| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
genius_man16
United States749 Posts
via MLG Sundance Twitter and Reddit nation. StarCraft on ESPN2... Would you tune in? I am sitting with a TV exec who wants to know. You've got an hour. Um, hell yes is my answer! Edit: Added poll. Poll: Starcraft on ESPN? Yes (5922) No (328) 6250 total votes Your vote: Starcraft on ESPN? | ||
|
See.Blue
United States2673 Posts
| ||
|
ptrpb
Canada753 Posts
| ||
|
Ecliptium
Canada147 Posts
| ||
|
ampson
United States2355 Posts
That is all. Maybe my dad would even watch, it's ESPN... | ||
|
Attican
Denmark531 Posts
| ||
|
The Stapler
United States326 Posts
TV exec: so what you're trying to say is you think your audience would watch this stuff on one of our Channels? like ESPN 2 for example? Sundance: hmmm....hang on let me tweet them | ||
|
SilentShout
686 Posts
| ||
|
Roxy
Canada753 Posts
I dont have cable.. dont watch tv.. just starcraft | ||
|
ProTech_MediC
United States498 Posts
Upvote it on reddit, too. | ||
|
Kieofire
United States1809 Posts
| ||
|
Wesso
Netherlands1245 Posts
On October 01 2011 06:45 The Stapler wrote: i'd prefer it on 'The Ocho' but i guess i could watch it on ESPN 2 "The Ocho" is awesome, nothing better than watching some ADAA.  I'd probably watch with my friends, but not alone because livestream seems better for that. | ||
|
Joey Wheeler
Korea (North)276 Posts
| ||
|
sLBraemar
Canada285 Posts
| ||
|
Donnie_Par
Canada72 Posts
| ||
Adebisi
Canada1637 Posts
I do feel like maybe broadcasting only the Championship Sunday LB finals and Grand Finals would work. The challenge is getting the dedicated online fan base to actually tune in on TV, and at least only broadcasting that you aren't giving up watching 3 other possible streams. | ||
|
Shaetan
United States1175 Posts
On October 01 2011 06:48 Joey Wheeler wrote: TV will build up the casual base so the scene won't end up imploding because no one watches NASL woah they give you internet in NoKo?! :-p | ||
|
R0YAL
United States1768 Posts
| ||
|
Schickysc
Canada380 Posts
| ||
|
VENDIZ
1575 Posts
| ||
|
MrMotionPicture
United States4327 Posts
I would try my best to watch it all of the time | ||
|
SirRobin
United States269 Posts
| ||
|
coreydota
United States180 Posts
| ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
| ||
|
Keeler
United States313 Posts
| ||
|
FacelessVoid
United States408 Posts
| ||
|
Aegeis
United States1619 Posts
| ||
|
ProTech_MediC
United States498 Posts
| ||
|
ElPeque.fogata
Uruguay462 Posts
| ||
|
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
| ||
|
EnderCraft
United States1746 Posts
Let's not forget, once Broodwar got on TV the rest was history. Edit: We only have one hour. If you've never cared for twitter. Care now. | ||
|
Pe[N]guiN
Canada48 Posts
| ||
|
s.a.y
Croatia3840 Posts
I support it totally. | ||
|
mtn
729 Posts
GOGOGO <3 | ||
|
Thrill
2599 Posts
| ||
|
Le BucheRON
Canada619 Posts
| ||
|
Soulish
Canada1403 Posts
| ||
|
Barbiero
Brazil5259 Posts
I only hope my TV cable can get ESPN2 from the US as well! | ||
|
Aubreebree
United States31 Posts
Great idea for sure. I would watch on multiple TV's. | ||
|
Frastic
United States96 Posts
| ||
|
2plusthree
Russian Federation43 Posts
| ||
|
AnonymousSC
United States24 Posts
Do it!!! | ||
|
shifty
United States280 Posts
| ||
|
nath
United States1788 Posts
 ( | ||
|
Trickstaloki
United States164 Posts
| ||
|
IPA
United States3206 Posts
| ||
|
Modernist
United States89 Posts
| ||
|
Diius
United States24 Posts
| ||
|
AxelTVx
Canada916 Posts
| ||
|
askTeivospy
1525 Posts
I'll retweet though because y noT | ||
|
sopas
509 Posts
| ||
|
Killing
Canada530 Posts
| ||
|
FoeHamr
United States489 Posts
| ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
| ||
|
crackcc
114 Posts
Yes yes yes for me ! And if for some reason I wouldn't have said channel to watch it I would find a way to watch that TV channel online. This is one of the reasons I LOVE IPL ! They are on every day, even if its re runs, but they are on all the time so whenever you have a minute you can watch quality games cast by quality casters. Kinda like TV ! | ||
|
EnderCraft
United States1746 Posts
On October 01 2011 06:58 crackcc wrote: Quick we need more votes ! Yes yes yes for me ! And if for some reason I wouldn't have said channel to watch it I would find a way to watch that TV channel online. This is one of the reasons I LOVE IPL ! They are on every day, even if its re runs, but they are on all the time so whenever you have a minute you can watch quality games cast by quality casters. Kinda like TV ! Not more votes. More retweets. | ||
|
carloselcoco
United States2302 Posts
YEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYEYE! | ||
|
1st_Panzer_Div.
