|
On October 01 2011 08:51 nath wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 08:49 Kickboxer wrote:On October 01 2011 08:32 Jibba wrote:
Your statements about WoW and CS in general are totally off, though. You should be seeking to learn from past failures, instead of dismissing them because of the game. WoW and CS at their peaks were extremely popular, and sponsor packed. They were "popular" because a billion nerds play them (just like LoL incidentally). The games are impossibly uninteresting, confusing and shitty to watch unless you are a hardcore fan / aspiring pro and even then they are still terrible. As a casual observer you can watch SF4 and you can watch starcraft and that's about it, let's be objective here. CS isn't a spectator sport for the same reasons curling isn't one. It sucks ass. I dare you to show your parents a wow arena match or a game of CS and ask them what they think they are looking at. i think cs is easier to understand. wow, lol, dota, etc...i agree with you. but people shooting each other, counter terrorists and terrorists, bomb, etc seems straightforward.
Conceptually it may be easier to understand, but for someone to have any enjoyment at all, they are going to have to see past the 'T shooting CT who will win?!?!?!'
|
Please dear god make this happen 
|
Wow, I can't believe people even answered no, probably out of spite, Hell yes I would watch.
|
On October 01 2011 08:55 hitpoint wrote:
No. I'd love to see SC2 on TV just because it would be so cool. But honestly it's better online where you have instant access to brackets, forums, etc. Even if it was on TV, I would be watching online regardless.
because it being on tv means there wouldn't be instant access to brackets, forums, etc?
|
I find it hard to watch first-person games, since it gives such a limited perspective on everything going on. For a game to really work in a big way as a spectator event, it seems it needs a spectator mode, or else have everything going on easily discernible from the player view, as is the case in Street Fighter.
|
Its nice I'd watch it! but I doubt my tv provider has ESPN2... still, that'd be great news!
|
DOTA just needed substantially different maps for different strategies to develop to be worth spectating - the same map over and over again leaves nothing for spectators after a few games.
WoW failed to address the ability of the audience to see who is being hurt without trying to compare to rapidly moving health bars - turned into nothing but flashing lights and random deaths if you didnt know what you were watching.
CS was unable to let casual spectators fully understand the maps, so you were watching first person someone shooting in some random location but were never able to understand the significance. I think halo and really most team shooters had this same problem except that halo had a broader audience watching from the casual side that understood more of what they were seeing.
Starcraft imo solves these problems, the map changes so the strategies change, even if the races dont adjust as much as the characters do in wow/lol/dota. Its easy to see which things are dying and which things are killing them, its very beautiful (CS1.6 was not).
I still think starcraft may have trouble on TV however, its impossible to negotiate a good time slot with random game length meaning broadcasts would have to be very long, or feature abridged versions of the games, which i think would kill it.
I'd love to see starcraft get a shot though, even if it crashes and burns.
|
On October 01 2011 09:01 jmbthirteen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 08:55 hitpoint wrote:
No. I'd love to see SC2 on TV just because it would be so cool. But honestly it's better online where you have instant access to brackets, forums, etc. Even if it was on TV, I would be watching online regardless. because it being on tv means there wouldn't be instant access to brackets, forums, etc?
For me yes. I don't have them in the same room and have no means of putting them in the same room. We're answering for ourselves, correct?
|
On October 01 2011 09:05 MannerKiss wrote:
DOTA just needed substantially different maps for different strategies to develop to be worth spectating - the same map over and over again leaves nothing for spectators after a few games.
The same football field layout and basketball court layout leaves nothing for spectators after a few games. Nobody wants to watch those either.
|
On October 01 2011 09:05 MannerKiss wrote:I still think starcraft may have trouble on TV however, its impossible to negotiate a good time slot with random game length meaning broadcasts would have to be very long, or feature abridged versions of the games, which i think would kill it.
I'd love to see starcraft get a shot though, even if it crashes and burns.
10 years of brood war broadcasting in Korea says otherwise. But it might be since they are dedicated game channels compared to 'regular' sport channels.
|
Only if the manner of production was similar to what Starcraft has evolved into at this point.
Right now we are used to watching games no matter the length. How would ESPN2 run a starcraft Bo5 finals match when you don't know if it will be a three game hour long affair or an epic five game four and half hour slug fest? Would there be artificial editing to cut it down for time? Would the games have to be preplayed and then edited to meet programming restrictions? Would ESPN require TV timeouts like they do in other sports to put commercials in at reasonable times?
The question of "would you watch" is too vague without details.
|
On October 01 2011 09:01 jmbthirteen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 08:55 hitpoint wrote:
No. I'd love to see SC2 on TV just because it would be so cool. But honestly it's better online where you have instant access to brackets, forums, etc. Even if it was on TV, I would be watching online regardless. because it being on tv means there wouldn't be instant access to brackets, forums, etc?
