now is incredibly stale. People will root for their own race most of the time. Also because as soon as someone tries to be bad manner he is struck down by the manner hammer of the community.
Even Idra had to publically appologize for what ? For typing some random things to his opponents ?
Think about how highly anticipated Cruncher vs Idra was because of what Idra said in his interview and how amusing it then was to see Idra lose. Thats good television !!!
If we are always forcing ourselves to be super duper good manner to eachother its impossible for fans to like or dislike. There are no grudges, there is no emotion. Watching a game between 2 players you care nothing about is absolutely pointless unless you are good enough to see the underlying strategy and tactics which very few people actually are.
The absolute only way to get SC2 on TV and make it interesting for people who don't have a strong interest in the strategy and the tactics is to add emotion.
People are already watching sports on TV where they don't need to think at all. For example the Olympics. Why do people watch the Olympics? Because all the games in the olympics are stupid so what reason is there ?
Running, jumping, throwing... Why would anyone care who can run the fastest or jump the highest ? What they care about is what country wins and how many medals their country can get. Not only that but its also about race even though nobody will talk about it. Its always amusing to see 1 white guy always come last in the running competitions behind 7 other black guys even though the reason is fairily obvious since we have evolved in 10.000 years to endure long and harsh winters not have good physical contidions for hunting.
Even in SC2 we have this; can foreigners be as good as koreans or are asians better when it comes to hand/eye coordination and strategy ? Think about what Moon said, "Koreans own white dudes". Because of this very racist remark whenwe were watching TSL / GSL we always wanted to see if foreigerns can actually do well against Koreans and they did ! And this time Moon had to swallow his words just like Idra vs Cruncher.
Again, bottom line is, our scene is very stale and is of no interest to people who want alot of emotion when watching something on TV. Emotion, both good and bad, is very good for ratings.
Thats just my opinion.
tv is based on views its based on commercials. And the bottom line is commercials are near impossible to do on western tv for an event like sc2. Yes yes i know theyll go but the ratting are so high, but what they will also say is goodbye obrien, we know your ratings are better, but we sell better commercials with jay. Its about profitability and tv just doesnt have it for sc2
i don't watch tv, and i won't start doing it, even if starcraft2 was broadcasted on it. reading through this thread shows that there are many people just like me, some don't even own a tv. why so many people would want to see videogames on tv, when internet is better in almost every aspect?
OK ill say it again because evryone is stuck on the, well people will watch it and like it thing. THAT DOES NOT MATTER. Sc2 can have the greatest rating in the world, but no one would give 2 shits if you cant buy a commercial durring that time. TV is a business therefore it will try and make money, the style of game that sc2 does not lend itself to conventional commercials in the west. What it does lend itself to is micro transactions and ads on streams, because regardless of timing length ect, you still have to see that commercial or add. Football has a break every 2-10 minutes for commercials, can you imagine that in sc2, it will not work. No one is saying that it wont be watched, what people are saying is it wont be bought.
Ok 1. Because games very in length. PVP is short, sometimes, Pvt is long, sometimes, you cant broadcast that with comercials in the west because unlike eastern tv, we dont have block commercial times. We sell our times to be spread out over a program. You cant evenly make that call when ur watching sc, because there is not clock, no 4 minutes left in the 4th quarter. Games can be 6 minutes, or 45 and you may guess sometimes very well you cant really call it (lol proleague has gone over 2 and a half hours once)
Poker games vary in length. They get aired. There's all kinds of different solutions to that problem.
2. Compare the rules in football to the rules in Sc2-Youll see here that where as yes one guy wins and the other guy loses will be easy to get into, whats hard is, why did he win why did he lose. Starcraft is much more subtle than I think you realise. This isn't ok well barcelona possesses the ball more and create more chances so thats why they won. Explaining i timing attack is much more than ok he droned the whole game he won, or hes been attacking so he won (jeez i cant even do examples very well its so difficult.) So initially yes, viewers may be like ok this is new. But true attachment will be much lower, why, because youll see a guy win, and then youll say i like that guy, but then hell lose, a lot, and you will not be able to figure out why, and so it becomes moot. So yes initially it will be very easy to understand, but unless you get that subtley very hard to keep watching, unless your extremely attached to the narrative
Again I get this elitist vibe, I think SC2 is not that hard to follow on a basic level. Oh he lost because he engaged wrong, oh he lost because he overdroned. Surely you can break all that shit down and perhaps find some underlying factors. You can make SC2 as complicated as you want it to be, surely there's a... hmm, a small bump to cross to get to that point where you have a basic understanding.
My entire point basicly is that I don't think that bump is bigger than with any other sport.
3. You must be new here. Read any live stream thread, it tends to generate about 40-80 for small events. Thats pages of text of people interacting. The whole reason anything with sc2 is even happening is becuase of the vast majority of interactions. I would venture to bet that 50% is a low ball number when you look at it. Trolls tend to lock down chat, but in reality skype, vent, or simply having people in your room, is how most of sc is watched
I suppose I am relatively new. However let's take a look then. I recall the TSL having about 40.000 viewers, I also recall 1 of the TSL live threads being about 200 pages long.
20 replies per page.
200x20 = 4000 replies
Even if we'd assume that all those replies are made by 4000 different people, that's still only a 10% show up.
:Edit: If anything your point could be that it's more fun to watch SC2 with other people than it is alone, which is definitely true. However that's the case for every sport. SC2 is not harder to watch alone than any other sport (Which seems to be your point)
Maybe I missed that, but there is something which makes his statistic completely flawed:
Streaming is global. When there are 30 000 people watcching a game, they come from the whole world: Indonesia, France, US, Mexico, Canada, Bulgaria.
A TV channel is local. It covers one country at best. And most of the time, not even everybody has access to every channel, because even if we talk about America, I don't think Starcraft would be broadcasted on Fox.
I perfectly agree with the OP. And least mainstream starcraft can be, the best it is.
3. You must be new here. Read any live stream thread, it tends to generate about 40-80 for small events. Thats pages of text of people interacting. The whole reason anything with sc2 is even happening is becuase of the vast majority of interactions. I would venture to bet that 50% is a low ball number when you look at it. Trolls tend to lock down chat, but in reality skype, vent, or simply having people in your room, is how most of sc is watched
I suppose I am relatively new. However let's take a look then. I recall the TSL having about 40.000 viewers, I also recall 1 of the TSL live threads being about 200 pages long.
20 replies per page.
200x20 = 4000 replies
Even if we'd assume that all those replies are made by 4000 different people, that's still only a 10% show up.
:Edit: If anything your point could be that it's more fun to watch SC2 with other people than it is alone, which is definitely true. However that's the case for every sport. SC2 is not harder to watch alone than any other sport (Which seems to be your point)
I don't do LR threads but I think it could be more replies, you are just taking one case, who knows what its like with GSL or MLG or even a different weekend TSL etc. There is also the IRC, there are people doing their own thing their own channels. I know I let my friends who game know when things are on and they will want to chat with me about what is happening on the screen. Even if it's in small amounts of chat, it's a huge part of enjoying it. Being able to ask questions, comming home late and it feels like you pull up a chair and sit down while you ask the person next to you: "whats the score now man?" Also not everyone posts, for every 100 people posting there are maybe 500 reading. Isn't that a similar form of interactivity? Or atleast added value.
On April 12 2011 19:26 Lipski wrote: i don't watch tv, and i won't start doing it, even if starcraft2 was broadcasted on it. reading through this thread shows that there are many people just like me, some don't even own a tv. why so many people would want to see videogames on tv, when internet is better in almost every aspect?
just go to any GSL LR thread and see how many people are b*%#in about the quality of the stream or the lag or the stream die on them, etc.
Internet is not better for a live broadcast because the infrastructure is not there (yet). While Cable TV have their basic infrastructure set up since way back which make them capable to broadcast live, uninteruppted, high quality audio & video
unless watching SC2 in 360x240 window embedded on some website is the best you'd ever hope for
I think the only way SC2 on TV could succeed is if it took on the same form Snooker has on eurosport. Laid back, relaxing exposition of games during sunday afternoons. Ditch the high strung hit by hit commentating and go for a slower and easier explanation of builds and unit counters, and comment on mechanical feats if they arise as being great executions of a plan.
SC2 on TV will never be big indeed but I can see it still getting some airtime on cheap air time perhaps.
If there is one thing that counts for e-sports on TV is that it has a very low production cost. A broadcast of sc2 would be incredibly cheap to make so perhaps it can be run on one of those hours where the networks are running another re-run of some show instead. I also don't really agree why sc2 can not be cut easily, it would be very easy to chop long games into short ones by just showing the critical opening moves and then showing some critical fights later on. Sure it would lose lots of people who rather watch entire games but it is the same with poker really, poker broadcasts are horrible because they only show all-in hands whereas anyone good at the game hardly cares about those.
E-sports will never be really big on TV or in general though I think. It lacks too many things for that to happen. First of all the market is way too fragmented, there are hundreds of games over many different genres and thus not one game is anywhere close to the numbers of players sports like football, tennis etc. have. Secondly, the top players never really have any charisma. They are not attractice, muscled guys but people who sit indoors entire days practicing their game, it just doesn't appeal to the big audience as they aren't the traditional players that can be worshipped. Clans and clubs are also not really comparible in the way people associate with it, it's not like clans have a stadium or any real fanbase that is devoted to the clan regardless of players playing for it like clubs do. Finally there isn't a single game with as much appeal to viewers as some of the top sports have. There are no astonishing feats of strength or dexterity that anyone that never played the game can enjoy. A headshot in a FPS or a perfect cheese in a RTS just don't compare to a perfect free kick in football or a massive dunk in basketball.
Ok 1. Because games very in length. PVP is short, sometimes, Pvt is long, sometimes, you cant broadcast that with comercials in the west because unlike eastern tv, we dont have block commercial times. We sell our times to be spread out over a program. You cant evenly make that call when ur watching sc, because there is not clock, no 4 minutes left in the 4th quarter. Games can be 6 minutes, or 45 and you may guess sometimes very well you cant really call it (lol proleague has gone over 2 and a half hours once)
Poker games vary in length. They get aired. There's all kinds of different solutions to that problem.
2. Compare the rules in football to the rules in Sc2-Youll see here that where as yes one guy wins and the other guy loses will be easy to get into, whats hard is, why did he win why did he lose. Starcraft is much more subtle than I think you realise. This isn't ok well barcelona possesses the ball more and create more chances so thats why they won. Explaining i timing attack is much more than ok he droned the whole game he won, or hes been attacking so he won (jeez i cant even do examples very well its so difficult.) So initially yes, viewers may be like ok this is new. But true attachment will be much lower, why, because youll see a guy win, and then youll say i like that guy, but then hell lose, a lot, and you will not be able to figure out why, and so it becomes moot. So yes initially it will be very easy to understand, but unless you get that subtley very hard to keep watching, unless your extremely attached to the narrative
Again I get this elitist vibe, I think SC2 is not that hard to follow on a basic level. Oh he lost because he engaged wrong, oh he lost because he overdroned. Surely you can break all that shit down and perhaps find some underlying factors. You can make SC2 as complicated as you want it to be, surely there's a... hmm, a small bump to cross to get to that point where you have a basic understanding.
My entire point basicly is that I don't think that bump is bigger than with any other sport.
3. You must be new here. Read any live stream thread, it tends to generate about 40-80 for small events. Thats pages of text of people interacting. The whole reason anything with sc2 is even happening is becuase of the vast majority of interactions. I would venture to bet that 50% is a low ball number when you look at it. Trolls tend to lock down chat, but in reality skype, vent, or simply having people in your room, is how most of sc is watched
I suppose I am relatively new. However let's take a look then. I recall the TSL having about 40.000 viewers, I also recall 1 of the TSL live threads being about 200 pages long.
20 replies per page.
200x20 = 4000 replies
Even if we'd assume that all those replies are made by 4000 different people, that's still only a 10% show up.
:Edit: If anything your point could be that it's more fun to watch SC2 with other people than it is alone, which is definitely true. However that's the case for every sport. SC2 is not harder to watch alone than any other sport (Which seems to be your point)
my point is not that its harder to watch alone it was that simply put, more people watch it in some form of together than alone. You counted the number of posts, not the number of views, which tell a much different story (though i realise at that point it much harder to diferentiate reloads ect), but there are way more people that read along than actually post, and that is signifigant. But again that has nothing to do with tv, mereley saying people watch it very socially. And to put the understanding sc2 simply, there are no points. You can not look at a score (besides how many games someone is up) and you can not count his chips to say he is in the lead.
Barcelona can be up 3 goals and you can easily say jeez they are creaming them, after the game has started. Without the casters (which good casters try to avoid saying who is really ahead or behind for excitement value) you have no clue (again assuming you know nothing), and even they get it wrong. Seeing an advantage in sc2 is harder than seeing and advantage anywhere else, again because if manchester is doing slightly better than chelsea, a goal will tell the tale. Easy to watch, now to the trained eye we can all watch that champions league game and say wow manchester got lucky (opinion i know) but the point is the average joe can go hm manchester is winning. Sc2 is not that easy unless you play it, and even then play it well (well being defined as much more rudimentary than master league, but instead the difference between a top bronze player and a custom game player).
As for commercials, again its the profitability thing. You can show better commercials, by better i mean more expensive, and theyll buy in less frequency in poker. In sc2 you have to have a ton of commercials because of the demographic and perceived value of it. We are not assumed to be a high spending demographic therefore the commercial airtime will be cheaper, and must then be sold more to accommodated. Look at football or baseball. Further sc2 has much more going on than poker, ironically it has a bit of poker in it, between hands go for it, after a table has finished sure. But yu can not show a commercial in the middle of a game, it does not work, and that is what poker does to compensate. It doesnt matter in poker because if a big hand happens they can cut back or even better when they cut to commercial they can stop the game, that can not happen in sc, and is why it is such a headache to edit. In which we come to my original point, lengths of games are different, and since you cant play commercials during, you no longer have stable time to sell
3. You must be new here. Read any live stream thread, it tends to generate about 40-80 for small events. Thats pages of text of people interacting. The whole reason anything with sc2 is even happening is becuase of the vast majority of interactions. I would venture to bet that 50% is a low ball number when you look at it. Trolls tend to lock down chat, but in reality skype, vent, or simply having people in your room, is how most of sc is watched
I suppose I am relatively new. However let's take a look then. I recall the TSL having about 40.000 viewers, I also recall 1 of the TSL live threads being about 200 pages long.