United States621 Posts
| ||
|
stormchaser
Canada1009 Posts
| ||
|
Boraz
United States361 Posts
| ||
|
Conquerer67
United States605 Posts
I get that some of you don't have ESPN, but it still is kinda big for MLG to be on network TV for American e-sports, so you kinda should vote yes no matter what, in my opinion. | ||
|
atmuh
United States246 Posts
im not saying im against is it could be really good or it could be bad as well | ||
|
jonathan1
United States395 Posts
| ||
|
WarSame
Canada1950 Posts
| ||
|
stormchaser
Canada1009 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:02 jonathan1 wrote: i would never watch it on TV instead of the computer so i voted no voting no would imply you wouldn't want others to watch it that do have cable. Lame. | ||
|
Boraz
United States361 Posts
| ||
|
McFeser
United States2458 Posts
| ||
|
EnderCraft
United States1746 Posts
Flash | ||
|
Novalisk
Israel1818 Posts
But hey, with the TL calendar it could work. | ||
|
ReturnStroke
United States801 Posts
| ||
|
Madera
Sweden2672 Posts
| ||
|
c0ldfusion
United States8293 Posts
I dream of the day make it happen Sundance!! | ||
|
chrisgreg
Canada61 Posts
| ||
|
Sandro
897 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:05 EnderCraft wrote: ESPORTS will only get the money and sponsorship deals it really needs once this goes mainstream guys. If you don't want MLG to have a dinky 100,000 dollar prize pool next season (yes and I said dinky 100,000) retweet sundance. SC2 needs 1 million dollar prize pools... Oh and guess what? You know what million dollar prize pools will bring to SC2? Better yet "who"? Flash Nah he can stay in SCBW, his dominance would kill SC2 for good lol | ||
|
zaii
Guam2611 Posts
| ||
|
BamBam
745 Posts
| ||
|
GhostFall
United States830 Posts
| ||
|
SynapseSC
United States86 Posts
Only if there was a way to present the full and proper experience that we get on streams right now with uninterrupted games. I'm not sure how practical that is given the immense amount that the length of Starcraft games can vary and the need for somewhat regular commercials on broadcast television, but I don't see a reason to watch it on TV over a stream if there are going to be commercials at the 10:00 mark or something like that as an example. If those issues were resolved though, sure why not? It'd be a great avenue to expand the game's popularity. | ||
|
blobrus
4297 Posts
| ||
|
zaii
Guam2611 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:00 Conquerer67 wrote: Who the fuck voted no? I get that some of you don't have ESPN, but it still is kinda big for MLG to be on network TV for American e-sports, so you kinda should vote yes no matter what, in my opinion. MLG used to be on TV before, USA network and G4. | ||
|
Clank
United States548 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:00 Conquerer67 wrote: Who the fuck voted no? I get that some of you don't have ESPN, but it still is kinda big for MLG to be on network TV for American e-sports, so you kinda should vote yes no matter what, in my opinion. exactly, if the question was would you watch, id understand some no's, but who wouldn't want SC2 on a major cable network? You wouldn't be forced to watch it, yet I'd be a great gateway for new fans and sponsors | ||
|
-MoOsE-
United States236 Posts
| ||
|
Draconicfire
Canada2562 Posts
On October 01 2011 06:43 ptrpb wrote: I don't get that channel but I'd tune in if I did! This. Holy shit this would be so sick if this happened. Might have to get ESPN2! | ||
|
SiguR
Canada2039 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:00 Conquerer67 wrote: Who the fuck voted no? I get that some of you don't have ESPN, but it still is kinda big for MLG to be on network TV for American e-sports, so you kinda should vote yes no matter what, in my opinion. I haven't voted, but if i were to vote and vote honestly, I would vote no. I prefer being able to switch through streams and check brackets and comments on my computer. The poll asks if you'd tune in, not if you think it' be cool. I don't have ESPN 2. So even if I wanted to, no I wouldn't be tuning in. | ||
|
Valikyr
Sweden2653 Posts
| ||
|
Telcontar
United Kingdom16710 Posts
| ||
|
mucker
United States1120 Posts
| ||
|
Kafkaesk
Germany140 Posts
MLG will take an entire weekend, you need the community contact, instantly updated live reports, working on the spot to make everything smooth and entertaining. TV just doesn't work this way, and it's a good thing. | ||
|
SynapseSC
United States86 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:12 Clank wrote: exactly, if the question was would you watch, id understand some no's, but who wouldn't want SC2 on a major cable network? You wouldn't be forced to watch it, yet I'd be a great gateway for new fans and sponsors Actually, the question is in fact whether you would watch. "would you tune in?" | ||
|
-MoOsE-
United States236 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:14 Kafkaesk wrote: TV is an totally outdated medium. Esport doesn't work in such a static way like regular TV shows do. MLG will take an entire weekend, you need the community contact, instantly updated live reports, working on the spot to make everything smooth and entertaining. TV just doesn't work this way, and it's a good thing. I have a feeling it would only be the finals or something like that | ||
|
arfyron
518 Posts
| ||
|
tainted muffin
United States158 Posts
| ||
|
ckunkel1
United States181 Posts
| ||
|
EnderCraft
United States1746 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:12 SiguR wrote: I haven't voted, but if i were to vote and vote honestly, I would vote no. I prefer being able to switch through streams and check brackets and comments on my computer. I'm not really a TV person. But wouldn't you prefer more production value and money being brought into ESPORTS? Don't you want SC2 to have an armada of sponsorship's that allow for multi million dollar prize pools? This is our chance to finally make this happen. What if everyone in Korea said no to OGN : / Think where broodwar would be today without OGN... | ||
|
KiLL_ORdeR
United States1518 Posts
I watch TV, don't even have cable, and I know a lot of SC2 fans in the same situation. | ||
|
atmuh
United States246 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:14 Kafkaesk wrote: TV is an totally outdated medium. Esport doesn't work in such a static way like regular TV shows do. MLG will take an entire weekend, you need the community contact, instantly updated live reports, working on the spot to make everything smooth and entertaining. TV just doesn't work this way, and it's a good thing. have you ever watched golf before | ||
|
Let it Raine
Canada1245 Posts
i'll watch if it's worth watching. you can make this amazing or you can show rebroadcasts of events from last year like what was done on the USA network for halo 2. it's up to you guys @ espn, there's no guarantee everyone will watch more than a couple times unless the show youre putting on is quality and useful. If it is, I'd imagine you getting a ton of viewers. | ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
| ||
|
LoraX
69 Posts
| ||
|
Antimatterz
United States1010 Posts
But seriously, how can you vote no? You can now watch IdrA vs. Drewbie on your 60 inch w/o needing some crazy shit done. | ||
|
Boraz
United States361 Posts
| ||
|
Mephiztopheles1
1124 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:12 SiguR wrote: I haven't voted, but if i were to vote and vote honestly, I would vote no. I prefer being able to switch through streams and check brackets and comments on my computer. The poll asks if you'd tune in, not if you think it' be cool. I don't have ESPN 2. So even if I wanted to, no I wouldn't be tuning in. Hipster nerd. Ofc yes!!! | ||
|
TidusX.Yuna
United States239 Posts
