Do what the GSL did after their season one (remember it had a ton of hiccups). Give all people who previously had a pass a discount on the season two pass for putting up with what happened with season one. If it's gonna be $25 per pass for season 2, make it $15 or $20 for all people who paid for Season one. Put a positive spin on it, not that you fucked up (I think people are being overly critical anyways), but rather that you want to reward returning customers and that you're glad they were understanding of hiccups, etc.
Note: I did not purchase a season 1 pass so it's not like I'm just trying to get a discount myself. I think people are honestly being incredibly over critical of you guys though. I had no problem with the interviewers, I thought Sporrer was fucking hilarious and some nice eye candy, and just took it to be something amusing. It's not like you guys didn't address the time issue, so I'm sure it'll be fixed in the future.
On July 12 2011 15:42 Excalibur_Z wrote: That, to me, was NASL Season 1. It was like you had a grandiose idea for an awesome league, but the transition between the brainstorming phase and actual planning and delegation hit like a brick wall. Get a paid, qualified staff with experience in the field of editing and post-production. Get experienced department leaders who can manage their teams effectively, report issues to you upfront and provide their suggestions for improvement. Run it like the business it should be -- and needs to be in order to succeed. Volunteers and hopeful dreamers are no substitute for proven, experienced, career-minded professionals. Listen to their feedback and take it to heart.
You can dismiss this post as "hate" all you like, and you can shirk the blame all you like. You, Gretorp, and Inc are the faces of NASL whether you expected to be or not, and you guys are the ones who will be held collectively responsible for the positive or negative results of your league. All I know is that if my name is attached to something, I want to be its harshest critic and demand perfection at every turn.
The good news is that by changing things up, Season 2 can be a lot better. You've already received some constructive criticism in this thread and others, don't just ignore it because you think people are being hateful.
What's funny is i have 5 years production experience in broadcasting and even sent NASL my resume yet they ignored it and then put on that attrocity of a broadcast.
It speaks to how much they want their product to succeed. They received an email (if not multiple ones) from experienced staff and chose what seemed like some stoner kids from the backlot of a Pizza Hut.
Nepotism in action, baby!
You think Anna and the blond girl got the interview job because they're great interviewers?
Rachel is pretty well known in the community and CSN has provided so much great content from Korea, and Anna is the current Miss Oregon. There's no doubting their interview skills.
See, this is stupid. The fact that you're still making posts like this tells me you've completely missed the point. Yes, they've done stuff before. Doing CSN content is meaningful experience. I really don't know how being Miss Oregon is particularly relevant, but Anna has done some interviews before and so forth. I didn't have a problem with them (though Lindsey or whatever was pretty special), but the definition of a good performance is one that the audience likes. If you have a lot of your audience saying they didn't like their interviews, then saying "there's no doubting their interview skills" is just factually wrong. You can make an informed judgement that with time most people will like the interviews, or that they do now and these people are a minority, but you can't just post saying that they're just factually wrong and how dare they question you. It frankly doesn't matter at all what you think of their interviews or what other experience they have that you think is relevant. What matters is what the audience thinks. The audience opinion can't actually be wrong, and these posters are just expressing their opinion as part of the audience. The only reason things like "they've done interviews" before matter is because it's a sign that the audience is likely to actually like them.
Anna has over 2 years of experience interviewing Starcraft players (the first time I remember her was at WCG USA 2009 interviewing people). Rachel has done a LOT of interviewing through her time in Korea. I was responding to the fact that people think it's just nepotism, but it isn't. We brought them to the event to do interviews because they've done a lot of it before.
I've read that a lot of people would rather have someone like Artosis or Day9 doing interviews rather than Anna/Rachel. This point is being taken into consideration for future events. Again, I was responding to people simply saying "they're only here because of nepotism," they were there because of their experience.
Then say that Anna has 2 years of experience interviewing Starcraft players instead of saying that she is Miss Oregon. I don't really see how that was relevant at all, and it was pretty obvious it would generate a bad response from a lot of people. This is one of those "PR problems" everyone talks about, it doesn't even matter if it was the right choice or not, the way you explained it basically asks for bashing. And you still avoided talking about Lindsay, and you wonder why people say you avoid answering some questions.
This isn't even about wether you are right or wrong, I just don't understand the way you talk to people.
haha <3 I was thinking the same thing, why not just said she has 2 years of experience than Miss Oregon. Completely irrelevant.
On July 13 2011 04:07 Xeris wrote: Yes, we're going to re-visit the Open Bracket winner seed. We're also going to introduce some element of group selection for Season 2, so stay tuned!