20 replies per page.
200x20 = 4000 replies
Even if we'd assume that all those replies are made by 4000 different people, that's still only a 10% show up.
:Edit: If anything your point could be that it's more fun to watch SC2 with other people than it is alone, which is definitely true. However that's the case for every sport. SC2 is not harder to watch alone than any other sport (Which seems to be your point)
exactly I don't do LR threads but I think it could be more replies, you are just taking one case, who knows what its like with GSL or MLG or even a different weekend TSL etc. There is also the IRC, there are people doing their own thing their own channels. I know I let my friends who game know when things are on and they will want to chat with me about what is happening on the screen. Even if it's in small amounts of chat, it's a huge part of enjoying it. Being able to ask questions, comming home late and it feels like you pull up a chair and sit down while you ask the person next to you: "whats the score now man?" Also not everyone posts, for every 100 people posting there are maybe 500 reading. Isn't that a similar form of interactivity? Or atleast added value.
I dont even watch tv these days and sc2 on tv would just be absurd, its small units and little details and I wanna watch it on monitor just like I play it.
If SC does show up on tv I do think it should only be major tournaments as a special on G4 otherwise it wouldn't be worth watching for the general public since the majority of the people already watch it on streams and vods.
On April 12 2011 19:47 Markwerf wrote: SC2 on TV will never be big indeed but I can see it still getting some airtime on cheap air time perhaps.
If there is one thing that counts for e-sports on TV is that it has a very low production cost. A broadcast of sc2 would be incredibly cheap to make so perhaps it can be run on one of those hours where the networks are running another re-run of some show instead. I also don't really agree why sc2 can not be cut easily, it would be very easy to chop long games into short ones by just showing the critical opening moves and then showing some critical fights later on. Sure it would lose lots of people who rather watch entire games but it is the same with poker really, poker broadcasts are horrible because they only show all-in hands whereas anyone good at the game hardly cares about those.
E-sports will never be really big on TV or in general though I think. It lacks too many things for that to happen. First of all the market is way too fragmented, there are hundreds of games over many different genres and thus not one game is anywhere close to the numbers of players sports like football, tennis etc. have. Secondly, the top players never really have any charisma. They are not attractice, muscled guys but people who sit indoors entire days practicing their game, it just doesn't appeal to the big audience as they aren't the traditional players that can be worshipped. Clans and clubs are also not really comparible in the way people associate with it, it's not like clans have a stadium or any real fanbase that is devoted to the clan regardless of players playing for it like clubs do. Finally there isn't a single game with as much appeal to viewers as some of the top sports have. There are no astonishing feats of strength or dexterity that anyone that never played the game can enjoy. A headshot in a FPS or a perfect cheese in a RTS just don't compare to a perfect free kick in football or a massive dunk in basketball.
OK dude now your taking the wrong route. The reason sc2 will not be on tv ultimately is because of commercials, not because of whatever belittlement of e-sports you can come up with. Their are more than a ton of people who perceive value in Bisu's ability to multi task faster than anyone else, just like a free kick in soccer. Also, have you been living under a rock? In korea as we speak, the best BROOD WAR players have yet to switch to sc2. Why? Because their fan base is so huge and they make so so much more money than any sc2 progamer. Girls faint at the sight of Bisu, people come from other countries to cheer on stork, and 500,000 people flood korean beaches to see the pro league finals. Their are e-sports stadiums, it has happened, please view the rest of this website and youll find it all over the place.
On April 12 2011 19:47 Markwerf wrote: SC2 on TV will never be big indeed but I can see it still getting some airtime on cheap air time perhaps.
If there is one thing that counts for e-sports on TV is that it has a very low production cost. A broadcast of sc2 would be incredibly cheap to make so perhaps it can be run on one of those hours where the networks are running another re-run of some show instead. I also don't really agree why sc2 can not be cut easily, it would be very easy to chop long games into short ones by just showing the critical opening moves and then showing some critical fights later on. Sure it would lose lots of people who rather watch entire games but it is the same with poker really, poker broadcasts are horrible because they only show all-in hands whereas anyone good at the game hardly cares about those.
E-sports will never be really big on TV or in general though I think. It lacks too many things for that to happen. First of all the market is way too fragmented, there are hundreds of games over many different genres and thus not one game is anywhere close to the numbers of players sports like football, tennis etc. have. Secondly, the top players never really have any charisma. They are not attractice, muscled guys but people who sit indoors entire days practicing their game, it just doesn't appeal to the big audience as they aren't the traditional players that can be worshipped. Clans and clubs are also not really comparible in the way people associate with it, it's not like clans have a stadium or any real fanbase that is devoted to the clan regardless of players playing for it like clubs do. Finally there isn't a single game with as much appeal to viewers as some of the top sports have. There are no astonishing feats of strength or dexterity that anyone that never played the game can enjoy. A headshot in a FPS or a perfect cheese in a RTS just don't compare to a perfect free kick in football or a massive dunk in basketball.
OK dude now your taking the wrong route. The reason sc2 will not be on tv ultimately is because of commercials, not because of whatever belittlement of e-sports you can come up with. Their are more than a ton of people who perceive value in Bisu's ability to multi task faster than anyone else, just like a free kick in soccer. Also, have you been living under a rock? In korea as we speak, the best BROOD WAR players have yet to switch to sc2. Why? Because their fan base is so huge and they make so so much more money than any sc2 progamer. Girls faint at the sight of Bisu, people come from other countries to cheer on stork, and 500,000 people flood korean beaches to see the pro league finals. Their are e-sports stadiums, it has happened, please view the rest of this website and youll find it all over the place.
You are so wrong in your view about commercials it's not even funny. The way you describe it is the ameracan way. Here in Europe things are way different. There are tons of sports that vary in length and are commercial free untill the game ends and they have multimillion people watching all over Europe. I am not saying SC2 will generate such numbers i am just pointing how wrong you are about commercials.
Good read. While I don't feel competent enough to comment on the whole issue, I'd like to add one thing:
On April 12 2011 11:18 Kennigit wrote: Why Starcraft should never be on Western Television. 1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative. Unlike a broadcasted strategy game like poker where the scene (television scene, not community) is compact (1 hand, 1 hand, commercial, 1 hand, 2 hands, commercial etc.) and easily interchangeable, Starcraft does not allow quick or easy editing decisions. Without former Starcraft players on hand in an editing both, you would be left with a chopped down product – missed building placements, missed timings, and a raging viewer base. This isn't really a negotiable point. Games would HAVE to be edited and cut to allows for a commercial in the middle. A TV station simply cant run a 45 minute game without commercials in North America and still remain profitable.
I don't know anything about TV in the US but Eurosport is broadcasting Snooker for quite some time now and they only make commercial breaks between the frames, no matter if it's some crazy 10 minute frame or 40 minutes of tactical back and forth.
Edit: Not to mention the untouchable 45 + X minutes of soccer.
The only point I disagree on is the format of SC2 on television. Football matches allow for 45 minutes of games into commercials. The point here is the build up. Generally goes like Introduction, commercial, analysis (why Man U is going to crush Tranmere Rovers), commercial players running onto pitch etc, commercial. First half, commercial, little more analysis, commercial. Second Half, end of broadcast. Other television broadcasts do entire shows or films with only commercials in between (SBS in Australia, at least they did 6 years ago). SC2 might not exactly lend itself to television but it could be done profitably.
Of course all the other points are completely valid, targeting the casual will almost always ensure the hardcore fans won't watch. And that is why we most likely won't see SC2 on television any time soon.
On April 12 2011 19:52 gk_ender wrote: Barcelona can be up 3 goals and you can easily say jeez they are creaming them, after the game has started.
Goals should be counted as game won, in a sense its the same as SC2 where you can say, wow MVP is up 3-0 and is creaming MKP
Seeing an advantage in sc2 is harder than seeing and advantage anywhere else, again because if manchester is doing slightly better than chelsea, a goal will tell the tale.
but if Manchester is doing slightly better then Chelsea at 0-0 people cant tell which team is 'ahead', thus they relied on the commentator to say something like, 'oh Manc have held the ball better and created more chances than Chelsea' and so far have the advantage
just like Tartosis would say of he lost his stalker/zealot and now at a disadvantage, etc
I think I disagree with the claim that the difference between the casual and hardcore audiences is that much higher for sc2 than for other sports .There is always a gap between those who understand/play a sport in every single sport. If I see Ronaldo make an excellent feint and I play soccer, I can appreciate (almost physically) the complexity and intentionality of each move he makes, as well as the reaction from the defender. A person who hasn't played soccer cannot appreciate this, in fact they might not even be aware that it was a feint. Yet they can enjoy seeing it, why?
The answer is conformity and self-delusion, about 1/4(or less) of most soccer audiences actually understands what is going on and appreciates it. I bet that more than 75% of the people who watched at least 1 World Championship match could not explain what an offside is. The people who trigger the emotion and appreciation within the group to which the group conforms are those who understand the game - the rest just conforms. Why do those people who do not understand soccer watch it in the 1st place anyway?
1/ It's a social activity 2/ There's group identities clashing - nationalities/teams 3/ It's a public event that everyone is expected to know about - ie: it is the social norm to know what happened in a soccer match
None of these 3 aspects is universally true for Starcraft 2, but nor were they true for soccer when soccer started out as a sport. Aspect 2/ can be fullfilled very easily and it's perhaps even funny how much attention the World vs. Korea brings out already at this time. Aspect 1/ has to develop over time, but LANs and chats on on-line streams clearly show that this is clearly possible as well. The problem is with Aspect 3/, which is perhaps the most important one in attracting large casual audiences. Personally, I think that it can only become true for starcraft 2, when more than 75% of the population has actually played an RTS sometime in their life. So, Starcraft 10 on 'TV', yes maybe in 2035 and it could be really succesful.
However, popular culture and culture in general develops slowly and even though Starcraft 2 is in many ways an icebreaker in RTS gaming culture, there is no way it's going to become a part of popular culture, and hence there will be no real point broadcasting it on National TV except as a part of a larger competition - noone watches 100m sprints, but many people watch them as a part of the olympics.
Every sport has its own complexities and is effectively a niche. It can only be marketed to larger casual audiences once it's very widespread, has group identity clashes and is a social activity. And so it would be a mistake for any sports show for a relatively small auedience ie.: 50000-100000 to try and market itself for a larger casual audience, not just for starcraft 2. The story needs to be there for the normal audience to watch regularly and to watch the otherwise less interesting matches, it can pull some casual audience, but it's not the most important factor in that.
What is it that people so desperately want their pastime to be validated by the mainstream? Even if there was little money in SC2, we'd still get tournaments, we'd still have a community. In fact, if there was a lot of money involved, isn't it more likely than not that players would stop participating on teamliquid so often? Maybe they'd have teams and managers that would 'manage' their appearance. So honestly, I don't even care for e-sports as in "getting more and more sponsors and people watching". SC2 for me is mostly a game that I play on occasion, and with a community of players better and worse than me that I follow. As it is, becoming a top player is still within reach of pretty much anyone: you just need to practice and then one day you might be able to compete. If there was an entire corporate infrastructure, then suddenly there's so much distance between pro players and the community. I'm not sure if it's good or bad, but I doubt it's without any drawbacks.
Honestly, I find your post very narrow minded, and it looks like you were writing it with some massive tunnel vision going on.
Some of your points counter argue them selves without you even knowing it.
The main thing that stands out to me is the fact you point out that Poker is on TV, and then use this as a reason why SC2 can't be on TV?
As someone who had never played poker before seeing it on TV, I got to tell you its actually extremely complicated. Its definitely not something you can learn in, as you say, "2-3 minutes of watching".
There is no real reason why eSports can't be on TV other than the fact that it's complicated and not easy to understand what's happening straight away. But that's still the same with most sports, and there are a number tactics that can be used to tackle that.
As already mentioned by some in this thread, I don't think commercials should take any part of the argument of why sc2 shouldn't be on TV. However, I do agree that putting sc2 on TV would result in a fiasco. The main points as I see it is: 1: the game is way too complex. There's an obvious goal (to kill your opponent structures), but how to get there wouldn't make sense to most people. 2: the following is just way too small. You might be overwhelmed by how many attends MLGs and the 50k TSL viewers. Compared to other sports, that really isn't impressive. What you are impressed about is "despite it being an esport, it gets that many viewers". 3: Computer gamers are nerds. The general western population is still not able to accept someone, who spends 8 hours a day on a computer game, as a star. This is also really where one can see the difference between western and korean culture.
Don't you think that with Digital Television, and ads being able to be added just like on a browser, it could open possibilities for having advertisement without having breaks?
my point is not that its harder to watch alone it was that simply put, more people watch it in some form of together than alone. You counted the number of posts, not the number of views, which tell a much different story (though i realise at that point it much harder to diferentiate reloads ect), but there are way more people that read along than actually post, and that is signifigant. But again that has nothing to do with tv, mereley saying people watch it very socially. And to put the understanding sc2 simply, there are no points. You can not look at a score (besides how many games someone is up) and you can not count his chips to say he is in the lead.
Your point being what exactly? How does this relate to SC2 having no chance on say an e-sports dedicated TV channel? SC2 is far from the only sport where someone "suddenly" wins.