On October 01 2011 06:51 R0YAL wrote: I don't have a TV but if SC2 was on ESPN then id fucking find one. I agree with this sentiment! | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
for those that say, "i dont have tv...so no" LOL dudes c'mon, this isn't about you. | ||
|
ptbl
United States6074 Posts
| ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:18 ptbl wrote: why pick one when you can have both, lol | ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On October 01 2011 06:54 darmousseh wrote: This needs to be promoted more. This has the chance of being the single most important opportunity for Starcraft 2 in the United States. Do not let this pass up. M:TG has been on ESPN2, I don't think this is a make or break thing for esports. | ||
|
InToTheWannaB
United States4770 Posts
| ||
|
Zooper31
United States5710 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:15 Let it Raine wrote: would I WATCH? i'll watch if it's worth watching. you can make this amazing or you can show rebroadcasts of events from last year like what was done on the USA network for halo 2. it's up to you guys @ espn, there's no guarantee everyone will watch more than a couple times unless the show youre putting on is quality and useful. If it is, I'd imagine you getting a ton of viewers. This is what scares me most if SC2 would be put on TV. The production and matches have to be quality and current or we risk completely ruining SC2 for the mainstream. | ||
|
eleaf
526 Posts
Is this for real? | ||
|
ptbl
United States6074 Posts
Some people don't have cable. I watch all my tv shows through hulu, netflix, etc. | ||
|
wassbix
Canada499 Posts
| ||
|
AcrossFiveJulys
United States3612 Posts
| ||
|
Enchanted
United States1609 Posts
| ||
|
CeriseCherries
6170 Posts
| ||
|
P0ckets
United States430 Posts
| ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:20 ptbl wrote: Some people don't have cable. I watch all my tv shows through hulu, netflix, etc. if both is available, its still win win. | ||
|
DeltaX
United States287 Posts
I know DJWheat had insights on this in a different thread, I'll try and find that. | ||
|
ThatGuyDoMo
Australia516 Posts
gogo Sundance haha | ||
|
bopoznpvt
United States51 Posts
| ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
I voted yes obviously, but they better not disappoint! | ||
|
Poyo
Canada790 Posts
| ||
|
Boblhead
United States2577 Posts
| ||
|
darkscream
Canada2310 Posts
| ||
|
RodrigoX
United States645 Posts
| ||
|
fant0m
964 Posts
| ||
|
Skullflower
United States3779 Posts
| ||
|
~Lowkey~
United States12 Posts
| ||
|
bubO
United States367 Posts
| ||
|
Flonomenalz
Nigeria3519 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:29 Boblhead wrote: Im assuming it would be on like 12am in the morning when they usually run sportscenter reruns all night. yeah probably this. | ||
|
Dalguno
United States2446 Posts
I'd be staying up till 12 AM to watch SC2 on tv then! | ||
|
Badfatpanda
United States9719 Posts
| ||
|
L3gendary
Canada1470 Posts
| ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:29 Skullflower wrote: How do so many of you not have a tv maybe people mean no cable, i'm sure everyone has TV  i'm one of those with tv but no cable | ||
|
atmuh
United States246 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:32 Badfatpanda wrote: this would be awesome, if it does well maybe it will eventually get a peak spot? ridiculously unlikely | ||
|
Moonling
United States987 Posts
| ||
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
| ||
|
iinsom
Australia339 Posts
EDIT: Yes, i get it and yes id watch it :D | ||
|
GoBaja
United States49 Posts
| ||
|
Sabre
United Kingdom1086 Posts
this is what Starcraft needs but its even bigger of a deal for... BarCrafts | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
Seriously though, if they can get an entertaining, not-watered-down version or coverage of SC2 on ESPN2, then it will be AMAZING for ESPORTS. I hope we've learned from the mistakes of CPL and other failed ventures of the past enough so that we can finally give the right kind of coverage. | ||
|
Saraf
United States160 Posts
| ||
|
Kazeyonoma
United States2912 Posts
| ||
|
xBillehx
United States1289 Posts
| ||
|
IMHope
Korea (South)1241 Posts
| ||
|
Mario1209
United States1077 Posts
| ||
|
JiYan
United States3668 Posts
| ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:38 xBillehx wrote: Honestly, no I probably wouldn't watch it on TV because I watch everything on my PC instead. I would, however, turn on my TV and leave the channel on mute while I watch it on my PC anyway, just to support the ratings. So in that case I voted yes. TV doesn't work like the internet. Since there is no request for content, they don't know if you're tuning into the TV. Besides, I stream internet content TO my TV what does that make me? LOL | ||
|
Rinrun
Canada3509 Posts
| ||
|
Isaac
United States810 Posts
| ||
|
Cyanocyst
2222 Posts
Man if this happened would really turn some heads. | ||
|
Larias
United States75 Posts
| ||
|
nooboon
2602 Posts
| ||
|
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
| ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:41 Isaac wrote: I think it'd be cool. but I won't watch it even though i can. I just like being in front of the PC, reading LR threads, browsing websites and stuffs, and also being able to instantly queue a starcraft game if I get bored. I take it there is no TV by your PC. | ||
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
| ||
|
[N3O]r3d33m3r
Germany673 Posts
On October 01 2011 06:58 sopas wrote: i'd rather have it stay on the intarwebs, who has a tv anyway. the thing is, the TV is widespread but people who watch ALOT of TV are not the main interest group of us sc'ers. so, really, it wouldn't do the game any. good everything can stay as it is | ||
ki11z0ne
United States427 Posts
| ||
|
Let it Raine
Canada1245 Posts
it could very easily, but it could also suck. it's just a matter of execution. | ||
|
GP
United States1056 Posts
| ||
|
MichaelDonovan
United States1453 Posts
Get cable. Get a Twitter account. Do what must be done. Go. | ||
|
Shadowsleep
United States19 Posts
| ||
|
amazingxkcd
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
| ||
|
MichaelDonovan
United States1453 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:38 Kazeyonoma wrote: I'm all for exposure to the masses, but it has to be done right, so someone from within the community needs to guide them. I don't want some bullshit espn executive who allows people to talk shit about "nerds" and "dweebs" to be behind it, only to belittle our effforts to grow esports and have it taken down by someone who doesn't get it. I'm assuming Sundance will be in charge. If there is anyone you can trust to do it right, its him. | ||
|
dangerjoe
Denmark1866 Posts
| ||
|
Larias
United States75 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:50 GP wrote: Starcraft with five minute commercials every ten minutes? No thanks. Just like how soccer is interrupted by commercials....wait... Be reasonable, obviously they wouldn't interrupt a match for ads. | ||
|
mango_destroyer
Canada3914 Posts
| ||
|
trifecta
United States6795 Posts
Edit: they should also experiment with three casters like they do in most sports and in Korean SCBW/SC2 broadcasts | ||
|
justsayinbro
307 Posts
If this were to happen impact is gonna be huge. Bigger crowd, sponsors, prize pool, pro gamers, higher level of competition, etc. Might take korea's esport Mecca title even. YOU CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN | ||
|
NYXinc
Germany74 Posts
| ||
|
RainmanMP
United States1698 Posts
| ||
|
2WeaK
Canada550 Posts
| ||
|
RaNgeD
United States733 Posts
| ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:51 Larias wrote: Just like how soccer is interrupted by commercials....wait... Be reasonable, obviously they wouldn't interrupt a match for ads. sorry but I don't see ESPN going ad-less for those hour-long TvT matches. SC does not work on American TV. The only way they can get it on is if it's some highlight show which doesn't do SC enough justice (and what's wrong with just watching the games online?). Sorry but this is a bad idea. | ||
|
justsayinbro
307 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:52 trifecta wrote: Considering that they broadcast poker, lacrosse, wnba, log rolling, bowling, high school football, and other niche sports on ESPN2, I don't find it implausible that they could find a comparable audience with esports fans. They broadcast spelling bee champs, come on. Espn2 is willing to broadcast as long as there are viewers | ||
|
Grettin
42381 Posts
| ||
|
Pinski
United States126 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:54 blabber wrote: sorry but I don't see ESPN going ad-less for those hour-long TvT matches. SC does not work on American TV. The only way they can get it on is if it's some highlight show which doesn't do SC enough justice. Sorry but this is a bad idea. ESPN goes nearly ad-less for 45-50 minutes for Football/Soccer. Also, you can easily put ads in a SC2 stream, just like they do for Football/Soccer. | ||
|
trifecta
United States6795 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:54 justsayinbro wrote: They broadcast spelling bee champs, come on. Espn2 is willing to broadcast as long as there are viewers That's exactly what I meant... the esports community could probably muster up a couple hundred-k audience for ESPN2 broadcasts. They could also put it online on ESPN3 | ||
|
AXygnus
Portugal1008 Posts
| ||
|
WArped
United Kingdom4845 Posts
 | ||
|
SigmaoctanusIV
United States3313 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:55 Pinski wrote: ESPN goes nearly ad-less for 45-50 minutes for Football/Soccer. Also, you can easily put ads in a SC2 stream, just like they do for Football/Soccer. If they need more ad time just run some PvPs/ZvZs and then gear up for the 45 minute TvTs The other matchups don't last that incredibly long most of the time. It would work I just don't think 90% of non starcraft players will understand the game without dumbing down the casting. | ||
|
GP
United States1056 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:51 Larias wrote: Just like how soccer is interrupted by commercials....wait... Be reasonable, obviously they wouldn't interrupt a match for ads. I don't see SC games being shown live. Football is the world's biggest spectator sport, there would be riots if they stopped a game for commercials. Starcraft... They'ed likely prerecord it and cut it with commercials. There's no way they'ed show an hour long starcraft game without commercials. Maybe what I said was hyperbole, but it's likely not too far from the truth. If they didn't cut for commercials, then I'd happily watch it however. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:54 blabber wrote: sorry but I don't see ESPN going ad-less for those hour-long TvT matches. SC does not work on American TV. The only way they can get it on is if it's some highlight show which doesn't do SC enough justice (and what's wrong with just watching the games online?). Sorry but this is a bad idea. I agree with the concerns about time constraints and advertising, but what would be wrong with a SC2 Sportscenter type show? I think that'd be pretty fantastic, and is probably the most viable. Maybe a recap of a past event. I doubt they could do a current event, and split the online viewers up. | ||
|
MichaelDonovan
United States1453 Posts
Keep that to yourself. You are hurting esports by saying that, even if its true. Don't tweet sundance saying no, because even if you wouldnt watch it because you don't have a tv, its still huge for esports either way. | ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
| ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:58 SigmaoctanusIV wrote: If they need more ad time just run some PvPs/ZvZs and then gear up for the 45 minute TvTs The other matchups don't last that incredibly long most of the time. It would work I just don't think 90% of non starcraft players will understand the game without dumbing down the casting. right, that's another problem. The broadcast will have to cater to the casual viewer more than any sc2 broadcast before it. Meaning it won't be as enjoyable for most of TL. | ||
|
Paraclete
United States100 Posts
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that sport, or any sport so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here devoted their lives that that sport might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, playing and spectating, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the players, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored spectators we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these players shall not have played in vain -- that this sport, under Blizzard, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. (tried to make it make sense.... FOR E-SPORTS!!!) | ||
|
Eschaton
United States1245 Posts
| ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
Time to make this huge! Everyone join and tell your friends to! Let's harness the social media of today for the power of Starcraft! | ||
|
lachy89
Australia264 Posts
| ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
| ||
|
RusHXceL
United States1004 Posts
wtf you on this forum lmao. | ||
|
sVnteen
Germany2238 Posts
would be so siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiick | ||
|
Sandro
897 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:02 blabber wrote: But really, WHAT IS WRONG WITH WHAT YOU'VE GOT NOW? Why is there this notion that Esports has to be shown on television? Any SC2 broadcast on (American) television will probably be worse than anything you can watch online What I don't get about this line of argument is why we can't have the ability to watch SC2 online and on television. Its not like we have to choose one or the other or give up entirely on the internet for television. | ||
|
arbitrageur
Australia1202 Posts
| ||
|
Taf the Ghost
United States11751 Posts
| ||
|
slicknav
1409 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:58 Jibba wrote: I agree with the concerns about time constraints and advertising, but what would be wrong with a SC2 Sportscenter type show? I think that'd be pretty fantastic, and is probably the most viable. Maybe a recap of a past event. I doubt they could do a current event, and split the online viewers up. State of the Game on ESPN??? | ||
|
RogerX
New Zealand3180 Posts
| ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:04 Sandro wrote: What I don't get about this line of argument is why we can't have the ability to watch SC2 online and on television. Its not like we have to choose one or the other or give up entirely on the internet for television. because SC on American television would be less enjoyable for us hardcore viewers than on online | ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:54 blabber wrote: sorry but I don't see ESPN going ad-less for those hour-long TvT matches. SC does not work on American TV. The only way they can get it on is if it's some highlight show which doesn't do SC enough justice (and what's wrong with just watching the games online?). Sorry but this is a bad idea. What hour-long TvTs? One hour long games (real time) are extremely rare, actually the longest I remember was 58 minutes Jinro vs Ensnare off the top of my head, and those are Blizzard minutes. Even the Goody games I've seen haven't been longer than that, despite the urban myth. I'm pretty sure that the average SC2 game is well under 30 "real" minutes, if not 20. In the extremely rare case of a 60-70 Blizzard-minute game, I think we can live with a round of commercials interrupting the game at a right time. | ||