Lol its funny how people will act on the internet. They feel like they have a little bit of power and of course they're anonymous so they'll say whatever they want. So we get things like "sorry pal this is bullshit"...."someone needs to take PR lessons"..."stoner kids from the backlot of a Pizza Hut"..."generall lack of management"... and a lot of sarcasm. Obviously this isn't how you guys communicate in real life. And there's a reason that's the case - because it's not effective communication. You don't get people to change by insulting them and being completely unconstructive. The only possible purpose of your post is to verbally tear NASL down. The LR threads on the first and second days were absolutely chock full of this.
Thankfully I think the majority of people in this thread are being reasonable and constructive. It's a shame the bad apples won't go away.
On July 12 2011 15:42 Excalibur_Z wrote: That, to me, was NASL Season 1. It was like you had a grandiose idea for an awesome league, but the transition between the brainstorming phase and actual planning and delegation hit like a brick wall. Get a paid, qualified staff with experience in the field of editing and post-production. Get experienced department leaders who can manage their teams effectively, report issues to you upfront and provide their suggestions for improvement. Run it like the business it should be -- and needs to be in order to succeed. Volunteers and hopeful dreamers are no substitute for proven, experienced, career-minded professionals. Listen to their feedback and take it to heart.
You can dismiss this post as "hate" all you like, and you can shirk the blame all you like. You, Gretorp, and Inc are the faces of NASL whether you expected to be or not, and you guys are the ones who will be held collectively responsible for the positive or negative results of your league. All I know is that if my name is attached to something, I want to be its harshest critic and demand perfection at every turn.
The good news is that by changing things up, Season 2 can be a lot better. You've already received some constructive criticism in this thread and others, don't just ignore it because you think people are being hateful.
What's funny is i have 5 years production experience in broadcasting and even sent NASL my resume yet they ignored it and then put on that attrocity of a broadcast.
It speaks to how much they want their product to succeed. They received an email (if not multiple ones) from experienced staff and chose what seemed like some stoner kids from the backlot of a Pizza Hut.
Nepotism in action, baby!
You think Anna and the blond girl got the interview job because they're great interviewers?
Rachel is pretty well known in the community and CSN has provided so much great content from Korea, and Anna is the current Miss Oregon. There's no doubting their interview skills.
See, this is stupid. The fact that you're still making posts like this tells me you've completely missed the point. Yes, they've done stuff before. Doing CSN content is meaningful experience. I really don't know how being Miss Oregon is particularly relevant, but Anna has done some interviews before and so forth. I didn't have a problem with them (though Lindsey or whatever was pretty special), but the definition of a good performance is one that the audience likes. If you have a lot of your audience saying they didn't like their interviews, then saying "there's no doubting their interview skills" is just factually wrong. You can make an informed judgement that with time most people will like the interviews, or that they do now and these people are a minority, but you can't just post saying that they're just factually wrong and how dare they question you. It frankly doesn't matter at all what you think of their interviews or what other experience they have that you think is relevant. What matters is what the audience thinks. The audience opinion can't actually be wrong, and these posters are just expressing their opinion as part of the audience. The only reason things like "they've done interviews" before matter is because it's a sign that the audience is likely to actually like them.
Anna has over 2 years of experience interviewing Starcraft players (the first time I remember her was at WCG USA 2009 interviewing people). Rachel has done a LOT of interviewing through her time in Korea. I was responding to the fact that people think it's just nepotism, but it isn't. We brought them to the event to do interviews because they've done a lot of it before.
I've read that a lot of people would rather have someone like Artosis or Day9 doing interviews rather than Anna/Rachel. This point is being taken into consideration for future events. Again, I was responding to people simply saying "they're only here because of nepotism," they were there because of their experience.
Then say that Anna has 2 years of experience interviewing Starcraft players instead of saying that she is Miss Oregon. I don't really see how that was relevant at all, and it was pretty obvious it would generate a bad response from a lot of people. This is one of those "PR problems" everyone talks about, it doesn't even matter if it was the right choice or not, the way you explained it basically asks for bashing. And you still avoided talking about Lindsay, and you wonder why people say you avoid answering some questions.
This isn't even about wether you are right or wrong, I just don't understand the way you talk to people.
haha <3 I was thinking the same thing, why not just said she has 2 years of experience than Miss Oregon. Completely irrelevant.
It's not irrevelant, as beauty pageant contestants you are trained to handle interviews well, literally you get classes/lessons on how to go through and conduct interviews for any serious beauty pageant contestants.
Again people are just reaching for anything to grab at, it's kind of sad.