Barcelona can be up 3 goals and you can easily say jeez they are creaming them, after the game has started. Without the casters (which good casters try to avoid saying who is really ahead or behind for excitement value) you have no clue (again assuming you know nothing), and even they get it wrong. Seeing an advantage in sc2 is harder than seeing and advantage anywhere else, again because if manchester is doing slightly better than chelsea, a goal will tell the tale. Easy to watch, now to the trained eye we can all watch that champions league game and say wow manchester got lucky (opinion i know) but the point is the average joe can go hm manchester is winning. Sc2 is not that easy unless you play it, and even then play it well (well being defined as much more rudimentary than master league, but instead the difference between a top bronze player and a custom game player).
I had the feeling that I had a basic understanding of the game from the moment I started watching. Not because I'm uberskilled but because it's just that easy to get into. I got that after player X lost his army that he's behind. I got that after player X got supply blocked for 2 minutes he's behind etc. All it takes is a slight fermilliarity with the game. (That "bump" I mentioned earlier)
And unless playing a little single player brood war 10 years ago and watching #100 daily counts as the preparation you claim it takes to follow a game of starcraft then I think you're still overestimating how difficult it is to enjoy SC2 matches.
As for commercials, again its the profitability thing. You can show better commercials, by better i mean more expensive, and theyll buy in less frequency in poker. In sc2 you have to have a ton of commercials because of the demographic and perceived value of it. We are not assumed to be a high spending demographic therefore the commercial airtime will be cheaper, and must then be sold more to accommodated. Look at football or baseball. Further sc2 has much more going on than poker, ironically it has a bit of poker in it, between hands go for it, after a table has finished sure. But yu can not show a commercial in the middle of a game, it does not work, and that is what poker does to compensate. It doesnt matter in poker because if a big hand happens they can cut back or even better when they cut to commercial they can stop the game, that can not happen in sc, and is why it is such a headache to edit. In which we come to my original point, lengths of games are different, and since you cant play commercials during, you no longer have stable time to sell
Why wouldn't it be possible to air commercials? I'm sure commercial deals come in all shapes and sizes, whether it is airing 5 minutes at a very specific time to making sure that an X amount of hours within an X amount of weeks/months etc.
I am by no means an expert at commercials, as a matter of fact I probably know very little about this topic.
However what I do know is that people will be in lining up to spent their cash if you got a decent enough demographic. Which is what I'm argueing for. That there's no reason why there couldn't be a decent enough demographic for SC2.
Seeing an advantage in sc2 is harder than seeing and advantage anywhere else, again because if manchester is doing slightly better than chelsea, a goal will tell the tale.
but if Manchester is doing slightly better then Chelsea at 0-0 people cant tell which team is 'ahead', thus they relied on the commentator to say something like, 'oh Manc have held the ball better and created more chances than Chelsea' and so far have the advantage
just like Tartosis would say of he lost his stalker/zealot and now at a disadvantage, etc
Its about the during game, yes if mvp is up 3-0 its easy. But then why watch the game, its about what your seeing happen before because the vast your interested in the game. What im saying is in game, you can see that barcelona is ahead while they are playing, it is much different in sc2. And what i was saying wasnt is manchester doing better than chelsea at 0-0. Im saying, first that chelsea was the better team and manchester got lucky.... But mainly that manchester was ahead 1-0, and a i can turn to the game at any point and see that manchester is up 1-0 whether i understand soccer or not. Now again anybody will tell you they got lucky, but that is the sort of thing that understanding brings, and again if im a casual viewer casually catching a game, i do not know what i am seeing when i watch sc2
On April 12 2011 19:47 Markwerf wrote: SC2 on TV will never be big indeed but I can see it still getting some airtime on cheap air time perhaps.
If there is one thing that counts for e-sports on TV is that it has a very low production cost. A broadcast of sc2 would be incredibly cheap to make so perhaps it can be run on one of those hours where the networks are running another re-run of some show instead. I also don't really agree why sc2 can not be cut easily, it would be very easy to chop long games into short ones by just showing the critical opening moves and then showing some critical fights later on. Sure it would lose lots of people who rather watch entire games but it is the same with poker really, poker broadcasts are horrible because they only show all-in hands whereas anyone good at the game hardly cares about those.
E-sports will never be really big on TV or in general though I think. It lacks too many things for that to happen. First of all the market is way too fragmented, there are hundreds of games over many different genres and thus not one game is anywhere close to the numbers of players sports like football, tennis etc. have. Secondly, the top players never really have any charisma. They are not attractice, muscled guys but people who sit indoors entire days practicing their game, it just doesn't appeal to the big audience as they aren't the traditional players that can be worshipped. Clans and clubs are also not really comparible in the way people associate with it, it's not like clans have a stadium or any real fanbase that is devoted to the clan regardless of players playing for it like clubs do. Finally there isn't a single game with as much appeal to viewers as some of the top sports have. There are no astonishing feats of strength or dexterity that anyone that never played the game can enjoy. A headshot in a FPS or a perfect cheese in a RTS just don't compare to a perfect free kick in football or a massive dunk in basketball.
OK dude now your taking the wrong route. The reason sc2 will not be on tv ultimately is because of commercials, not because of whatever belittlement of e-sports you can come up with. Their are more than a ton of people who perceive value in Bisu's ability to multi task faster than anyone else, just like a free kick in soccer. Also, have you been living under a rock? In korea as we speak, the best BROOD WAR players have yet to switch to sc2. Why? Because their fan base is so huge and they make so so much more money than any sc2 progamer. Girls faint at the sight of Bisu, people come from other countries to cheer on stork, and 500,000 people flood korean beaches to see the pro league finals. Their are e-sports stadiums, it has happened, please view the rest of this website and youll find it all over the place.
You are so wrong in your view about commercials it's not even funny. The way you describe it is the ameracan way. Here in Europe things are way different. There are tons of sports that vary in length and are commercial free untill the game ends and they have multimillion people watching all over Europe. I am not saying SC2 will generate such numbers i am just pointing how wrong you are about commercials.
I don't live in Europe and have never watched European television and I still know that you are way off in assuming that European broadcasting of sports doesn't revolve around advertising. It may not have commercials every 15 minutes but it still has loads of advertisements plastered everywhere. Also the comparison of an actual sport compared to SC2 in terms of popularity and viewer numbers is worlds apart, so it would be extremely unprofitable to show SC2 on television without commercials for 45 minutes at a time and would just not happen, not even in Europe.
On April 12 2011 19:52 gk_ender wrote: Barcelona can be up 3 goals and you can easily say jeez they are creaming them, after the game has started.
Goals should be counted as game won, in a sense its the same as SC2 where you can say, wow MVP is up 3-0 and is creaming MKP
Seeing an advantage in sc2 is harder than seeing and advantage anywhere else, again because if manchester is doing slightly better than chelsea, a goal will tell the tale.
but if Manchester is doing slightly better then Chelsea at 0-0 people cant tell which team is 'ahead', thus they relied on the commentator to say something like, 'oh Manc have held the ball better and created more chances than Chelsea' and so far have the advantage
just like Tartosis would say of he lost his stalker/zealot and now at a disadvantage, etc
Its about the during game, yes if mvp is up 3-0 its easy. But then why watch the game, its about what your seeing happen before because the vast your interested in the game. What im saying is in game, you can see that barcelona is ahead while they are playing, it is much different in sc2.And what i was saying wasnt is manchester doing better than chelsea at 0-0. Im saying, first that chelsea was the better team and manchester got lucky.... But mainly that manchester was ahead 1-0, and a i can turn to the game at any point and see that manchester is up 1-0 whether i understand soccer or not. Now again anybody will tell you they got lucky, but that is the sort of thing that understanding brings, and again if im a casual viewer casually catching a game, i do not know what i am seeing when i watch sc2
Thats why I said to consider a series as a match and goals as game won. Because before the goal is scored/a match is won, anything can happen. MVP can move-command his whole army to MKP siege line and lost the game (akin to a dominating team scored a stupid own goal) and after that point what we have is MKP 1 - MVP 0 and we go to the next game, likewise it would be Liverpool 1 - Barcelona 0 and we continue and looks for more goals
if you start watching at this point, there's no way you would know which team is the dominating / better one, thats why you then refer to the commentator to give you that information
my point is not that its harder to watch alone it was that simply put, more people watch it in some form of together than alone. You counted the number of posts, not the number of views, which tell a much different story (though i realise at that point it much harder to diferentiate reloads ect), but there are way more people that read along than actually post, and that is signifigant. But again that has nothing to do with tv, mereley saying people watch it very socially. And to put the understanding sc2 simply, there are no points. You can not look at a score (besides how many games someone is up) and you can not count his chips to say he is in the lead.
Your point being what exactly? How does this relate to SC2 having no chance on say an e-sports dedicated TV channel? SC2 is far from the only sport where someone "suddenly" wins.
Barcelona can be up 3 goals and you can easily say jeez they are creaming them, after the game has started. Without the casters (which good casters try to avoid saying who is really ahead or behind for excitement value) you have no clue (again assuming you know nothing), and even they get it wrong. Seeing an advantage in sc2 is harder than seeing and advantage anywhere else, again because if manchester is doing slightly better than chelsea, a goal will tell the tale. Easy to watch, now to the trained eye we can all watch that champions league game and say wow manchester got lucky (opinion i know) but the point is the average joe can go hm manchester is winning. Sc2 is not that easy unless you play it, and even then play it well (well being defined as much more rudimentary than master league, but instead the difference between a top bronze player and a custom game player).
I had the feeling that I had a basic understanding of the game from the moment I started watching. Not because I'm uberskilled but because it's just that easy to get into. I got that after player X lost his army that he's behind. I got that after player X got supply blocked for 2 minutes he's behind etc. All it takes is a slight fermilliarity with the game. (That "bump" I mentioned earlier)
And unless playing a little single player brood war 10 years ago and watching #100 daily counts as the preparation you claim it takes to follow a game of starcraft then I think you're still overestimating how difficult it is to enjoy SC2 matches.
As for commercials, again its the profitability thing. You can show better commercials, by better i mean more expensive, and theyll buy in less frequency in poker. In sc2 you have to have a ton of commercials because of the demographic and perceived value of it. We are not assumed to be a high spending demographic therefore the commercial airtime will be cheaper, and must then be sold more to accommodated. Look at football or baseball. Further sc2 has much more going on than poker, ironically it has a bit of poker in it, between hands go for it, after a table has finished sure. But yu can not show a commercial in the middle of a game, it does not work, and that is what poker does to compensate. It doesnt matter in poker because if a big hand happens they can cut back or even better when they cut to commercial they can stop the game, that can not happen in sc, and is why it is such a headache to edit. In which we come to my original point, lengths of games are different, and since you cant play commercials during, you no longer have stable time to sell
Why wouldn't it be possible to air commercials? I'm sure commercial deals come in all shapes and sizes, whether it is airing 5 minutes at a very specific time to making sure that an X amount of hours within an X amount of weeks/months etc.
I am by no means an expert at commercials, as a matter of fact I probably know very little about this topic.
However what I do know is that people will be in lining up to spent their cash if you got a decent enough demographic. Which is what I'm argueing for. That there's no reason why there couldn't be a decent enough demographic for SC2.
Ok again, you need points so that you can see whats going on clearly. I feel like a broken record but here it goes. If i am casually catching a sc2 broadcast, when i flip the channel, without a score i cant understand whats going on in the middle of the game. You cant watch 2 sc2 games simultaneousness and understand unless you already get the game, unlike basketball where i can say ok knicks are up 32-18 flip ok steelers are down a goal. And you have yet to see what sc2 will bring. Games are going to get much much much closer, and i feel like a lot of people in this thread havent watched brood war, which is ok, but when players skill goes up, the things happen so so suddenly it is near impossible to discern. Sc2 hasnt gotten there yet but it will. At the moment it is like you say, one guy loses his army hes behind. But soon you will see, how can you tell if someone is fighting back into the game, how can you tell when hes not? For example, sometimes drops look great, but are terribly ineffective, or maybe your behind and it got you ahead, damage dealt is really really hard to see unless you already understand the game. or better, a guy just lost his army, hes behind right? Not at all, sometimes you do it on purpose matter of fact. And no this isnt 8 base vs 2 base ideas, hell sometimes its not even a black and white as 3 base on 2 base. Sometimes its 2 base on 2 base and guy throws his army at the other army, loses it and is still ahead, and its obvious to everyone who knows the game, but not to anyone who doesnt. This is not by any means some rare case, this is what will happen, weve been watching starcraft for years, the reason why the strategey thread is painful to read is it will be full of players who don't actually understand whats going on, and that is the thing, they tend to watch for a minute, misunderstand, and move on. And that is the issue hes talking about. You would have to dumb the game down, have everything explained, which in turn kills the game for the hardcore viewers. You can not please both And
On April 12 2011 20:24 gk_ender wrote: Its about the during game, yes if mvp is up 3-0 its easy. But then why watch the game, its about what your seeing happen before because the vast your interested in the game. What im saying is in game, you can see that barcelona is ahead while they are playing, it is much different in sc2. And what i was saying wasnt is manchester doing better than chelsea at 0-0. Im saying, first that chelsea was the better team and manchester got lucky.... But mainly that manchester was ahead 1-0, and a i can turn to the game at any point and see that manchester is up 1-0 whether i understand soccer or not. Now again anybody will tell you they got lucky, but that is the sort of thing that understanding brings, and again if im a casual viewer casually catching a game, i do not know what i am seeing when i watch sc2
i believe that point is completly void .
soccer : barca can have 70% ball position and bairen can have the lead from one fast break. your abillity to see who is "in the lead" in soccer is flawed , and its not important to it success.
SC2: you delude yourself if you think its take special mind to understand sc2 match.
Sister: who is leading ? Me: you see MVP has 120 food army while MKP has 80 food army their both on equal bases so they can build stuff at the same speed. MKP is behind and need to do something special to be back into it. its really not that hard to understand enough to enjoy ... tastosis doing damn good job explaining about the corrent situation.
why people want it on TV that much ?
well as i wrote before a lot more Money will go into the game. production value , more reward for the players effort , better quality of games and show. money -> more time and effort -> better product .
yes what we have now makes me happy , but it can be so much more ..