|
atmuh
United States246 Posts
On October 01 2011 07:58 Jibba wrote: I agree with the concerns about time constraints and advertising, but what would be wrong with a SC2 Sportscenter type show? I think that'd be pretty fantastic, and is probably the most viable. Maybe a recap of a past event. I doubt they could do a current event, and split the online viewers up. This is more than likely what it would end up being. Just because Soccer can be done without commercials doesn't mean something new to the network would be done the same way. It is HIGHLY unlikely that commercials will be skipped for something like SC2. You'd have the standard thing where there's a commercial every 10 minutes or so, and I'm not sure how much the majority of people who watch SC2 on streams on a regular basis would enjoy something so different. They would probably watch it the first day just because they're excited about it but after seeing the presented product they would quickly go back to favoring online streams. I would be ok with a sportscenter style thing though as it's something I already watch quite a bit for other sports. | ||
|
BryanSC
United States455 Posts
On October 01 2011 06:57 Modernist wrote: While it would be awesome (voted yes), I don't think LIVE Starcraft would survive on American television. Pre-recorded wouldn't do it justice either. I agree and think most people are under the illusion that there is no risk of SC2 going on TV and will automatically become what Brood War is in Korea. I don't think the SC2 community is big enough at the moment to support wherever SC2 lands on ESPN, and dont want SC2 to fail which will end up setting a bad precedent for other networks looking at hosting an esport. | ||
|
InToTheWannaB
United States4770 Posts
![[image loading]](http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/5648/ellycrywall16x9text.jpg) | ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:08 Talin wrote: What hour-long TvTs? One hour long games (real time) are extremely rare, actually the longest I remember was 58 minutes Jinro vs Ensnare off the top of my head, and those are Blizzard minutes. Even the Goody games I've seen haven't been longer than that, despite the urban myth. I'm pretty sure that the average SC2 game is well under 30 "real" minutes, if not 20. In the extremely rare case of a 60-70 Blizzard-minute game, I think we can live with a round of commercials being played at the right time. why deal with commercials IN THE MIDDLE OF A GAME when you can watch the whole game with NO COMMERCIALS online?? What does having SC on TV get you? NOTHING EXCEPT LESS ENJOYMENT. Now if ESPN promised to do it exactly like Korean TV, then it'd be worth talking about. But I don't see that happening. | ||
|
seansye
United States1722 Posts
| ||
|
Sandro
897 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:08 blabber wrote: because SC on American television would be less enjoyable for us hardcore viewers than on online And that is a bad thing why? Making it more mainstream = more viewers = more $$$/sponsorships | ||
|
Hossinaut
United States453 Posts
| ||
|
Thorn Raven
United States126 Posts
Sick!!!!!!!! Of course I would tune in! | ||
|
McFeser
United States2458 Posts
| ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:09 blabber wrote: why deal with commercials IN THE MIDDLE OF A GAME when you can watch the whole game with NO COMMERCIALS online?? What does having SC on TV get you? NOTHING EXCEPT LESS ENJOYMENT. Now if ESPN promised to do it exactly like Korean TV, then it'd be worth talking about. But I don't see that happening. Because commercials in the middle of the game will be EXTREMELY RARE, and vast majority of games will fit into the schedule nicely. So there's really nothing to "deal with", you're making it sound like every game is 2 hours long or something. If you're gonna freak out because one game in a hundred or w/e gets interrupted... well I'll only say there are always people complaining about online streams as well, but we live with it. | ||
|
JSpades
United States56 Posts
| ||
|
Xkalibert
United States1404 Posts
| ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:10 Sandro wrote: And that is a bad thing why? Making it more mainstream = more viewers = more $$$/sponsorships why the heck do you care about how much sponsorships people you don't know have and how much they get paid? | ||
|
fant0m
964 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:12 Talin wrote: Because commercials in the middle of the game will be EXTREMELY RARE, and vast majority of games will fit into the schedule nicely. So there's really nothing to "deal with", you're making it sound like every game is 2 hours long or something. If you're gonna freak out because one game in a hundred or w/e gets interrupted... well I'll only say there are always people complaining about online streams as well, but we live with it. There's a pause button for a reason. | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
| ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
WSVG crashed and burned on CBS (major network) with WoW and CS at their peaks, and a bunch of silly games because they didn't handle it well. | ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
you're joking right? You're asking the players to pause the game for like 5 minutes in the middle of a game? No player will want that. | ||
|
JSpades
United States56 Posts
why the heck do you care about how much sponsorships people you don't know have and how much they get paid? More money being pumped into the game means more Starcraft, and better Starcraft, as players compete harder for higher stakes. | ||
|
Grettin
42381 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:12 McFeser wrote: I can't believe some people are arguing against this. It's not like it's not going to help. I can't believe why someone cares if this would be US/CAN thing only. That is if you live outside of course. It would be sick, but i would also be extremely disappointed and mad. | ||
|
stokes17
United States1411 Posts
| ||
|
PhiliBiRD
United States2643 Posts
go sundance! | ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
or day9 and wheat no exceptions | ||
|
simansh
257 Posts
| ||
|
zaii
Guam2611 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:08 blabber wrote: because SC on American television would be less enjoyable for us hardcore viewers than on online relax its only MLG on ESPN, You can always watch DH,IEM,GSL,NASL, and IPL online. if MLG suffers from this, Then so be it. I mean how important is MLG compared to those other tournaments? | ||
|
firehand101
Australia3152 Posts
| ||
|
boon2537
United States905 Posts
| ||
|
TriO
United States421 Posts
| ||
|
jdreamer
Australia296 Posts
| ||
|
L3gendary
Canada1470 Posts
| ||
|
shindigs
United States4795 Posts
| ||
|
Sprouter
United States1724 Posts
SC2 on ESPN would BE HUGE | ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
| ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:19 L3gendary wrote: Aside from the soccer broadcasts, they follow a fairly rigid schedule. You get about 22 minutes of air time per half hour, and they're not going to stick 8 minutes of ads in a single block.Why would they air commercials in the middle of a game? Games are fairly short especially in sc2. They could just air commercials after games like all the streams do. Sometimes that means after 10min sometimes after 20 or more, its the average that matters and sc2 games average around 18min or so. | ||
|
zaii
Guam2611 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:20 blabber wrote: I would LOVE to be proven wrong but you guys really need a reality check. American TV is not like TV from around the world. it's only MLG!!! theres other tournaments you can enjoy that are online stream only!! | ||
|
BaRReD
United States3 Posts
| ||
|
envisioN .