I thought the interviewers were fine (I've seen interviews by both Rachel and Anna that I've liked). I'd say the problems would be an awkward position and setup for the interview (too noisy, felt too in the mix of things) and awkward translations (the translator was great, but handing off the mic constantly and the waiting was pretty awkward) made the thing feel a bit weird. If possible it'd be nice if the translator at the very least had a clip-on mic, even better if it was the interviewer and the translator so you could just hold the mic up for the player at all times. Or delay the interview a bit and get all 3 micced up with clip-on mics. Anything to make the interview go smoother.
I enjoyed the season overall, but what I want to see is just more consistency. Less issues with the mics, better sound levels, a more stable camera angle that's properly centered and zoomed in on the casters, games all in the right order, all that stuff.
The format was enjoyable, the games great, and graphical effects and what not were good. It's just the consistency of the other stuff that detracted from the otherwise good league. You may feel you're being judged harshly on any little slip-ups, but mostly it's because you've made mistakes in the past that people judge harshly and making further mistakes is just going to cause people to think you haven't changed.
On July 12 2011 15:42 Excalibur_Z wrote: That, to me, was NASL Season 1. It was like you had a grandiose idea for an awesome league, but the transition between the brainstorming phase and actual planning and delegation hit like a brick wall. Get a paid, qualified staff with experience in the field of editing and post-production. Get experienced department leaders who can manage their teams effectively, report issues to you upfront and provide their suggestions for improvement. Run it like the business it should be -- and needs to be in order to succeed. Volunteers and hopeful dreamers are no substitute for proven, experienced, career-minded professionals. Listen to their feedback and take it to heart.
You can dismiss this post as "hate" all you like, and you can shirk the blame all you like. You, Gretorp, and Inc are the faces of NASL whether you expected to be or not, and you guys are the ones who will be held collectively responsible for the positive or negative results of your league. All I know is that if my name is attached to something, I want to be its harshest critic and demand perfection at every turn.
The good news is that by changing things up, Season 2 can be a lot better. You've already received some constructive criticism in this thread and others, don't just ignore it because you think people are being hateful.
What's funny is i have 5 years production experience in broadcasting and even sent NASL my resume yet they ignored it and then put on that attrocity of a broadcast.
It speaks to how much they want their product to succeed. They received an email (if not multiple ones) from experienced staff and chose what seemed like some stoner kids from the backlot of a Pizza Hut.
Nepotism in action, baby!
You think Anna and the blond girl got the interview job because they're great interviewers?
Rachel is pretty well known in the community and CSN has provided so much great content from Korea, and Anna is the current Miss Oregon. There's no doubting their interview skills.
See, this is stupid. The fact that you're still making posts like this tells me you've completely missed the point. Yes, they've done stuff before. Doing CSN content is meaningful experience. I really don't know how being Miss Oregon is particularly relevant, but Anna has done some interviews before and so forth. I didn't have a problem with them (though Lindsey or whatever was pretty special), but the definition of a good performance is one that the audience likes. If you have a lot of your audience saying they didn't like their interviews, then saying "there's no doubting their interview skills" is just factually wrong. You can make an informed judgement that with time most people will like the interviews, or that they do now and these people are a minority, but you can't just post saying that they're just factually wrong and how dare they question you. It frankly doesn't matter at all what you think of their interviews or what other experience they have that you think is relevant. What matters is what the audience thinks. The audience opinion can't actually be wrong, and these posters are just expressing their opinion as part of the audience. The only reason things like "they've done interviews" before matter is because it's a sign that the audience is likely to actually like them.
Anna has over 2 years of experience interviewing Starcraft players (the first time I remember her was at WCG USA 2009 interviewing people). Rachel has done a LOT of interviewing through her time in Korea. I was responding to the fact that people think it's just nepotism, but it isn't. We brought them to the event to do interviews because they've done a lot of it before.
I've read that a lot of people would rather have someone like Artosis or Day9 doing interviews rather than Anna/Rachel. This point is being taken into consideration for future events. Again, I was responding to people simply saying "they're only here because of nepotism," they were there because of their experience.
Then say that Anna has 2 years of experience interviewing Starcraft players instead of saying that she is Miss Oregon. I don't really see how that was relevant at all, and it was pretty obvious it would generate a bad response from a lot of people. This is one of those "PR problems" everyone talks about, it doesn't even matter if it was the right choice or not, the way you explained it basically asks for bashing. And you still avoided talking about Lindsay, and you wonder why people say you avoid answering some questions.