*que dream* i would love being able to go one day to a 50k stadium fully packed for the world championship which will have jinro vs Mc fighting for the 9th world championship and the right to be named the first bonjowa of sc2.
i would love to have my son come to me after he watched on tv sc5 commentator explaining the origins of the game , and i would proudly tell him about how i reached gold divition while using mouse and keybord to play games. and although he want to be a big esport star he still have to finish his homework assigment **
i just trully enjoy esport , and would love it to get better . and inorder to get better you need more exposure - easy way for exposure this days is TV. soccer had to start from somewhere , korean esport had to start from somewhere,
western esport have to start from somewhere, we have great start , but it really should be only the start.
On April 12 2011 19:52 gk_ender wrote: Barcelona can be up 3 goals and you can easily say jeez they are creaming them, after the game has started.
Goals should be counted as game won, in a sense its the same as SC2 where you can say, wow MVP is up 3-0 and is creaming MKP
Seeing an advantage in sc2 is harder than seeing and advantage anywhere else, again because if manchester is doing slightly better than chelsea, a goal will tell the tale.
but if Manchester is doing slightly better then Chelsea at 0-0 people cant tell which team is 'ahead', thus they relied on the commentator to say something like, 'oh Manc have held the ball better and created more chances than Chelsea' and so far have the advantage
just like Tartosis would say of he lost his stalker/zealot and now at a disadvantage, etc
Its about the during game, yes if mvp is up 3-0 its easy. But then why watch the game, its about what your seeing happen before because the vast your interested in the game. What im saying is in game, you can see that barcelona is ahead while they are playing, it is much different in sc2.And what i was saying wasnt is manchester doing better than chelsea at 0-0. Im saying, first that chelsea was the better team and manchester got lucky.... But mainly that manchester was ahead 1-0, and a i can turn to the game at any point and see that manchester is up 1-0 whether i understand soccer or not. Now again anybody will tell you they got lucky, but that is the sort of thing that understanding brings, and again if im a casual viewer casually catching a game, i do not know what i am seeing when i watch sc2
Thats why I said to consider a series as a match and goals as game won. Because before the goal is scored/a match is won, anything can happen. MVP can move-command his whole army to MKP siege line and lost the game (akin to a dominating team scored a stupid own goal) and after that point what we have is MKP 1 - MVP 0 and we go to the next game, likewise it would be Liverpool 1 - Barcelona 0 and we continue and looks for more goals
if you start watching at this point, there's no way you would know which team is the dominating / better one, thats why you then refer to the commentator to give you that information
But then your simply watching for the results. What im saying isnt simply ok, manchester is up....how do i put this. Where is the excitement in reading that mvp, what is exciting is that hes wining. And manchester wining is exciting when im a casual fan whether or not i understand that theyre doing worse. I can see a goal, he scored it. But when you say ok well hes up one game, who cares ab the game? Why are you watching the game if your excitement comes from simply viewing a stat screen. you want to, while the game is happening, feel the rising motion, say omg were gunna win, holy shit can he pull it off. Come backs like marine king primes against mvp become pointless if you cant see whats happening and why. Its the difference between cool hes coming back he won a game, and holy shit hes ahead, he should win this. What i am saying is when your a casual person, you can see shots on a goal, actual goals, crosses, free kicks and penalties, everyone gets that, i have to score a goal to win here i go. But how to win in sc2 is simple yes, but shots on goal are like drops, penalties are like misplaced units, and you can not tell whats working and what isnt unless you understand. The games you see now barley show off where this game is going, there will be a point when literally there will be to much for a caster to explain all at once, and if he does he kills the game for the hardcore because he wont be noticing something. its a complexity issue that just simply spirals out of control and what ends up happening is you cant please me and gf who doesnt watch sc2 with the same program
I thought it was common sense that Internet TV and alike are the new thing, TV is going away. Not today, not tomorrow. But at some point, and SC2 and all other computer games are part of the technological age that we live in. I dont WANT it to go on TV simply because I spend more time at my PC than my TV.
On April 12 2011 19:52 gk_ender wrote: Barcelona can be up 3 goals and you can easily say jeez they are creaming them, after the game has started.
Goals should be counted as game won, in a sense its the same as SC2 where you can say, wow MVP is up 3-0 and is creaming MKP
Seeing an advantage in sc2 is harder than seeing and advantage anywhere else, again because if manchester is doing slightly better than chelsea, a goal will tell the tale.
but if Manchester is doing slightly better then Chelsea at 0-0 people cant tell which team is 'ahead', thus they relied on the commentator to say something like, 'oh Manc have held the ball better and created more chances than Chelsea' and so far have the advantage
just like Tartosis would say of he lost his stalker/zealot and now at a disadvantage, etc
Its about the during game, yes if mvp is up 3-0 its easy. But then why watch the game, its about what your seeing happen before because the vast your interested in the game. What im saying is in game, you can see that barcelona is ahead while they are playing, it is much different in sc2.And what i was saying wasnt is manchester doing better than chelsea at 0-0. Im saying, first that chelsea was the better team and manchester got lucky.... But mainly that manchester was ahead 1-0, and a i can turn to the game at any point and see that manchester is up 1-0 whether i understand soccer or not. Now again anybody will tell you they got lucky, but that is the sort of thing that understanding brings, and again if im a casual viewer casually catching a game, i do not know what i am seeing when i watch sc2
Thats why I said to consider a series as a match and goals as game won. Because before the goal is scored/a match is won, anything can happen. MVP can move-command his whole army to MKP siege line and lost the game (akin to a dominating team scored a stupid own goal) and after that point what we have is MKP 1 - MVP 0 and we go to the next game, likewise it would be Liverpool 1 - Barcelona 0 and we continue and looks for more goals
if you start watching at this point, there's no way you would know which team is the dominating / better one, thats why you then refer to the commentator to give you that information
But then your simply watching for the results. What im saying isnt simply ok, manchester is up....how do i put this. Where is the excitement in reading that mvp, what is exciting is that hes wining. And manchester wining is exciting when im a casual fan whether or not i understand that theyre doing worse. I can see a goal, he scored it. But when you say ok well hes up one game, who cares ab the game? Why are you watching the game if your excitement comes from simply viewing a stat screen. you want to, while the game is happening, feel the rising motion, say omg were gunna win, holy shit can he pull it off. Come backs like marine king primes against mvp become pointless if you cant see whats happening and why. Its the difference between cool hes coming back he won a game, and holy shit hes ahead, he should win this. What i am saying is when your a casual person, you can see shots on a goal, actual goals, crosses, free kicks and penalties, everyone gets that, i have to score a goal to win here i go. But how to win in sc2 is simple yes, but shots on goal are like drops, penalties are like misplaced units, and you can not tell whats working and what isnt unless you understand. The games you see now barley show off where this game is going, there will be a point when literally there will be to much for a caster to explain all at once, and if he does he kills the game for the hardcore because he wont be noticing something. its a complexity issue that just simply spirals out of control and what ends up happening is you cant please me and gf who doesnt watch sc2 with the same program
Your forgetting one simple thing... You have been watching and playing football ever since you were born. You take someone who has never heard of or seen football, put them in front of a screen and they wont have a CLUE what is happening. The only thing they will be able to grasp is "Oh when one team kicks the ball into the net the team get happy".
I wish people would stop making illogical comparisons.
The playerbase of SC2 is just too small. In all honesty, I think the game being unpirateable (in multiplayer) is a huge factor: You can't really play starcraft unless you pay the 30€ it still costs after a year. You also cant just borrow the game from a friend like you can with console games or all the older, successfull multiplayer games. You have no LAN. If I go to a LAN with some friends, you can easily play a couple of rounds of WC3, CS, Quake etc. without having anyone owning the game. With starcraft 2 however, I'm having a hard time getting anyone into it, with the additional difficulty that you cant have internet everywhere (e.g. if you get some room in the local youth center). Unfortunately, all effort Blizzard invests to get their well deserved money, is playing against SC2 as an Esport. Like it is now, SC2 is just really hard to get into. Remind you that I dont think everybody should pirate SC2 and Blizzard does not deserve any money, but IMO it's the main reason why it's not that popular
Do you really KNOW a lot of people irl who would watch SC2 on TV? I sure don't.
1. Didnt read all posts, but to me it seems, most ppl here (which I view as the "big international starcraft community") wouldnt watch SC2 on the telly, as they want to be behind their computer (as do I ).
2. SC2 is still in it's baby shoes (and with that the entire esports community - exception of SKorea I guess). Digital television is on the rise (prolly well established in a lot of countries), which I look at as a step to internet TV (read baby shoes).
1 + 2 = SC2 shouldnt be on the telly, cause it wouldnt have enough viewers, and imo it should (and could) rise alongside the (inevitable?) step to Inet TV.
Comparing SC2 to any other sport is like comparing Football to swimming. They're both sports, they're both competitive in their own manner, but the comparison ends there.
I also read something by a French dude ( cant remember the name, but he seemed wise) who said the number of viewers are not comparable, as the internet is worldwide, whereas television is local. That statement alone should (imho) have ended the discussion then and there.
my 2 cents...
Edit: forgot to add: there's some sports I dont get either, cause I either dont have any interest in them, or I just cant access any matches easily from where I live. BUT, if I were able to follow matches easily, or if my interest would be high enough, it wouldnt really take too long to be able to understand what's going on I reckon...
Sure there's a lot of different units and counters in SC2, but how many different plays does American Football have (<- one of those sports I dont have access to :p)
On April 12 2011 20:54 MaGariShun wrote: The playerbase of SC2 is just too small. In all honesty, I think the game being unpirateable (in multiplayer) is a huge factor: You can't really play starcraft unless you pay the 30€ it still costs after a year. You also cant just borrow the game from a friend like you can with console games or all the older, successfull multiplayer games. You have no LAN. If I go to a LAN with some friends, you can easily play a couple of rounds of WC3, CS, Quake etc. without having anyone owning the game. With starcraft 2 however, I'm having a hard time getting anyone into it, with the additional difficulty that you cant have internet everywhere (e.g. if you get some room in the local youth center). Unfortunately, all effort Blizzard invests to get their well deserved money, is playing against SC2 as an Esport. Like it is now, SC2 is just really hard to get into. Remind you that I dont think everybody should pirate SC2 and Blizzard does not deserve any money, but IMO it's the main reason why it's not that popular
Do you really KNOW a lot of people irl who would watch SC2 on TV? I sure don't.
Okay please dont tell me pirating is good for esport. the fact that some people expect games to cost nothing and explain its okay to Esteal is one thing i hope our children will be cured from , there will be no future for pc gaming otherwise.
as in consule , you can take your acount and let someone play it . no problem . he like it and want to play with you ... pay for a copy . if everyone who played Quake3 would pay for the hard work the developer put into that game i promise you that instead of java game , it would have a real sequal with better engine much faster.
*programmer rant off*
post like that are the only reason why i agree with blizzard insistance of not using lan. mandatory online server is the only real way to slow down piracy , and as long as stupid people think its okay to pirate there can be no lan version .
On April 12 2011 19:52 gk_ender wrote: Barcelona can be up 3 goals and you can easily say jeez they are creaming them, after the game has started.
Goals should be counted as game won, in a sense its the same as SC2 where you can say, wow MVP is up 3-0 and is creaming MKP
Seeing an advantage in sc2 is harder than seeing and advantage anywhere else, again because if manchester is doing slightly better than chelsea, a goal will tell the tale.
but if Manchester is doing slightly better then Chelsea at 0-0 people cant tell which team is 'ahead', thus they relied on the commentator to say something like, 'oh Manc have held the ball better and created more chances than Chelsea' and so far have the advantage
just like Tartosis would say of he lost his stalker/zealot and now at a disadvantage, etc
Its about the during game, yes if mvp is up 3-0 its easy. But then why watch the game, its about what your seeing happen before because the vast your interested in the game. What im saying is in game, you can see that barcelona is ahead while they are playing, it is much different in sc2.And what i was saying wasnt is manchester doing better than chelsea at 0-0. Im saying, first that chelsea was the better team and manchester got lucky.... But mainly that manchester was ahead 1-0, and a i can turn to the game at any point and see that manchester is up 1-0 whether i understand soccer or not. Now again anybody will tell you they got lucky, but that is the sort of thing that understanding brings, and again if im a casual viewer casually catching a game, i do not know what i am seeing when i watch sc2
Thats why I said to consider a series as a match and goals as game won. Because before the goal is scored/a match is won, anything can happen. MVP can move-command his whole army to MKP siege line and lost the game (akin to a dominating team scored a stupid own goal) and after that point what we have is MKP 1 - MVP 0 and we go to the next game, likewise it would be Liverpool 1 - Barcelona 0 and we continue and looks for more goals
if you start watching at this point, there's no way you would know which team is the dominating / better one, thats why you then refer to the commentator to give you that information
But then your simply watching for the results. What im saying isnt simply ok, manchester is up....how do i put this. Where is the excitement in reading that mvp, what is exciting is that hes wining. And manchester wining is exciting when im a casual fan whether or not i understand that theyre doing worse. I can see a goal, he scored it. But when you say ok well hes up one game, who cares ab the game? Why are you watching the game if your excitement comes from simply viewing a stat screen. you want to, while the game is happening, feel the rising motion, say omg were gunna win, holy shit can he pull it off. Come backs like marine king primes against mvp become pointless if you cant see whats happening and why. Its the difference between cool hes coming back he won a game, and holy shit hes ahead, he should win this. What i am saying is when your a casual person, you can see shots on a goal, actual goals, crosses, free kicks and penalties, everyone gets that, i have to score a goal to win here i go. But how to win in sc2 is simple yes, but shots on goal are like drops, penalties are like misplaced units, and you can not tell whats working and what isnt unless you understand. The games you see now barley show off where this game is going, there will be a point when literally there will be to much for a caster to explain all at once, and if he does he kills the game for the hardcore because he wont be noticing something. its a complexity issue that just simply spirals out of control and what ends up happening is you cant please me and gf who doesnt watch sc2 with the same program
Your forgetting one simple thing... You have been watching and playing football ever since you were born. You take someone who has never heard of or seen football, put them in front of a screen and they wont have a CLUE what is happening. The only thing they will be able to grasp is "Oh when one team kicks the ball into the net the team get happy".