United States552 Posts
On October 01 2011 06:45 Roxy wrote: Does ESPN stream on their website? I dont have cable.. dont watch tv.. just starcraft LOL! the irony of having MLG on ESPN2 just so you could watch it on a different stream is awesome. | ||
|
justsayinbro
307 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:02 blabber wrote: But really, WHAT IS WRONG WITH WHAT YOU'VE GOT NOW? Why is there this notion that Esports has to be shown on television? Any SC2 broadcast on (American) television will probably be worse than anything you can watch online You can still use stream to watch but the idea is that this will add more viewers n attract more sponsors. Sponsors pay for teams and tourneys, so increased number of sponsors really means growth in sc2 for US. | ||
|
imPERSONater
United States1324 Posts
Most games are left alone, but particular long ones have their important moments still viewed if you have to cut away. | ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
| ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
| ||
|
LtDan
United States6 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:18 boon2537 wrote: I logged on just to vote "yes." Now, lemme dusk off my TV... Heck Yes! Me too! I May even make a twitter account just to respond...ha....Id said I never do it but, I also said the same thing about facebook...myspace...friendster.... ok, so I was never on friendster but, the the rest were true. | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:15 Jibba wrote: WSVG crashed and burned on CBS (major network) with WoW and CS at their peaks, and a bunch of silly games because they didn't handle it well. I am not familiar with this but I'm still going to say it must have 100% crashed because those two games are fucking unwatchable and that's a leviathan understatement. I played WoW in a semi-pro manner and I still couldn't watch a single game because you couldn't fucking see anything even when you were a top 5 gladiator obsessed with the game and when I showed it to my girlfriend she had recurring seizures and couldn't tell which class I was playing or if there were actually characters on screen. And watching CS is about as enjoyable as trying to pop a stubborn zit located dangerously near your tender crack. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
| ||
|
Dental Floss
United States1015 Posts
| ||
|
nath
United States1788 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:26 Kickboxer wrote: I am not familiar with this but I'm still going to say it must have 100% crashed because those two games are fucking unwatchable and that's a leviathan understatement. I played WoW in a semi-pro manner and I still couldn't watch a single game because you couldn't fucking see anything even when you were a top 5 gladiator obsessed with the game and when I showed it to my girlfriend she had recurring seizures and couldn't tell which class I was playing or if there were actually characters on screen. And watching CS is about as enjoyable as trying to pop a stubborn zit located dangerously near your tender crack. while i agree with you on wow, cs is far more watchable | ||
|
Saturnize
United States2473 Posts
| ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:28 Saturnize wrote: This is terrible for E-Sports. It will commercialize everything and people will only play SC2 for the money! no people will play sc2 for the love of the game. the money is incentive to commit your life to it. same as regular sports. not one pro european football player is playing football because in his teens he was like. i'm going to make money if i do this. no they love the game and got good at it and now commit themsleves to it to sustainn them and their families. | ||
|
TritaN
United States406 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:26 Kickboxer wrote: I am not familiar with this but I'm still going to say it must have 100% crashed because those two games are fucking unwatchable and that's a leviathan understatement. I played WoW in a semi-pro manner and I still couldn't watch a single game because you couldn't fucking see anything even when you were a top 5 gladiator obsessed with the game and when I showed it to my girlfriend she had recurring seizures and couldn't tell which class I was playing or if there were actually characters on screen. And watching CS is about as enjoyable as trying to pop a stubborn zit located dangerously near your tender crack. I can confirm these statements. Sc2 is designed around esports and with spectators in mind - WoW and CS were not. If Sc2 was done correctly - meaning with casters like day9 and actual production value - it would be glorious. | ||
|
Grettin
42381 Posts
MLGSundance Sundance DiGiovanni After an hour I won't be able to read him your thoughts. Oh and of course it would be MLG StarCraft. Accept no imitations. Sigh, why i didn't read this more carefully. Definitely fine by me then. ^_^ | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:26 Kickboxer wrote: I am not familiar with this but I'm still going to say it must have 100% crashed because those two games are fucking unwatchable and that's a leviathan understatement. I played WoW in a semi-pro manner and I still couldn't watch a single game because you couldn't fucking see anything even when you were a top 5 gladiator obsessed with the game and when I showed it to my girlfriend she had recurring seizures and couldn't tell which class I was playing or if there were actually characters on screen. And watching CS is about as enjoyable as trying to pop a stubborn zit located dangerously near your tender crack. WoW ratings still dominate Blizzcon, iirc. It crashed and burned because they presented it poorly with overly simplistic explanations, that turned off their core audience, and then they added in filler games that no one else cared about. I don't recall the other things that were wrong with it, but it didn't go well. WSVG probably had their own internal problems as well, but the TV time didn't save them. 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. | ||
|
LanTAs
United States1091 Posts
| ||
|
Secret05
United States342 Posts
| ||
|
Drowsy
United States4876 Posts
| ||
|
Flossy
United States870 Posts
If you don't say yes you aren't a true SC2 fan. | ||
|
Kieofire
United States1809 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:34 Secret05 wrote: put it on espn3 because espn3 is streamed free online... they need to make sure its available via internet... gamers are more likely to watch it online than on tv Now that is a lie if you actually read the poll numbers. | ||
|
Trezeguet
United States2656 Posts
| ||
|
Trumpet
United States1935 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:35 Kieofire wrote: Now that is a lie if you actually read the poll numbers. Which poll numbers? The poll in this thread's OP, or do you have some actual market numbers? I think he's correct about people's likelihood to watch on computers vs tv. The more interesting question is whether or not it will bring in extra viewers that wouldn't have already been watching by being on tv. | ||
|
chillah
12 Posts
| ||
|
c0ldfusion
United States8293 Posts
| ||
|
DyEnasTy
United States3714 Posts
| ||
|
atmuh
United States246 Posts
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. Well the real issue is the time block that it would get. If it was something like a few hours then it could be done like many American sports (MLB/NFL/NHL/NBA) where commercials could be ran when there is a substantial break, like after a game. I can't really see this happening though, as large time blocks are usually not available especially at prime time because there is always something that they're broadcasting. They could potentially get the big 2-3 hour time blocks at off hours but I'm not sure how popular it would be at times like that. People have to remember that this will be broadcast mainly to Americans so Europeans that normally watch streams at off hours for Americans won't actually be able to watch it. The more probably outcome is time slots of 1/2 hour to an hour. In this time it's not really feasible to just run commercials whenever its possible if live games are being shown because games can go for long periods of time and ESPN is absolutely not going to want to go 20-30 minutes without cutting to a commercial. | ||
|
ayserjamshidi
United States16 Posts
| ||
|
XnG_777
713 Posts
| ||
|
ronpaul012
United States769 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:28 Saturnize wrote: This is terrible for E-Sports. It will commercialize everything and people will only play SC2 for the money! Oh, No! Who would ever want there to be a bigger incentive for more people to play and give us better starcraft! Who would ever want that??? Oh the horror! | ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
Edit: Only a bad TV executive would not see the potential of televising SC2 and esports in general. | ||
|
Deleted User 183001
2939 Posts
| ||
|
Wrathsc2
United States2025 Posts
| ||
|
Secret05
United States342 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:35 Kieofire wrote: Now that is a lie if you actually read the poll numbers. No i totally agree with you but, I think it'd be a lot safer to put it on a place that is available via the internet and tv (espn3) instead of just the tv. Yes I totally agree that most of us would watch it on espn2 via the television but, it seems like a much safer investment to just start it on espn3 and see how it goes and then go from there. The last thing we want is to have it get bad ratings. I think it'd be safer to slowly and gradually transition it onto television by having it on both tv and internet. | ||
|
Hatsu
United Kingdom474 Posts
| ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:37 atmuh wrote: Well the real issue is the time block that it would get. If it was something like a few hours then it could be done like many American sports (MLB/NFL/NHL/NBA) where commercials could be ran when there is a substantial break, like after a game. I can't really see this happening though, as large time blocks are usually not available especially at prime time because there is always something that they're broadcasting. They could potentially get the big 2-3 hour time blocks at off hours but I'm not sure how popular it would be at times like that. People have to remember that this will be broadcast mainly to Americans so Europeans that normally watch streams at off hours for Americans won't actually be able to watch it. The more probably outcome is time slots of 1/2 hour to an hour. In this time it's not really feasible to just run commercials whenever its possible if live games are being shown because games can go for long periods of time and ESPN is absolutely not going to want to go 20-30 minutes without cutting to a commercial. Actually if the off hours are something like before 4PM EDT then that would be great for Europeans :D If it was 11PM+ then it would be bad | ||
|
Thurokiir
United States779 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:25 Meta wrote: This would be cool, but adblock doesn't exist on TV, so I think I'd watch it online still. Also, TV subscription is expensive and I don't even have ESPN 2. Sorry Sundance, I still voted yes because it'd be great exposure for SC2 to a wider audience. You adblock streams? You're a bit of a dick dude. | ||
|
Greggle
United States1131 Posts
| ||
|
Kuror
United States399 Posts
| ||
|
atmuh
United States246 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:42 -Archangel- wrote: Actually if the off hours are something like before 4PM EDT then that would be great for Europeans :D If it was 11PM+ then it would be bad The point is you won't be able to watch it in Europe. | ||
|
Dranak
United States464 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:39 Secret05 wrote: No i totally agree with you but, I think it'd be a lot safer to put it on a place that is available via the internet and tv (espn3) instead of just the tv. Yes I totally agree that most of us would watch it on espn2 via the television but, it seems like a much safer investment to just start it on espn3 and see how it goes and then go from there. The last thing we want is to have it get bad ratings. I think it'd be safer to slowly and gradually transition it onto television by having it on both tv and internet. I agree. As much as I love the idea of SC2 on TV, EPSN3 would be a safer bet (especially if it's available internationally). That said, regardless of the channel I think we'd get something more like IPL TV, which I would be completely okay with if it's done reasonably well. | ||
|
Thurokiir
United States779 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:38 Defacer wrote: If you're going to show DARTS, then it makes sense to air SC2. It has a much bigger and more appealing demographic for advertising, with a great deal of overlap with Poker. Edit: Only a bad TV executive would not see the potential of televising SC2 and esports in general. The only thing I'm worried about is that sc2 audience will have a large rate of attrition resulting in a dead investment. Granted if there's someone who can make us tune in and give two fucks, it'd be sundance. Godspeed! | ||
|
gogoGoGoGOOO
United States6 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:42 Thurokiir wrote: You adblock streams? You're a bit of a dick dude. If you don't get banned I'll be surprised. | ||
|
Secret05
United States342 Posts
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. Well my biggest concern is that gamers play the computer more than they watch television. The worst thing that could ever happen is for them to put it on tv and have it get horrible ratings. Having something get horrendous ratings could scare them into never wanting to be involved in it anytime in the near future. But I do think that it would work fine if it was broadcasted via the internet and tv and have the same commercials and everything that they would have on tv. I think they should transition into this slowly and first offer it on tv and the internet at the same time, instead of putting all their eggs in one basket and just praying that it will work. | ||
|
[N3O]r3d33m3r
Germany673 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:38 Defacer wrote: Only a bad TV executive would not see the potential of televising SC2 and esports in general. what huge potential can lie in a niche market? | ||
|
W2
United States1177 Posts
| ||
Fionn
United States23455 Posts
But yeah, anything to grow the e-sport and get more people to watch Starcraft. More people who watch means more people on TeamLiquid which means e-sports will only grow industry wise. | ||
|
Sandro
897 Posts
| ||
|
Dranak
United States464 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:46 Sandro wrote: So Sundance's tweet was hours ago, has anything come of his meeting with that TV executive yet? If/when Sundance has news for us, he'll let us know. | ||
|
Secret05
United States342 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:44 W2 wrote: its probably not going to be a permanent fixture on espn, just one show for MLG every few months. Ya does anyone know for sure what this thread is discussing specifically? My guess is it'll probably be something to do with MLG where they show an MLG event every few months. Kind of like how they show major tennis and golf tournaments every few months. | ||
|
Chvol
United States200 Posts
| ||
|
zev318
Canada4306 Posts
im not sure i'd watch it on tv, unless it's on my computer | ||
|
staples2
United States216 Posts
| ||
|
Kuror
United States399 Posts
| ||
|
CursedRich
United Kingdom737 Posts
| ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
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. | ||
|
ronpaul012
United States769 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:44 gogoGoGoGOOO wrote: If you don't get banned I'll be surprised. why? it's true. If anything i wouldn't be surprised if tl mods agreed, considering adblock blocks the ad on tl site, which keeps the site going. | ||
|
Eternalmisfit
United States643 Posts
The poll itself is misleading as I do want SC2 on ESPN (and I would vote yes for that) but if the poll is asking specifically whether I will tune in or not, it will be a no vote. For the record, I haven't voted yet. | ||
|
fer
Canada375 Posts
| ||
|
nath
United States1788 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:49 Kickboxer wrote: 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. | ||
|
MurDeRsc2
133 Posts
| ||
|
Polarexia
United States383 Posts
| ||
|
Torpedo.Vegas
United States1890 Posts
| ||
|
Like a Boss
502 Posts
| ||
|
hitpoint
United States1511 Posts
| ||
|
Angra
United States2652 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:45 Fionn wrote: This would be amazing for GSL since that is usually the time when ESPN2 shows random crap that is very niche like bass fishing or Dungeons and Dragons. If it's MLG, it more than likely be taped delayed and played in an edited format around the same time GSL comes on. But yeah, anything to grow the e-sport and get more people to watch Starcraft. More people who watch means more people on TeamLiquid which means e-sports will only grow industry wise. That would be the most likely thing. I can't see them airing SC2 on prime time, ESPN2 is a pretty prominent sports channel during the daytime/evening. It'll probably be a late-night airing kind of thing. On October 01 2011 08:54 Like a Boss wrote: No... way no. Who the hell watches TV? Why would anybody want to go backwards in technology, the amount of time spend watching TV is decreasing every year. Why would you want to constrain your tournament to a certain time frame when you can pull up VODs online anywhere and anytime? Why wouldn't anyone want to enjoy playing and watching from the same place? They probably shouldn't broadcast SC2 games over computers, either, to be honest. I mean people watching things on their phones is increasing every year. Why would you want to constrain yourself to a certain room when you can watch SC2 anywhere over a phone? They should really just exclusively stick to phone streams and dump the whole computer thing. | ||
|
Micket
United Kingdom2163 Posts
On October 01 2011 08:51 nath wrote: 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?!?!?!' | ||
|
Brotatolol
United States1742 Posts
| ||
|
TelecoM
United States10673 Posts
| ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
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? | ||
|
JSpades
United States56 Posts
| ||
|
WilDMousE
Chile1335 Posts
| ||
|
MannerKiss
United States2398 Posts
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. | ||
|
hitpoint
United States1511 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:01 jmbthirteen wrote: 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? | ||
|
Angra
United States2652 Posts
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. | ||
|
simansh
257 Posts
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. | ||
|
Aurdon
United States2007 Posts
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. | ||
|
Boraz
United States361 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:01 jmbthirteen wrote: 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. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:07 Angra wrote: 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: 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?!?!?!?; | ||
|
LayZRR
Germany449 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:10 Boraz wrote: 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. | ||
|
pique
143 Posts
| ||
|
feanor1
United States1899 Posts
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. | ||
|
Nagano
United States1157 Posts
| ||
|
Pisko.