This isn't even about wether you are right or wrong, I just don't understand the way you talk to people.
haha <3 I was thinking the same thing, why not just said she has 2 years of experience than Miss Oregon. Completely irrelevant.
Yes, I should have said that first. Please to forgive. <3
On July 13 2011 04:08 FlyingDJ wrote: I am kind of astonished by the thinly veiled arrogance that some of what I perceive as NASL's representatives write here exhibits. In all the years I have worked in esports, I have never come across someone who screwed up like this on an event and then had the nerve to give his paying customers sh** about it on top of it. I can only hope someone is wise enough to stop you from typing at some point, because writing nothing is better than what you're writing at the moment.
Anyone who starts a sentence with "in all the years I have worked in esports" is clearly incapable of understanding the scene and what people do for it.
Pretty much everything has been discussed by this point.
I'm in the group that thinks there should be a double elim/group play since you have so much time anyways. If not bo5 at the very least with much better seeding system.
Also, you have 3 of the top people in the foreign esports scene (day9 tastosis)... use them. And no I don't just mean casting. If you need to fill time have them do stuff. Have them play eachother, or go over a game or do something with the crowd. Don't just have them walk out to announce the players and disappear back into the shadows.
On July 13 2011 04:15 QTIP. wrote: I didn't consider season 1 a polished enough product to purchase the ticket, but season 2 may change that. These changes look good. GL
I think one of your challenges is that NASL is a combination of 2 things--a live event and a broadcast. I think you need to decide which you are primarily. If the live event is a money-maker, then just remind fans that you are event-driven, and if they want the full experience they need to attend the event. But if the money is in the subscriptions, then the live event needs to be secondary.
I wasn't at the live event, so I can't speak of how to improve it. But I can speak on the broadcast. The most important things are: (1) the best players in the world, (2) great commentators, (3) great streaming with quality options and no lag, (4) a good user interface on the web site with helpful information about when matches will start.
In my opinion, you nailed (1) and (2), but (3) and (4) need significant improvement. If the live event is hampering the broadcast, compromise the live event to ensure that the broadcast is top-notch. Viewers need to know when matches start and they need to have a decent quality broadcast with no lag. If Justin.tv can't provide this, find someone who can. If the live event format can't coexist with a satisfying broadcast, change the live event. (That is assuming the live event isn't a huge money-maker.)
Whatever changes you make, do not compromise (1) and (2). Like I said, you nailed these, and they are what will keep viewers coming back. For instance, if spreading the prize money out will make live-event attendees like White-Ra happier, but will make top players less likely to sign up in the first place, don't do it. Of course White-Ra wants more money for Ro16 finishes--that's where he finished. Would he still have signed up if the first place prize was only $25,000?
On that note, in Puma's interview after the Squirtle match, Anna asked him if it was more important to him to win the money or beat the best players, and he said "I just want more people to know who I am." I think money and fame are the biggest draws for top players. So, make a BIG deal about Puma. Do what you can to make him famous. Produce a high-end video of his highlights with crowds cheering, and end with him holding the check for $50,000 surrounded by booth babes. Put it on YouTube and wherever else your target market spends time. I would make it your goal to make sure EVERYONE who plays Starcraft knows who he is. That is what will keep the big names coming back and ensure the quality of NASL.
On July 12 2011 15:42 Excalibur_Z wrote: That, to me, was NASL Season 1. It was like you had a grandiose idea for an awesome league, but the transition between the brainstorming phase and actual planning and delegation hit like a brick wall. Get a paid, qualified staff with experience in the field of editing and post-production. Get experienced department leaders who can manage their teams effectively, report issues to you upfront and provide their suggestions for improvement. Run it like the business it should be -- and needs to be in order to succeed. Volunteers and hopeful dreamers are no substitute for proven, experienced, career-minded professionals. Listen to their feedback and take it to heart.
You can dismiss this post as "hate" all you like, and you can shirk the blame all you like. You, Gretorp, and Inc are the faces of NASL whether you expected to be or not, and you guys are the ones who will be held collectively responsible for the positive or negative results of your league. All I know is that if my name is attached to something, I want to be its harshest critic and demand perfection at every turn.
The good news is that by changing things up, Season 2 can be a lot better. You've already received some constructive criticism in this thread and others, don't just ignore it because you think people are being hateful.
What's funny is i have 5 years production experience in broadcasting and even sent NASL my resume yet they ignored it and then put on that attrocity of a broadcast.
It speaks to how much they want their product to succeed. They received an email (if not multiple ones) from experienced staff and chose what seemed like some stoner kids from the backlot of a Pizza Hut.