I wish people would stop making illogical comparisons.
no your forgetting. A GOAL IS SIMPLE TO UNDERSTAND. if in soccer whenever someone struck for goal it went in, scores would be in the double didgets. People can understand what it means to strike at goal, and get happy. As a united states citizen durring the world cup i listen to a bunch of idiots who know nothing about the sport, but man do they get happy everytime the ball gets near the other half of the field. THERE ARE NO MISSED GOALS IN SC2. Most of the game happens in such subtlety that things as blatant as ball hitting top post and being flung out of goal are missed by most people
On April 12 2011 19:52 gk_ender wrote: Barcelona can be up 3 goals and you can easily say jeez they are creaming them, after the game has started.
Goals should be counted as game won, in a sense its the same as SC2 where you can say, wow MVP is up 3-0 and is creaming MKP
No, because there is no limit on the amount of goals that can be scored other than the physical limit of time. StarCraft matches end after a certain # of games won.
People need to stop believing Starcraft can only work if people who are not gamers start watching it. If that's the case, considering it doomed. What you can hope for is to gather gamers from other communities, start playing SC and then start following the scene. You need to promote the game, and then the scene to the gamers.
There is absolutelly no reason for someone to watch starcraft instead of something else if they are not interested in the game itself. Drama? Background of players? You can find all that in basically any sport you want to, production needs to happen to attract SC players, but not viewers, to the streams. Understanding the subtle way pro-gaming works would take months for a non-gamers. How many people do you actually know that are not into gaming at all and would watch SC by themselfs?
Noone will suddenly start watching SC instead of Football for no reason.
On April 12 2011 19:52 gk_ender wrote: Barcelona can be up 3 goals and you can easily say jeez they are creaming them, after the game has started.
Goals should be counted as game won, in a sense its the same as SC2 where you can say, wow MVP is up 3-0 and is creaming MKP
No, because there is no limit on the amount of goals that can be scored other than the physical limit of time. StarCraft matches end after a certain # of games won.
then compare it to tennis: 1v1: game - set - match.
Comparing SC2 to any other sport is like comparing Football to swimming. They're both sports, they're both competitive in their own manner, but the comparison ends there.
On April 12 2011 19:47 Markwerf wrote: SC2 on TV will never be big indeed but I can see it still getting some airtime on cheap air time perhaps.
If there is one thing that counts for e-sports on TV is that it has a very low production cost. A broadcast of sc2 would be incredibly cheap to make so perhaps it can be run on one of those hours where the networks are running another re-run of some show instead. I also don't really agree why sc2 can not be cut easily, it would be very easy to chop long games into short ones by just showing the critical opening moves and then showing some critical fights later on. Sure it would lose lots of people who rather watch entire games but it is the same with poker really, poker broadcasts are horrible because they only show all-in hands whereas anyone good at the game hardly cares about those.
E-sports will never be really big on TV or in general though I think. It lacks too many things for that to happen. First of all the market is way too fragmented, there are hundreds of games over many different genres and thus not one game is anywhere close to the numbers of players sports like football, tennis etc. have. Secondly, the top players never really have any charisma. They are not attractice, muscled guys but people who sit indoors entire days practicing their game, it just doesn't appeal to the big audience as they aren't the traditional players that can be worshipped. Clans and clubs are also not really comparible in the way people associate with it, it's not like clans have a stadium or any real fanbase that is devoted to the clan regardless of players playing for it like clubs do. Finally there isn't a single game with as much appeal to viewers as some of the top sports have. There are no astonishing feats of strength or dexterity that anyone that never played the game can enjoy. A headshot in a FPS or a perfect cheese in a RTS just don't compare to a perfect free kick in football or a massive dunk in basketball.
OK dude now your taking the wrong route. The reason sc2 will not be on tv ultimately is because of commercials, not because of whatever belittlement of e-sports you can come up with. Their are more than a ton of people who perceive value in Bisu's ability to multi task faster than anyone else, just like a free kick in soccer. Also, have you been living under a rock? In korea as we speak, the best BROOD WAR players have yet to switch to sc2. Why? Because their fan base is so huge and they make so so much more money than any sc2 progamer. Girls faint at the sight of Bisu, people come from other countries to cheer on stork, and 500,000 people flood korean beaches to see the pro league finals. Their are e-sports stadiums, it has happened, please view the rest of this website and youll find it all over the place.
You are so wrong in your view about commercials it's not even funny. The way you describe it is the ameracan way. Here in Europe things are way different. There are tons of sports that vary in length and are commercial free untill the game ends and they have multimillion people watching all over Europe. I am not saying SC2 will generate such numbers i am just pointing how wrong you are about commercials.
I don't live in Europe and have never watched European television and I still know that you are way off in assuming that European broadcasting of sports doesn't revolve around advertising. It may not have commercials every 15 minutes but it still has loads of advertisements plastered everywhere. Also the comparison of an actual sport compared to SC2 in terms of popularity and viewer numbers is worlds apart, so it would be extremely unprofitable to show SC2 on television without commercials for 45 minutes at a time and would just not happen, not even in Europe.
If you tried a major US network ad strategy nobody would watch Starcraft on television. Average hour long show you see maybe 37-38 minutes of content and the rest is commercial. AMC has a 45 minute rule for movies on their channel. Europe is complex how they do commercials and different rules apply for the type of broadcast you have. Like religious shows cannot be interrupted and sports like tour de france can be split screened since there is no break. Actually you are wrong that it wouldn't be profitable because the production cost for running a tournament is surely far lower than a show like 2 1/2 men on weekly basis. John Cryer by himself gets paid $450,000 per episode. That's several seasons of prize pool even for gsl.
On April 12 2011 20:54 MaGariShun wrote: The playerbase of SC2 is just too small. In all honesty, I think the game being unpirateable (in multiplayer) is a huge factor: You can't really play starcraft unless you pay the 30€ it still costs after a year. You also cant just borrow the game from a friend like you can with console games or all the older, successfull multiplayer games. You have no LAN. If I go to a LAN with some friends, you can easily play a couple of rounds of WC3, CS, Quake etc. without having anyone owning the game. With starcraft 2 however, I'm having a hard time getting anyone into it, with the additional difficulty that you cant have internet everywhere (e.g. if you get some room in the local youth center). Unfortunately, all effort Blizzard invests to get their well deserved money, is playing against SC2 as an Esport. Like it is now, SC2 is just really hard to get into. Remind you that I dont think everybody should pirate SC2 and Blizzard does not deserve any money, but IMO it's the main reason why it's not that popular
Do you really KNOW a lot of people irl who would watch SC2 on TV? I sure don't.
Okay please dont tell me pirating is good for esport. the fact that some people expect games to cost nothing and explain its okay to Esteal is one thing i hope our children will be cured from , there will be no future for pc gaming otherwise.
as in consule , you can take your acount and let someone play it . no problem . he like it and want to play with you ... pay for a copy . if everyone who played Quake3 would pay for the hard work the developer put into that game i promise you that instead of java game , it would have a real sequal with better engine much faster.
*programmer rant off*
post like that are the only reason why i agree with blizzard insistance of not using lan. mandatory online server is the only real way to slow down piracy , and as long as stupid people think its okay to pirate there can be no lan version .
We can argue about the morality of piracy all day long, but it does not change the fact, that there is a 30€ hurdle for everyone to overcome to get into stacraft 2. For a student, that (or even the 60€ it cost at release - which is btw when i bought it) is a lot of money. You dont just throw that out for something you might probably like. I agree, it would be bad if everyone could just play it online for free, but you should be able to show it and share it with your friends at least. Look at the numbers for DOTA successors: LoL and HoN. For HoN, It's like 50.000 online at best times (more like 20.000 normally), while LoL claims to have a playerbase of 11 Million (dont know the online numbers, but i'm sure its a lot bigger than hon). I dont claim to have found the right model to balance acessibility and profit (I'd be rich if I had), but it is a problem SC2 has. My whole point was about how inaccessible starcraft is for a player who just wants to try it out and not that piracy is a good thing (which IMO, to a certain degree it is).
On April 12 2011 20:54 MaGariShun wrote: The playerbase of SC2 is just too small. In all honesty, I think the game being unpirateable (in multiplayer) is a huge factor: You can't really play starcraft unless you pay the 30€ it still costs after a year. You also cant just borrow the game from a friend like you can with console games or all the older, successfull multiplayer games. You have no LAN. If I go to a LAN with some friends, you can easily play a couple of rounds of WC3, CS, Quake etc. without having anyone owning the game. With starcraft 2 however, I'm having a hard time getting anyone into it, with the additional difficulty that you cant have internet everywhere (e.g. if you get some room in the local youth center). Unfortunately, all effort Blizzard invests to get their well deserved money, is playing against SC2 as an Esport. Like it is now, SC2 is just really hard to get into. Remind you that I dont think everybody should pirate SC2 and Blizzard does not deserve any money, but IMO it's the main reason why it's not that popular
Do you really KNOW a lot of people irl who would watch SC2 on TV? I sure don't.
Okay please dont tell me pirating is good for esport. the fact that some people expect games to cost nothing and explain its okay to Esteal is one thing i hope our children will be cured from , there will be no future for pc gaming otherwise.
as in consule , you can take your acount and let someone play it . no problem . he like it and want to play with you ... pay for a copy . if everyone who played Quake3 would pay for the hard work the developer put into that game i promise you that instead of java game , it would have a real sequal with better engine much faster.
*programmer rant off*
post like that are the only reason why i agree with blizzard insistance of not using lan. mandatory online server is the only real way to slow down piracy , and as long as stupid people think its okay to pirate there can be no lan version .
We can argue about the morality of piracy all day long, but it does not change the fact, that there is a 30€ hurdle for everyone to overcome to get into stacraft 2. For a student, that (or even the 60€ it cost at release - which is btw when i bought it) is a lot of money. You dont just throw that out for something you might probably like. I agree, it would be bad if everyone could just play it online for free, but you should be able to show it and share it with your friends at least. Look at the numbers for DOTA successors: LoL and HoN. For HoN, It's like 50.000 online at best times (more like 20.000 normally), while LoL claims to have a playerbase of 11 Million (dont know the online numbers, but i'm sure its a lot bigger than hon). I dont claim to have found the right model to balance acessibility and profit (I'd be rich if I had), but it is a problem SC2 has. My whole point was about how inaccessible starcraft is for a player who just wants to try it out and not that piracy is a good thing (which IMO, to a certain degree it is).
On April 12 2011 14:04 Pyo wrote: To be completely honest, as a 18-30 year-old American male, to me traditional TV really feels like a dying technology. I hardly ever watch anything on television. Although I pay for basic cable, I never watch it. Everything I do is on or from the internet. I am somewhat curious what the break down of TL.net is in this regard.
Poll: How much (traditional, non-internet) television do you watch per week?
0-1 hrs/week (61)
75%
1-7 hrs/week (15)
19%
21+ hrs/week (3)
4%
7-14 hrs/week (1)
1%
14-21 hrs/week (1)
1%
81 total votes
Your vote: How much (traditional, non-internet) television do you watch per week?
If this poll is even close to representative of the SC2 fan base, then I think the problem with shooting for SC2 to be brought to television is abundantly clear. SC2 fans (and probably gamers in general) don't really watch television. So claims that SC2 is big enough to make it on TV based on stream viewers is a gross misstatement.
One of the other reasons I don't want to see E-sports on TV aside from the ones stated already is how television works here in Canada (more specifically in Quebec). As of recently the major owner of cable television and satellite seems to be on a crusade to choke out the competition and force people to use their service (which i must add, uses a pre-historic model in comparison to how we have entertainment online today), I can safely say TV the way it is will not be the popular choice of entertainment in about a decade, unless they revolutionize the way it's shown. If would be completely turned off by the thought of watching important competitions on television when I'm forced to buy a the service to view TV, and THEN buy the channel package along with it.
Anyways, I have to completely agree with Kennigit. There is too many conflicting factors about Starcraft on television to even remotely succeed properly without killing what it stands for I find. A lot of people saying he's wrong and the business model can work needs to remember that investing into Starcraft 2 isn't as simple as advertising Hand eg-err American football and is a collosal risk.
Here's to hoping for TV to evolve into something more accessible than what it is today. And more importantly, the success of E-Sports.
I was incredibly surprised the other weekend when the pre-frosh who visited campus and came to a SC event haven't picked up SC2 yet (except for beta). Might just be an issue with strict parents, graphic requirements, or...I don't really know. I'd figured that the new generation would be all over SC2 by now D:
On April 12 2011 19:47 Markwerf wrote: SC2 on TV will never be big indeed but I can see it still getting some airtime on cheap air time perhaps.
If there is one thing that counts for e-sports on TV is that it has a very low production cost. A broadcast of sc2 would be incredibly cheap to make so perhaps it can be run on one of those hours where the networks are running another re-run of some show instead. I also don't really agree why sc2 can not be cut easily, it would be very easy to chop long games into short ones by just showing the critical opening moves and then showing some critical fights later on. Sure it would lose lots of people who rather watch entire games but it is the same with poker really, poker broadcasts are horrible because they only show all-in hands whereas anyone good at the game hardly cares about those.