It's called a laptop...or checking brackets and stuff on your computer inbetween games.
|
On October 01 2011 09:07 Angra wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 09:05 MannerKiss wrote:
DOTA just needed substantially different maps for different strategies to develop to be worth spectating - the same map over and over again leaves nothing for spectators after a few games.
The same football field layout and basketball court layout leaves nothing for spectators after a few games. Nobody wants to watch those either.
Haha, I was going to say the same thing.
On October 01 2011 08:57 Micket wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 08:51 nath wrote:On October 01 2011 08:49 Kickboxer wrote:On October 01 2011 08:32 Jibba wrote:
Your statements about WoW and CS in general are totally off, though. You should be seeking to learn from past failures, instead of dismissing them because of the game. WoW and CS at their peaks were extremely popular, and sponsor packed. They were "popular" because a billion nerds play them (just like LoL incidentally). The games are impossibly uninteresting, confusing and shitty to watch unless you are a hardcore fan / aspiring pro and even then they are still terrible. As a casual observer you can watch SF4 and you can watch starcraft and that's about it, let's be objective here. CS isn't a spectator sport for the same reasons curling isn't one. It sucks ass. I dare you to show your parents a wow arena match or a game of CS and ask them what they think they are looking at. i think cs is easier to understand. wow, lol, dota, etc...i agree with you. but people shooting each other, counter terrorists and terrorists, bomb, etc seems straightforward. Conceptually it may be easier to understand, but for someone to have any enjoyment at all, they are going to have to see past the 'T shooting CT who will win?!?!?!'
That's a given, just like to enjoy any sport, you have to see past 'Put the ball in the net, who will win?!?!?!?;
|
I love esports but i dont want it to be that mainstream. Its just that i like it when i can watch every game i want for example. I mean i dont want to become it big like football etc. so i miss a tournament cause i watch anotherone. This would happen if it becomes big on TV totally.
|
On October 01 2011 09:10 Boraz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 09:01 jmbthirteen wrote:On October 01 2011 08:55 hitpoint wrote:
No. I'd love to see SC2 on TV just because it would be so cool. But honestly it's better online where you have instant access to brackets, forums, etc. Even if it was on TV, I would be watching online regardless. because it being on tv means there wouldn't be instant access to brackets, forums, etc? It's called a laptop...or checking brackets and stuff on your computer inbetween games.
If it was on TV, I'm sure that they'd regularly be showing the brackets in-between games, when it wasn't showing ads. The format of the show will change somewhat, because it's using a different medium, and they can't assume access to the Internet.
|
|
|
On October 01 2011 09:05 MannerKiss wrote:
DOTA just needed substantially different maps for different strategies to develop to be worth spectating - the same map over and over again leaves nothing for spectators after a few games.
WoW failed to address the ability of the audience to see who is being hurt without trying to compare to rapidly moving health bars - turned into nothing but flashing lights and random deaths if you didnt know what you were watching.
CS was unable to let casual spectators fully understand the maps, so you were watching first person someone shooting in some random location but were never able to understand the significance. I think halo and really most team shooters had this same problem except that halo had a broader audience watching from the casual side that understood more of what they were seeing.
Starcraft imo solves these problems, the map changes so the strategies change, even if the races dont adjust as much as the characters do in wow/lol/dota. Its easy to see which things are dying and which things are killing them, its very beautiful (CS1.6 was not).
I still think starcraft may have trouble on TV however, its impossible to negotiate a good time slot with random game length meaning broadcasts would have to be very long, or feature abridged versions of the games, which i think would kill it.
I'd love to see starcraft get a shot though, even if it crashes and burns.
Soccer is a sport with very little downtime, and they make it work.
|
|
|
On October 01 2011 09:11 LayZRR wrote:
I love esports but i dont want it to be that mainstream. Its just that i like it when i can watch every game i want for example. I mean i dont want to become it big like football etc. so i miss a tournament cause i watch anotherone. This would happen if it becomes big on TV totally.
This made me rage pretty hard.
|
On October 01 2011 08:27 tree.hugger wrote:
I have spent several minutes reading the concerns of people in this thread, and I'm left with the impression that few people on TeamLiquid have ever watched sports on TV. I can't find a single convincing reason why this would be a bad thing or work poorly or something.
Indeed... People worried about variable game length, this is an issue with many sports, baseball in particular comes to mind. But the length of events can be guessed well enough that it usually works out, and TV stations have plenty of reruns to fill extra time with and don't mind overrunning on events either.
One interesting issue though is ad time. Someone said 8 out of every 30 minutes is ads, what do you think the best way to incorporate that into an SC broadcast would be? Other sports have timeouts where ads are shown. How funny would it be to have a "halftime" pause during an SC2 game? I don't think anyone would ever agree to it but it would be interesting
I suppose sports like soccer have long stretches of play right? Perhaps endorsements and on-field ads make up for that? It could be the same for SC2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