Nepotism in action, baby!
You think Anna and the blond girl got the interview job because they're great interviewers?
Rachel is pretty well known in the community and CSN has provided so much great content from Korea, and Anna is the current Miss Oregon. There's no doubting their interview skills.
See, this is stupid. The fact that you're still making posts like this tells me you've completely missed the point. Yes, they've done stuff before. Doing CSN content is meaningful experience. I really don't know how being Miss Oregon is particularly relevant, but Anna has done some interviews before and so forth. I didn't have a problem with them (though Lindsey or whatever was pretty special), but the definition of a good performance is one that the audience likes. If you have a lot of your audience saying they didn't like their interviews, then saying "there's no doubting their interview skills" is just factually wrong. You can make an informed judgement that with time most people will like the interviews, or that they do now and these people are a minority, but you can't just post saying that they're just factually wrong and how dare they question you. It frankly doesn't matter at all what you think of their interviews or what other experience they have that you think is relevant. What matters is what the audience thinks. The audience opinion can't actually be wrong, and these posters are just expressing their opinion as part of the audience. The only reason things like "they've done interviews" before matter is because it's a sign that the audience is likely to actually like them.
Anna has over 2 years of experience interviewing Starcraft players (the first time I remember her was at WCG USA 2009 interviewing people). Rachel has done a LOT of interviewing through her time in Korea. I was responding to the fact that people think it's just nepotism, but it isn't. We brought them to the event to do interviews because they've done a lot of it before.
I've read that a lot of people would rather have someone like Artosis or Day9 doing interviews rather than Anna/Rachel. This point is being taken into consideration for future events. Again, I was responding to people simply saying "they're only here because of nepotism," they were there because of their experience.
Then say that Anna has 2 years of experience interviewing Starcraft players instead of saying that she is Miss Oregon. I don't really see how that was relevant at all, and it was pretty obvious it would generate a bad response from a lot of people. This is one of those "PR problems" everyone talks about, it doesn't even matter if it was the right choice or not, the way you explained it basically asks for bashing. And you still avoided talking about Lindsay, and you wonder why people say you avoid answering some questions.
This isn't even about wether you are right or wrong, I just don't understand the way you talk to people.
lol @ how unreasonable this is. You say that Xeris's simple statement that Anna was Miss Oregon and therefore has interview experience (which is 100% correct, btw) is a "PR problem" and "basically asks for bashing." WTF???? It's a harmless, non-confrontational post on an internet forum. You're completely taking him to task on something that is actually insignificant.
On July 13 2011 03:21 bbulzibar wrote: I've read every post in the entire thread, and I too few people supported Xeris's decision to have incontrol and gretorp cast the finals. I absolutely think this was the right move. I would be horrified if I casted the entire regular season, only to be dumped for the finals by people who flew in for a weekend. It doesn't matter if tastosis would have done a better job, you can't treat your people like disposable diapers. Kudos on making the right choice, and treating your casters well!!!
Yep, you got it, that is exactly our position and was our reasoning. Well done sir
On July 13 2011 04:13 Doodsmack wrote: Lol its funny how people will act on the internet. They feel like they have a little bit of power and of course they're anonymous so they'll say whatever they want. So we get things like "sorry pal this is bullshit"...."someone needs to take PR lessons"..."stoner kids from the backlot of a Pizza Hut"..."generall lack of management"... and a lot of sarcasm. Obviously this isn't how you guys communicate in real life. And there's a reason that's the case - because it's not effective communication. You don't get people to change by insulting them and being completely unconstructive. The only possible purpose of your post is to verbally tear NASL down. The LR threads on the first and second days were absolutely chock full of this.
Thankfully I think the majority of people in this thread are being reasonable and constructive. It's a shame the bad apples won't go away.
I posted the "sorry pal this is bullshit" post, and I was responding to something which is bullshit.
But anyhow, instead of reducing my post to the opening one-liner, why not comment on the following paragraphs which explained why the quoted post was bullshit?
On July 13 2011 03:21 bbulzibar wrote: I've read every post in the entire thread, and I too few people supported Xeris's decision to have incontrol and gretorp cast the finals. I absolutely think this was the right move. I would be horrified if I casted the entire regular season, only to be dumped for the finals by people who flew in for a weekend. It doesn't matter if tastosis would have done a better job, you can't treat your people like disposable diapers. Kudos on making the right choice, and treating your casters well!!!
Yep, you got it, that is exactly our position and was our reasoning. Well done sir
Sorry for the jab, but can you look Ret in the eyes and say the same?
EPT