E-sports will never be really big on TV or in general though I think. It lacks too many things for that to happen. First of all the market is way too fragmented, there are hundreds of games over many different genres and thus not one game is anywhere close to the numbers of players sports like football, tennis etc. have. Secondly, the top players never really have any charisma. They are not attractice, muscled guys but people who sit indoors entire days practicing their game, it just doesn't appeal to the big audience as they aren't the traditional players that can be worshipped. Clans and clubs are also not really comparible in the way people associate with it, it's not like clans have a stadium or any real fanbase that is devoted to the clan regardless of players playing for it like clubs do. Finally there isn't a single game with as much appeal to viewers as some of the top sports have. There are no astonishing feats of strength or dexterity that anyone that never played the game can enjoy. A headshot in a FPS or a perfect cheese in a RTS just don't compare to a perfect free kick in football or a massive dunk in basketball.
OK dude now your taking the wrong route. The reason sc2 will not be on tv ultimately is because of commercials, not because of whatever belittlement of e-sports you can come up with. Their are more than a ton of people who perceive value in Bisu's ability to multi task faster than anyone else, just like a free kick in soccer. Also, have you been living under a rock? In korea as we speak, the best BROOD WAR players have yet to switch to sc2. Why? Because their fan base is so huge and they make so so much more money than any sc2 progamer. Girls faint at the sight of Bisu, people come from other countries to cheer on stork, and 500,000 people flood korean beaches to see the pro league finals. Their are e-sports stadiums, it has happened, please view the rest of this website and youll find it all over the place.
You are so wrong in your view about commercials it's not even funny. The way you describe it is the ameracan way. Here in Europe things are way different. There are tons of sports that vary in length and are commercial free untill the game ends and they have multimillion people watching all over Europe. I am not saying SC2 will generate such numbers i am just pointing how wrong you are about commercials.
I don't live in Europe and have never watched European television and I still know that you are way off in assuming that European broadcasting of sports doesn't revolve around advertising. It may not have commercials every 15 minutes but it still has loads of advertisements plastered everywhere. Also the comparison of an actual sport compared to SC2 in terms of popularity and viewer numbers is worlds apart, so it would be extremely unprofitable to show SC2 on television without commercials for 45 minutes at a time and would just not happen, not even in Europe.
No he's right (at least for Germany^^). Football: ~12min prematch analysis (lineup, history, interviews, ...). Short commercial (~3min). 1st half (45min+X). 15min break (some analysis, some commericals, I'd say ~10mins commercials). 2nd half (45min+X). Commercial. Postmatch analysis. During the games there are no ads anywhere (ok sometimes they show, "Next program"). The actual game is completely uninterrupted.
Tennis though seems to be more in line with SC2 (Best of X, unknown length for each set, ...) and it's like (in a Bo3): Prematch analysis, commercial, set 1, commercial, set 2, commercial, set 3, commercial, postmatch analysis. And some sets can take a loooong time while others are over really fast. (5min rush vs 45min macro game).
So I dont really see that Kennigit's point is valid for all markets (it seems to be true for the American market) and since the sixjag guy wrote about American channels so I think that's ok to assume he only means America.
I'm also not entirely sure about the "casual" vs "hardcore" viewer argument. I think it is easy enough to understand. "Build units kill your opponents base". It's similiar to snooker "Hit ball, other ball hits moar balls and has to get them into the nets". Or curling "Throw the disc and have it try to land near the circle". Or poker "Have the better hand". All those games have been shown on television and if you have no prior knowledge you're still able to understand them very fast. Of course it's different to all those ballsports (football, handball, basketball, icehockey) since we're taught the rules in school. And they're very similiar.
The delicacies of the sport come over time and with good commentators. "Guards, saves" or something like "probabilities, value of hands, bluff, allin, harass, scouting, positioning, macro".
Overall though I think TV is dying. So I dont see a reason why we should have SC2 or any esports on that platform. It will be a very slow death, but it probably will happen. Especially when more countries get stuff like Hulu & co.
fully agree. i dont even know why people keep wanting sc on tv. sure it has a funny effect when you see that stuff on tv but in the end what we have right now is better in evryway.
and lets be serious, korea is a very special case where starcraft took over a whole generation. it works cause evrybody knows starcraft.
i cant even get my friends to watch any sc2 matches cause they dont care,dont understand and just arent interested. and i dont blame them. even my brother who played wc3 and liked bw vods isnt interested in watching sc2 much and i constantly have to explain him why this is exciting (" mmhh they just both turtled, then aclicked in one fight and now its over? boring... wc3 or that old game were more fun"). how you gonna get random people in there?
also its 2011 and evrybody somewhat involved in sc2 has internet access. so why gnot use that easy medium that has much less risk ,free schedules, less pressure and perfectly hits the interested audience?
also i saw some stuff about IEM on eurosport. and dayyumm it was bad. ignoring that it was in german and the people speaking def had no expirience with such stuff and sounded awful i dont get who would watch that. was chillin in bed with gf watching tv and this comes up. im like "wooo sc2 ! look! thats what i play :D:D". 5minutes later i turned it off cause it was incredibly boring and looked so stupid even to me that knows all the backround,game,iem etc. that was my first expirience with sc2 on tv. and while i like their effort i just cant see it work.
On April 12 2011 14:04 Pyo wrote: To be completely honest, as a 18-30 year-old American male, to me traditional TV really feels like a dying technology. I hardly ever watch anything on television. Although I pay for basic cable, I never watch it. Everything I do is on or from the internet. I am somewhat curious what the break down of TL.net is in this regard.
Poll: How much (traditional, non-internet) television do you watch per week?
0-1 hrs/week (61)
75%
1-7 hrs/week (15)
19%
21+ hrs/week (3)
4%
7-14 hrs/week (1)
1%
14-21 hrs/week (1)
1%
81 total votes
Your vote: How much (traditional, non-internet) television do you watch per week?
If this poll is even close to representative of the SC2 fan base, then I think the problem with shooting for SC2 to be brought to television is abundantly clear. SC2 fans (and probably gamers in general) don't really watch television. So claims that SC2 is big enough to make it on TV based on stream viewers is a gross misstatement.
also this. the only TV i watch nowadays is when i go to sleep and watch some random crap for 20 minutes or when i watch something with gf . other then that internet gives me evrything the tv can offer and much more.
events and stuff should be covered on G4, it wouldnt be to hard for them to put the 6 hour daily cops marathons on hold, to actually show gaming related content. or would it =/ I mean they cover things like comic con, and other conventions in a really well done manner when they happen.(also about the only time I even watch that channel)
and for those saying sc2 would be commercial free for like 45 minutes is lol. that could be fixed by integrating a mandatory pause time into the rules, or do what most mainstream sports do, go to commercial anyway, and show highlights if something happens...(and completely anger everyone that didnt get to see it originally happen =P)
As for the commercial signs next to a football pitch, how about putting banners and other commercial stuff straight into the terrain of the maps? Like the most likely places a battle's to be fought or the players mains are the most expensive spots or something .
Not sure if possible, but critters could be small cola cans or something?
Gonna stop, cause imagination's running wild, and I think my co-worker's getting the feeling that stupid smile on my face isnt work related lol.
Ok, I like your approach, but i feel there's still room for discussion.
first of all, I'd agree that tv isn't as important for most of us. still, it's very important for many viewers who aren't hardcore gaming.
On April 12 2011 11:18 Kennigit wrote: Why Starcraft should never be on Western Television.
In order for a TV game show to be viable, it needs a few things which Starcraft cannot provide without being shit.
1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative. Unlike a broadcasted strategy game like poker where the scene (television scene, not community) is compact (1 hand, 1 hand, commercial, 1 hand, 2 hands, commercial etc.) and easily interchangeable, Starcraft does not allow quick or easy editing decisions. Without former Starcraft players on hand in an editing both, you would be left with a chopped down product – missed building placements, missed timings, and a raging viewer base. This isn't really a negotiable point. Games would HAVE to be edited and cut to allows for a commercial in the middle. A TV station simply cant run a 45 minute game without commercials in North America and still remain profitable.
Why is that? Works perfectly for soccer all around Europe. 45 minutes without any commercials (other than the ones on the field). you could still show logos (like on ustream). I mean this solution might not be possible for huge football broadcasts, it should still be legit for smaller channels with lower production values. So I don't agree with this. There could be longer commercials between single games of a best of 5 and it would be sufficient imo.
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 and casual TV audiences simultaneously.
I partly agree here. Yet there's a catch. On the one hand we want the rest of the world to respect eSports and on the other hand we say 'nay they don't understand us'. I feel like we could either stay in our relatively small community or we have to find ways to make this game understandable. Poker might be easier, but there are a lot of programs which makes you actually understand a bit of the game. Smaller casts with showing audience and backgrounds etc could (only could) help to improve the casual gamer see what it's all about. and that would be great.
3. Social Networking While Teamliquid can't take full credit for any one production's success, the nature of having a very central hub where one can come and find live events quickly is a huge benefit to live broadcasts. Social media hubs like facebook/twitter and sites like reddit also contibute heavily, but I find it ignorant to suggest that this would be scalable when applied to a television. The social platform which impassions viewers on Teamliquid simply doesn't exist on television. The Starcraft Esports scene is very niche despite it's size – do not mistake size for accessibility. These new viewers came to esports via the promise of Starcraft 2's launch, they found Esports along the way.
hmm. social network is indeed a big deal. but again, it's about if we want to keep within ourselves or open it up and make eSports (and it's money values) bigger.
all in all i feel like a smaller version of the korean way might be possible for the west. and i don't think this is a bad thing. it might be tough, but if we really want starcraft to be recognized from more then 0.5% of the people, we need to find ways to successfully broadcast on tv (where you happen to watch stuff and not speciafically search for it).
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 and casual TV audiences simultaneously.
Great article, and I agree with a lot of what you said except this. Requiring that you need to understand it immediately is not a requirement of any sport. When I turn to watch golf on TV (which a lot of people in the world enjoy watching), it's not immediately apparent what is going on, what hole the guy is on, where he's playing in the leaderboard, etc. Same with cricket: American audiences see it, they have no idea what's going on. And yet it's extremely popular around the world.
I guess I just don't believe the game needs to be simple to be understandable - there are many exceptions to this clause.
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 is my thoughts exactly.
I'm only 24yo and I don't even pay for cable TV, I only have internet, and I watch all I want from the internet.
So yeah, TV at this moment has the bigger share of viewers, but in a few years I'm pretty sure that internet streams(or IPTV, whatever device you use to watch stream over the internet) are gonna take the place of the 'old' TV.
We can force to get StarCraft2 broadcasted on the cable, and possibly fail, or we can keep trying to improve the ways we're using right now, and make these the "TV" of the future.
TV is still a great media for mainstream entertainment, but I don't think we want to spend a lot of ressources/time/effort just to get it on TV, when it's helping to improve and make more popular the ways of the future in entertainment.
2,4 million daily reader news paper/tabloid has a live coverage of Dreamhack Invitational right now and a link to the steam is on the first page. The steam quality is even better than JTV 1080p.
Kennigit is right. Also, what the fuck is the point of putting it on TV if I can just fire up TL/Wellplayed and watching HQ streams commercial less (debateble lol) on demand? It just seems like an unnecessary hassle to put it on TV.
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.
Just wanted to highlight this post because I really think TV isn't going to survive the next 20years. That's an entirely different discussion though!'
Impressive analysis Kennigit, hopefully people will realize that TV is not where we should be heading.
There may have been prior attempts to get E-sports rolling, but most of those attempts were plagued with problems from what I can see and aren't actually relevant to future success past the damage to the reputation of Esports they've caused. Looking at some of the arguments I think SC2 could have a potential place on TV as a pre-recorded broadcast, the author did make a similar point but there are plenty of stations out there which show repeats, highlight shows or some obscure sport like bobsleigh for 3 hours straight in between their main broadcasts, so I can see a space it can fill.
If there was a team league format (which I believe is the best format for SC2 on TV) using pre-recorded games with the high quality ones selected for broadcast it could work. The longer games would need a cut for commercials but I don't see it as a problem if it's done tactically, since the broadcast would be pre-recorded there'd be plenty of wiggle room to fit them in at the right times.
I don't buy the dumbing down argument. If people don't understand SC2 there are numerous of ways to help them, just having good casters who speak in a way beginners can understand like Husky and TotalBiscuit is the first step. The philosophy that something can't cater to both a casual and hardcore audience is also wrong, Blizzard themselves have been doing it for years.
Anyway I'm enjoying how this article has made a lot of the people involved in broadcasting SC2 quite mad, good job author.
Why doesn't e-sports begin working with Netflix and Hulu.com (though the latter is having legal issues... joy?) to get content out to more people?
Most of the people I know don't watch T.V. anymore, but stream their shows via Netflix. That and other "Mainstream" content providers (I.E: Apples iTunes Store, xBox Live, PSN, ect...) probably reach more people than TV.
It's low cost, relatively speaking, and you could reach more people than before.
Look at day[9]! He reaches thousands of people and many of his viewers don't even PLAY THE GAME.
On April 12 2011 13:26 Jotoco wrote: I will disagree with you Kennigit.
I will start by saying that I do agree SC2 won't make to TV, and if it did, it would fail miserably.
BUT, I think it is more of a cultural thing to the USA (maybe North America) which is not representative of "The West".
On point:
1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative.
It is easy to edit. Look what recent tournaments are using, they add smaller videos to dead areas of the screen, add promotional banners and stuff.
As someone pointed, we have 45 min Soccer half-times. There are commercials squeezed in when the play is slow, and there are many such occasions on SC2 to squeeze commercials (long macro moments, right at the beginning, etc). It would be the work of casters/observer to sneak those adds in the slow moments. Or even put then in the smaller dead spaces across the screen.
2. Able to target core demographic and casuals simultaneously.
This is only an issue (at least in Brazil) if you're talking about open TV. If you're on Cable, then even a small amount of viewers (much smaller then current SC2 viewership) can keep it a profitable business. There are Channels (on cable) that get a few thousand viewers, tops, and SC2 can manage a few tens of thousands of viewers at the same time.
You could target the HARDCORE demographic and slowly try to make the masses understand the game.
In Brazil there are MANY Sports that are unknown, like Golf, Baseball, even BASKETBALL. What does the TV stations do when there are major games? They dedicate a good 15~30 min to explaining the fucking game before each transmission. They explain the rules, the rivalries involved, hype the players... each and every transmission.
Eventually, some people grow used to those sports and start following then, but in the end Brazil is still a one sport nation and most (80%+) of people only know follow and know Soccer. But the point being, this 20% is some 40 million fucking people. That is a HUGE amount of viewers and money that is untapped. They want entertainment, but not Soccer, shouldn't we give then an option?
3. Social Networking
I've experienced many times that TV transmissions can (and will) foment social networking responses. Like a SC2 match in the middle of the day would create a fuck-ton of Community and Hassle in Orkut (largest social network in Brazil), some top TTs in twitter (Brazil is known for putting topics in the TTs lighting fast) and create many, many comments on facebook.
By the very nature of these social networks people who don't have a clue what the hell is starcraft would hit some knowledgeable person who would then explain it and propagate the message.
Of course this is not guaranteed to happen (nothing is) but this is as likely a scenario as you paint. We don't have SC 2 experience on TV, we DON'T know how it would go. I personally think it would fail, for completely different reasons, one being that I am the target audience for this kind of show and I only turn on the TV on MAJOR, MAJOR events/shows. And even those events I get to know about because of internet and/or word of mouth.
On the other hand, it could flourish because we (Brazil, and to an extent "the west") have AWFUL internet connections and streams very often lag terribly (UStream, for example, TSL is unwatchable).
I'm literally playing devil's advocate here, but because I think the Kennigit's attitude is Immature and even if I though he was right I don't think it is the way to critize someone who put effort into writing something to try to help the SC community. He should have respected other people's opinions like this site tells us to.
I have seem people be banned for only half the criticism he expresses here, even with good arguments, and he gets all the praise in the world for it? Sorry I don't buy these two weights thingy.
Even though my post is probably be deleted/edited and I perma banned I HAD to say this, because it would NOT be funny if the TL staff was being ridiculed on another site.
PS: And YES, I'm mad with this attitude. Censor me for expressing my opinion.
I'm quoting myself to say I wrote this with too hot a head, should weighted my words better.
BUT, the point still stands.
TL; DR:
Just because Kennigit can refute Dick's argument it doesn't mean he can call him a 'dick', nor ridicule him on this forum. I think you're abusing your power as mod to heavily criticize someone when you're own arguments can be refuted.
What would happen if a TL Staff member was being ridiculed on another website because of a post here? Where he can not defend himself?
In fairness of self-defense this Sixjax guy should be given an equivalent space HERE to defend himself and not be ridiculed in front of a major audience.
As long as people think that this is "TL Community" and NOT "SC community" and start in-fighting, then we will be always small, we should join forces, have healthy discussions and NOT try to snipe each other like Kennigit did (and dJWheat did, but retracted).
I, similarly, could starting ridiculing you because you copy most US-based texts I know and assume the whole world thinks and does things like you do. Your arguments do NOT apply to other parts of the "West".
And I will stop because I'm spiraling down a rant again...
On April 12 2011 22:35 lowercase wrote: Great article, and I agree with a lot of what you said except this. Requiring that you need to understand it immediately is not a requirement of any sport.
You seem to misunderstand the point. It's not immediate understanding when you tune in he's talking about; it's understanding the sport at all.
When I turn to watch golf on TV (which a lot of people in the world enjoy watching), it's not immediately apparent what is going on, what hole the guy is on, where he's playing in the leaderboard, etc.
If you didn't know that a negative score is better than a positive one or that there are 18 holes on a golf course it wouldn't matter anyway; you'd just see a guy whacking an egg with a stick into a field of green and people being impressed by it.
Same with cricket: American audiences see it, they have no idea what's going on. And yet it's extremely popular around the world.
Is it extremely popular in America? No, except among those people that have a prior knowledge of the apparent random shit that's happening on screen.
Imagine someone with absolutely no prior knowledge tuning into the beginning of a Starcraft II game and seeing a bug sink into the ground and start pulsing, upon which the crowd goes fucking nuts because the robot guy started making a big building. Nobody's killing anybody, why are people cheering?
Cable and broadcast TV are becoming obsolete, IPTV will be the way of the future. Esports doesn't need to bother with TV to succeed and they are a step ahead of the curve by getting established with streaming. IMHO.
I'm 22, and live with my girlfriend. We're both college graduates, making average income... and don't have cable. I hate commercials and flipping through channels in general. If i want to watch something, I watch that something. I think a lot of people my age feel the same way. That being said, who can you reach through TV that would want to watch SC2 that can't access it via the internet?
The OP's article is well-written and raises a myriad of valid points.
On April 12 2011 23:09 bonifaceviii wrote: Imagine someone with absolutely no prior knowledge tuning into the beginning of a Starcraft II game and seeing a bug sink into the ground and start pulsing, upon which the crowd goes fucking nuts because the robot guy started making a big building. Nobody's killing anybody, why are people cheering?
That's actually a pretty good point. I showed a match of starcraft to my parents once (to see how they'd react) and they didn't get when somebody lost. it's tough for an outsider.
on the same note, I don't know how many hours I watched snooker without knowing why people went nuts and what a snooker is. the caster has to clarify stuff like that and explain everything thoroughly.
it's tough, but imo at some point it just has to televised to gain popularity. If we make the internet our tv, it will be just us, cause nobody else will know where to look and not find starcraft by chance. and that's the flaw of keeping it as it is
TO all people saying that the length varies too greatly:
1 - Poker: It can end in a couple of all-ins, or it can go on forever with each player winning some and losing some. Seem Poker games last 10min and others last SEVERAL HOURS (Which sc can't because of amount of resources on a map).
On April 12 2011 23:41 Jotoco wrote: TO all people saying that the length varies too greatly:
1 - Poker: It can end in a couple of all-ins, or it can go on forever with each player winning some and losing some. Seem Poker games last 10min and others last SEVERAL HOURS (Which sc can't because of amount of resources on a map).
Starcraft is MUCH easier than those sports to control the time. But more/less commentary between matches, interview players, etc....
All you really get from poker games on TV are highlighted hands and stuff like that.
The longest tennis matches you cite are really rare, and the most recent one wasn't televised in it entirety.
Ideally I think SC2 tourneys would only broadcast marquee match-ups, and late rounds. There could also be highlights of certain up and coming players as well as some highlights "pimpest plays" in between these marquee match-ups.
On April 12 2011 23:41 Jotoco wrote: TO all people saying that the length varies too greatly:
1 - Poker: It can end in a couple of all-ins, or it can go on forever with each player winning some and losing some. Seem Poker games last 10min and others last SEVERAL HOURS (Which sc can't because of amount of resources on a map).
Starcraft is MUCH easier than those sports to control the time. But more/less commentary between matches, interview players, etc....
All you really get from poker games on TV are highlighted hands and stuff like that.
The longest tennis matches you cite are really rare, and the most recent one wasn't televised in it entirety.
Ideally I think SC2 tourneys would only broadcast marquee match-ups, and late rounds. There could also be highlights of certain up and coming players as well as some highlights "pimpest plays" in between these marquee match-ups.
I don't know, but I've seen several Poker matches broadcasted LIVE.
And the Tennis match in question WAS AIRED in it's entirety here in a cable channel. And long starcraft 2 matches are rare, too. Most are 10~20min real time. A BO3 can be put in a 60 min WITH COMMERCIALS program really easily.
You just need to have someone who knows the players and the matchup plan ahead and gauge as the game goes on. If you have a Very Short AND one-sided first game, chances are next game can be short and the guy will take it 2-0. Put more commercials/analysis/player interviews before the next match, but leave enough space for another round of commercials/analysis/player interviews after the game. If the game is short, put commercials/analysis/player interviews to fill the gap. If the game is long skip right to the next match so you can finish in the 60 min frame you have and so on and so forth.
Even Volley can vary wildly in duration, a 3-0 against a 3-2 with scores in the high 30is each set.
EDIT: Actually DreamHack IS doing 60 min BO3... can't be done?
It was very well written and I agree that the Esports would have trouble in the current network television model.
However that model is slowly starting to change. I think the idea of interactive television with multiple ad revenue models will become a reality.
Check out the link below, if Google can prove legitimate revenue models with this venture then it won't be long before the major networks follow suit. Interactive television would suit Starcraft and esports well and I'm sure the block based advertising format could be altered to maintain the integrity of the game
also keep in mind that technology has advanced so far that we almost have complete television studios/graphics workstations at our home PC's... -limited only by time and creativity- ie.. you don't -need- a 20million dollar TV studio to put out high quality content...
im 100% happy with online broadcasts and as long as the production values and editing keeps getting better I don't mind a commercial or 2 to fund the project and pay the players.
Starcraft 2 on prime time tv? Doubtful. SC2 on a niche station like G4? Possible.
If you asked me in 2001 if poker would ever be big on ESPN i'd say you're retarded. And poker sucks. Now if you ask me about poker on ESPN i'll still say it sucks, but hey obviously people watch it. All stations care about is # of viewers. If you air something like starcraft on espn, you now have limited your viewer base from the entire world, to anyone who gets espn. ESPN is only turned on my TV whenever football season is on and "my" teams are playing. Halo had the best chance because you'd be hard pressed to find a watcher base bigger outside of the US. But enough of ESPN, it won't happen again for a while after the previous problem.
G4 is entirely possible as a niche station for SC2. COPS isn't exactly the most interesting program on television. I say that and mean the only thing less interesting than COPS is world series of poker on ESPN The best thing G4 has going for them is their regular prime time (Xplay/AOTS) and "movies that don't suck" the rest of the channel? meh. G4 always has the big expos being covered, a small partnership to stream a couple of events online would be a good way to test the waters. Dreamhack, GSL Finals, MLGs, NASL Finals. There is almost always something going on in SC2 on the weekends, a great place to start testing the waters.
The only problem goes back to who has access to the actual channel, and even if you do have access do people even watch it. I don't have a solution for that except possible incentives for people to watch. Give them a reason, give people the chance to win something by watching. Show HD matches just by watching the channel. Do limited commercial interruption at first, you don't want to spam the crap out of commercials just to piss people off that can watch the VODs free. Get personalities that work.
Basically learn from the mistakes of LANs (MLG's technical difficulties), Learn from the mistakes of CSL, and give the people what they want.
On April 12 2011 23:04 Crackensan wrote: Why doesn't e-sports begin working with Netflix and Hulu.com (though the latter is having legal issues... joy?) to get content out to more people?
Most of the people I know don't watch T.V. anymore, but stream their shows via Netflix. That and other "Mainstream" content providers (I.E: Apples iTunes Store, xBox Live, PSN, ect...) probably reach more people than TV.
It's low cost, relatively speaking, and you could reach more people than before.
Look at day[9]! He reaches thousands of people and many of his viewers don't even PLAY THE GAME.
Wait what? Day9 basically does lessons and strategical analysis. Why would anyone watch it if they didn't play. This might count for some other people maybe but Day9 is a terrible example.
Very interesting read and never really thought about what SC2 would be like on the TV, but this article focusses on it and really addresses the problems associated with it. About fitting in ads during the games, I'm sure it would be possible to do but the games wouldn't be entirely live. So you could have 15mins of play then a 30sec break, and every 15mins have another break depending on how long the game is. The matches would still continue and the casters would still cast and the viewers would still be able to see the full game
Starcraft 2 would make a great BBC program, take for example darts and snooker championships.
-There are no set time limits and no adverts, programs have been pushed back an hour because a match has taken more time than expected. It's all happened with these sports on the BBC.
-The BBC already have a lot of niche programs, take a look at Click for example. It's mainly for technological people, but they often simply explain stuff for the more casual people.
-Take a look at the Dreamhack, dApollo, Demusilim and 2GD all British, would suit the BBC's sport commentary scene perfectly.
-Of course I don't expect it to be on one of the main channels, but seeing something displayed on the red button as a trial run for an event for example a future Dreamhack.
This will probably never happen, but do take note that being on the TV isn't all bad. A short segment with some noobie explanations, no adverts, could use their already popular iPlayer to stream. Maybe I'm too biased about the BBC, but they do produce great programming; especially when it comes to sports.
It was a good read. I also agree on the fact TV is not the way to go for StarCraft in the western world. The internet is taking over as a medium very quickly almost every TV broadcaster has their episodes to be viewed online incase you missed one. News papers are going out with the internet bringing news quicker and easier to read. Heck even sports channels are streaming their programming online as well. StarCraft is fine to be done over the internet only because it will reach a broader audience in the long run.
Don't think there is market for it on television. It's so easy to watch games on the internet, I myself though I watch a ton of games I would still watch them on pc.
On April 12 2011 23:04 Crackensan wrote: Why doesn't e-sports begin working with Netflix and Hulu.com (though the latter is having legal issues... joy?) to get content out to more people?
Most of the people I know don't watch T.V. anymore, but stream their shows via Netflix. That and other "Mainstream" content providers (I.E: Apples iTunes Store, xBox Live, PSN, ect...) probably reach more people than TV.
It's low cost, relatively speaking, and you could reach more people than before.
Look at day[9]! He reaches thousands of people and many of his viewers don't even PLAY THE GAME.
Wait what? Day9 basically does lessons and strategical analysis. Why would anyone watch it if they didn't play. This might count for some other people maybe but Day9 is a terrible example.
Obviously you don't watch Day9. Day9 himself has said many many times that looooots of people tell him how they don't even play starcraft 2 but love watching the daily.
Only way StarCraft 2 would be suitable for TV is if someone made a drama series about it with the main focus on the players, in the style of Deadliest Catch (or Boxer's wings).
Since you need to be relatively affluent to afford a decent PC and internet connection, I don't think that there are too many players with overcoming the odds dramatic back stories like you'd see in other sports.
Well I hope the OP responds to some posts here... it seems like he wrote his post with way too much confidence, while many people disagree with his points. He may have some more experience with esports, but I can't imagine he's a TV expert and many of the points he said don't seem to make sense.
On April 13 2011 02:06 Zorkmid wrote: Since you need to be relatively affluent to afford a decent PC and internet connection, I don't think that there are too many players with overcoming the odds dramatic back stories like you'd see in other sports.
not really. Blizzard makes their games so almost any comp can run it no problem. And just because you have money to buy a computer doesnt mean you cant have dramatic back stories.....
hell deadliest catch you really didnt get any back stories...other then edgars really...and now that young kid when his dad went missing.
People in this thread going "who needs TV?" are forgetting one thing: at the moment, online content is more often shitty than not. In a huge majority of online streams the production value is terrible and connection/quality problems are plenty. People watch sporting events on TV because it's an easy and smooth experience, they don't want to spend even a split second troubleshooting shit. In 10 years the online viewer experience might be good enough to start bringing in some serious audience and money, but at the moment it pretty much sucks.
On April 12 2011 23:04 Crackensan wrote: Why doesn't e-sports begin working with Netflix and Hulu.com (though the latter is having legal issues... joy?) to get content out to more people?
Most of the people I know don't watch T.V. anymore, but stream their shows via Netflix. That and other "Mainstream" content providers (I.E: Apples iTunes Store, xBox Live, PSN, ect...) probably reach more people than TV.
It's low cost, relatively speaking, and you could reach more people than before.
Look at day[9]! He reaches thousands of people and many of his viewers don't even PLAY THE GAME.
Wait what? Day9 basically does lessons and strategical analysis. Why would anyone watch it if they didn't play. This might count for some other people maybe but Day9 is a terrible example.
Obviously you don't watch Day9. Day9 himself has said many many times that looooots of people tell him how they don't even play starcraft 2 but love watching the daily.
That's like the people who don't play the game at all and follow tournaments, it's common, but they have played at some time and have knowledge about the game, they just don't have enough time to do both. I think it would be very dificult to find someone who watches Day9 without any knowledge about the game, and it would actually be very interesting to hear what such person has to say.
Personally I think what Starcraft has that other games don't, is just how entertaining it is to watch, whether you are a player or not. I've never played a game, where people would stop and want to watch, even without understanding of the game, because it is simply fun to watch. I've never encountered a game where people who don't even play, want to watch, because the action is entertaining. Halo isn't fun to watch. Counter-strike wasn't fun to watch. Will it ever catch on big enough to be on TV? Who knows, I honestly doubt it... but I know I would tune in, and so would many others who don't even play and have never seen the game before. I only say this because of my own surprise when people who didn't even play, actually really enjoyed watching GSL matches or even just watching my own weak play. There really is a spectator appeal to Starcraft that even people who don't know anything about the game, can really get into. When you add in quality commentary, it is far more entertaining than many sports for many people who barely know a thing about what is going on.
On April 12 2011 11:18 Kennigit wrote: I'll refer to “dick” as “the author” because I don't think I can resist stupid puns which would result in calls for maturity (sirscoots >:| ). These are my personal opinions, not those of Teamliquid.net. + Show Spoiler +
The author sure is a...ok i'm done.
Starting a post with ad hominem? o_O
Anyways, because of the way commercials work in the respective western countries, SCII might make its way to being broadcast on European TV, such as BBC, but not on NATV? Just my two cents...
On April 13 2011 02:21 Mannerheim wrote: People in this thread going "who needs TV?" are forgetting one thing: at the moment, online content is more often shitty than not. In a huge majority of online streams the production value is terrible and connection/quality problems are plenty. People watch sporting events on TV because it's an easy and smooth experience, they don't want to spend even a split second troubleshooting shit. In 10 years the online viewer experience might be good enough to start bringing in some serious audience and money, but at the moment it pretty much sucks.
Totally disagree.. have you tried watching major sporting events via the internet stream? Not a huge sports fan (or one at all really), but for Tennis at least the live streaming is actually better than the cable broadcast. They don't play commercials, and you have the ability to watch whatever court you want when multiple matches are being played. These features would be awesome for SC2. Also, cable is just the vehicle (like the internet)... the content on Netflix/Hulu is perfect quality in my experience.
Dreamhack Invitational is proving this thread right just now. Seriously, the quality and drama are amazing, can't imagine something like that on televison. It may not exactly be IPTV, but I think it's pretty close to how Starcraft broadcasting shoudl be run in the best of all worlds.
I can only speak for myself here, but personally, I dont even own a TV. I dont actually care about TV. If I had the choice of watching SC on tv or from the computer, Id watch it on the computer. In fact, I watch TV shows on the computer, and movies too, just because its a lot more convenient.
Watching live stuff on TV or the computer, is pretty much equivalent. But VODs are 100% superior to a set program of content on the TV.
People in this thread going "who needs TV?" are forgetting one thing: at the moment, online content is more often shitty than not.
content can be shitty or not. if you put shitty content on TV instead of in a VOD, its still shit. being on TV doesnt make it better. And yeah, with more funding, it can be made better, but that goes both ways.
technologies are evolving. radio used to be super popular, but now it isnt all that much. then TV was around. the newest generation doesnt care much about TV, and are internet junkies. in a few years, traditional landline phones are probably going to be obsolete, since everyone has a cellphone and uses that so much more.
Lets be honest, mostly everyone who would ever want to watch SC owns a computer, with a decent internet connection. not all of them own a TV. not all of us have cable. I bet everyone here has watched some gomtv vods or streams, but how many of you actually ever watched SC on TV, not through the internet? Its pretty easy to watch a show made in korea, on the internet, but getting their TV stations here is troublesome. I live in europe, and Ill probably be watching the nasl. Its on the internet, it wont be hard. If instead, it was a small TV channel, like the fox soccer channel... Well good luck getting access to that on your TV from europe.
Sure, soccer started out on radio, because thats alkl that was available back then. And then it became huge on TV, because color TV was the big thing. But we should be going forward, not backwards. Internet is the future, at least until the next big technology comes around. The demographic for SC isnt my grandmother, who watches sports on TV and doesnt know how to use a computer. Its the 15-35 year old gamer/nerd. people who have a computer, have internet, and know what video games are, and play them. TV is declining, and if there is to be growth for esports, its not very logical to have it be on a shrinking medium. This is esports, and its played over the internet, most of us can and want to watch it over the internet.
-OP has an awesome, refreshing viewpoint -I haven't had access to cable at my house for years. Actually, 2 years ago I had cable for a few months apparently but never even plugged in the wire to bother checking. -Starcraft as an observer sport will always be appreciated by people who or used to play, period. We are ALREADY at a period when people can watch internet shows on their TV without a problem anyway, hoping to hop on the cable bandwagon for anything other than blurbs on news shows or a special on 60 minutes is silly.
I didnt understand a lot of stuff from the op: 1) why would you spend so much time and effort fiercely proving a point which is so bitter for any starcrafter? It was just an article on some other site of someone being optimistic about something we love. If we will bash such ideas who wont? 2) why would you want an sc2 channel to be a major one? It can start off by being available for free on cable packeges. I have a channel on mine that is called ZenTV. It shows pictures of nature 24hours a day, 1 minute per picture, no ads... Now on the point of the sc2 being doomed on TV 3) sc2 should not aim for it's own channel right from the start, at least for now. Thats quite obvious. Before dedicated soccer chanels appeared dedicated sports channels had to prove their worth. 3) gaming channel is not supposed to be big, quite the contrary, it's supposed to be small, at least at the start. Sure soccer can bring millions of viewers, but how often worthy matches are played? how much do you have to pay for those matches to be broadcasted on the channel? What matters is the bottom line. Factors: - gaming channel casters can work from their homes and often are willing to work for free or a symbolic reward (i guess there will be plenty of those willing to donate their free time to a developing gaming channel), it's content currently is usually streamed online free of charge... so basicly the major costs can be free. So the real costs which really matter are the technical costs. - considering how low on expenses it can survive you dont even need much ads (and why would you bring an example of a 45 minute game anyway? that is 1 hour ingame time, how often did it happen in broadcasted games? so often it makes broadcasting on TV unviable?). - developers support. TV exposes esports to a much large audience. Some kids (or not kids) might see it on TV and decide to buy the game. So a struggling TV channel can try to negotiate a deal of support from developers. With Blizzard it can be at least by the means of getting broadcasting rights for some events run by GOM.
If one expects a gaming channel to be like other big names on TV one will fail. But starting small and building up slowly can work. I remember like 10 years ago a first music channel appeared in Ukaine, it had no ads for a year or more and a lot of people worked basicly for free. Now it's one of the largest channels in the country. One should understand that sooner or later there will be gaming channels in NA, EU, Russia, China and other countries, the one who gets there first will have a huge advantage over possible competitors. This is the main point of getting a channel for gaming: to capture territory for future expansion. But those interested in quick financial success will not do that: too much effort with too much uncertainty.
Pretty sure a million people are watching LIfetime right now and none of the GSL vods will ever get that many views in their lifetime.... which is why SC2 will never be on TV.
Pretty sure this point is obvious, but: professional Starcraft is a form of entertainment. Those who post on this website like to think of it as a "higher" or even superior form of entertainment, but what makes Starcraft unique experiences for us does not necessarily mean it will for the general masses. I think what applies to basically any form of subjective artistic experience such as music applies to Starcraft, when taken in the context of marketing to the general masses. People have different tastes, and while it certainly IS possible, with enough money and mass-marketing, to build up a large audience (after all, there is some truth to the saying that the general public, in any nation, will enjoy/buy/consume anything given enough promotion and hype), why would it be Starcraft instead of anything else non-mainstream, including other forms of games?
I couldn't agree more. I don't even want to see SC2 on TV, mainly because I can't. Ever since I moved out of my parents house 6 years ago I haven't had any sort of television access. I've used torrents to acquire every single TV show I've wanted to watch and I never pay for any of it because I don't have the option to. Its ONLY broadcast on TV.
I own a netflix and hulu plus subscription. I also buy the tickets to GSL, MLG (god knows why), and just recently to NASL. I'm so used to VoD type services now that I actually get frustrated watching regular TV at my friends houses. If SC2 is ever on TV I won't have the option of paying for that content and SC2 is worth my money plus it will make me beholden to someone else's schedule for my SC2 which is just absurd at this point.
Please don't make Starcraft like UFC. UFC takes the athletics boxing and combines it with the hokey fake storyline bullshit of professional wrestling. All the "rivalries" and "bad blood" are manufactured BS by Dana White, just like it is by Vince McMahon. Starcraft doesn't need that.
It will never work on American television, keep it where it is successful.
On April 13 2011 04:19 insaneMicro wrote: Dreamhack Invitational is proving this thread right just now. Seriously, the quality and drama are amazing, can't imagine something like that on televison. It may not exactly be IPTV, but I think it's pretty close to how Starcraft broadcasting shoudl be run in the best of all worlds.
Didn't it show a good format for a TV cast. The games, some interview, some commercials, setup for the next game during it? Having it between each game or not would probably have to depend on game length, since having it every 10 mins would be a tad too often.
While a static commercial was airing the entire time it aired by overlays. They could also use the bottom right that had the commentators as a commercial placement while the game is on.
There you have three variants of commercials, two in-game and one between games.
On April 12 2011 14:04 Pyo wrote: To be completely honest, as a 18-30 year-old American male, to me traditional TV really feels like a dying technology. I hardly ever watch anything on television. Although I pay for basic cable, I never watch it. Everything I do is on or from the internet. I am somewhat curious what the break down of TL.net is in this regard.
When I moved out I didn't get a TV. I can't watch traditional TV.
As for the topic, if it goes on TV I wouldn't watch it. I would still watch the stream, so I would be an example of the category of people that is hard core (compared to a casual, but not to other hard core fans) but wouldn't generate anything for a large scale operation. Also an example of the split fan base since I am from Northern Europe while the discussion is about NA.
Sweden has a different way of using commercials compared to the NA standard. Mostly that is due to the laws effecting/that used to effect that.
Awesome article and I have to agree with you for the main reason of the players themselves. Overall, with a few exceptions, the players are great and the community is great. This leads to there not really being that much overall "human drama", that little thing that really makes shows and events fun to watch on tv. Why do people watch wrestling? It is totally fake with some of the stupidest things I have ever seen on it, but they create characters and conflict and that is what makes it fun to watch for most people. In the SC community I have to see that there is not a ton of overall conflict. There are a few "rivalries" and a few "controversial" players, but not a ton because we support one another and know that this is a hard game. That being said we all know that the top players are top for a reason and even if they go on a losing streak, they are still outstanding players. Also, along with the human drama aspect, not a ton is on the line but some prize winnings and bragging rights. Yeah, sometimes there is more, but overall it is not like football or baseball where the person can sacrifice their own health for the well-being of the team. I know people can do it virtually in the game with risky plays and tactics, but it does not mean much except for in the game. I am not saying this is a bad thing at all, but I am saying that these are all aspects that create the conflicts and story lines that drive us to television.
I agree with your article overall, but I am not totally against the idea of trying it out again. If it can be done well, then it may work. You never know for sure until you try I guess. =)
I've got a question that I very very roughly know the answers to, but just to get more insight: Why does it work in Korea? Not specifically SC2, not even just Starcraft (SC2 and BW), but all kinds of games in eSports on TV in general.
Why can't SC2 on TV be looked at as just a bonus to everything else? Just another way to get people interested in the game? Everything else would still exist. I don't understand why you are hating so much on something that could boost everything about the game.
Having Starcraft 2 on TV would hurt nothing about the current "state" of the game. It would do nothing but help it. More exposure=more people interested/more people on TL/more people watching streams/more people buying the game/more sponsors/more money for players... the list goes on and on and on.
Are you saying if NBC announced all of a sudden that it would dedicate a channel to Starcraft 2 you would scream "NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!"?