United States214 Posts
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. | ||
|
castled
United States322 Posts
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. | ||
|
Rkie
United States1278 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:18 Nagano wrote: Duh lol | ||
|
Stropheum
United States1124 Posts
| ||
|
c0ldfusion
United States8293 Posts
| ||
|
Phanekim
United States777 Posts
| ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
If it was on a major cable channel like ESPN2 it would have to be done right. It would have to justify the games competitive aspect before anyone would take it seriously. I think this would be a great topic for a show about sports, like 30 for 30, or ESPN films. That would introduce it to people. | ||
|
LayZRR
Germany449 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:22 Pisko. wrote: This made me rage pretty hard. i know its selfish but it would not be so cool anymore on tv like on stream man :D esports belongs on PC in my oppinion. no matter in which way (playing or watching) | ||
|
castled
United States322 Posts
Yeah what he said is pretty much wrong. If he's saying that there will be too many tournaments with that popularity... well that is already the case. If he's saying you won't be able to watch VODs like you can after internet line streams, well most broadcasts sports have this feature now too. The only downside would be maybe it would cost more than it does now, but having esports be mainstream would make that totally worth it to me. Or maybe he's part of a budding esports hipster movement. Edit: look ^ that is right | ||
|
Elefanto
Switzerland3584 Posts
The game is not ready, it's too early. | ||
|
LayZRR
Germany449 Posts
If you just think about the idea Esports becoming normal on Tv...in my opinion more disadvantages for people which are long esport fans. cause the more people watch the more they want to make money out of it. LOL think about people paying for ONE game someday...who knows whats coming... | ||
|
Chriamon
United States886 Posts
| ||
|
jinixxx123
543 Posts
I'd guess a rebroadcasting of mlgs that are editied ( to remove the player setup wait time in-between matches) would be ideal. like have 2 commentators talk about the players a bit before each match , then get straight to it . | ||
|
Pisko.
United States214 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:34 LayZRR wrote: i know its selfish but it would not be so cool anymore on tv like on stream man :D If anything it'll make it even "cooler" because it's something you can get people into that normally wouldn't even consider it before. On October 01 2011 09:35 castled wrote: + Show Spoiler + Yeah what he said is pretty much wrong. If he's saying that there will be too many tournaments with that popularity... well that is already the case. If he's saying you won't be able to watch VODs like you can after internet line streams, well most broadcasts sports have this feature now too. The only downside would be maybe it would cost more than it does now, but having esports be mainstream would make that totally worth it to me. Or maybe he's part of a budding esports hipster movement. Edit: look ^ that is right Yeah I mean right now there's three tourneys going on so it's definitely the hipster thing. Kind of funny, I've been following Starcraft since 2008 and you think I'd be the one saying that, but no lol | ||
|
Fox333
United States11 Posts
Vote Yes on prop ESPN2 | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
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. I don't think they could show full games if it was to be on TV. They would have to edit replays in a way that fits the schedule and makes the game more interesting. I don't think it is at all possible to expect SC2 to ever make it on tv and just be "there" in its full length and form. It will have to be editted heavily to be interesting, understandable and within time. | ||
|
nitdkim
1264 Posts
| ||
|
Seide
United States831 Posts
Unfortunately if I did say so, I would be lying as I highly prefer streams and haven't touched actual TV for a few years. | ||
|
jyLee
United States350 Posts
| ||
|
HeroHenry
United States1723 Posts
| ||
|
Sandro
897 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:45 jyLee wrote: Why the hell would anyone vote no? Maybe they think if SC2 went on TV then all internet streams of SC2 would be shut down overnight or something... idk | ||
|
tracoes
United States45 Posts
| ||
|
Seide
United States831 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:17 feanor1 wrote: Soccer is a sport with very little downtime, and they make it work. Soccer is also the #1 sport in the world. Starcraft is a spec of dust compared to it. Soccer's play time is also standardized(excluding some cup finals), not random 5-50 minute matches, so your point about soccer is a bit moot. | ||
|
Kal_rA
United States2925 Posts
| ||
|
SkimGuy
Canada709 Posts
Also asking this on a Starcraft board - Don't you think that the results would be a little biased? xd | ||
|
DKo
United States187 Posts
| ||
|
Sith Inquisitor
Germany113 Posts
| ||
|
PeachTea
United States149 Posts
| ||
|
Herculix
United States946 Posts
i will NOT give my seal of approval on that, because i've been an MMA fan since the 90's as well as other sports and i have seen what TV production does and can do to your lovechild of a niche sport. because of my experience having seen things grow massively in some ways and die painfully in others, i am not so hasty to give my blind support. i've seen the leeches that came out of the woodwork after The Ultimate Fighter season 1 finale, where everyone got big eyes full of dollar signs. i love the grass roots small business feel that esports still has, and if i have to sacrifice it for additional fame, or convenience, or higher costs which i have to pay for simply because of supply and demand, i don't want it. if sundance can keep his balls from getting snipped and not compromise the things that the community loves about esports and MLG, and let ESPN do what it is good at without essentially buying the product out, i will become cautiously optimistic. anything less than that and this entire community is incredibly naive as to what both the positive and negative consequences will be. i understand that something like this can potentially make esports mainstream, but i question every day as to whether that is actually what matters and what sacrifices i am comfortable making to see that happen. edit: having also seen MLG's dealings with Halo 2, that was an overall good thing in my opinion. should just throw that out there. ESPN respected that they didn't quite know how to run it, MLG tried to show them the strings in the live events while they created an excellent TV production from MLG reruns. i feel like this project is much more ambitious, though, and it kind of scares me. | ||
|
Baker75
United States8 Posts
| ||
|
Pisko.
United States214 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:43 nitdkim wrote: Internet stream is good enough for me. On October 01 2011 09:44 Seide wrote: I would love to say "yes" because if it happened it would be a big step forward. Unfortunately if I did say so, I would be lying as I highly prefer streams and haven't touched actual TV for a few years. This isn't just about you, this is for the players and the progression of the game. Saying garbage like this is extremely selfish. Being on TV makes the game more popular. It attracts people who normally wouldn't even know what a Zealot or Marauder even is. This brings in sponsors. Sponsors = money. Players start getting paid more as the game gets taken more seriously. There is literally nothing bad that can happen. If it fails we go back to streaming like we always do, oh well at least we tried. You don't even want to try, which I just can't understand why. It's almost depressing to see people actually think like this. | ||
|
Seide
United States831 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:57 Pisko. wrote: This isn't just about you, this is for the players and the progression of the game. Saying garbage like this is extremely selfish. Being on TV makes the game more popular. It attracts people who normally wouldn't even know what a Zealot or Marauder even is. This brings in sponsors. Sponsors = money. Players start getting paid more as the game gets taken more seriously. There is literally nothing bad that can happen. If it fails we go back to streaming like we always do, oh well at least we tried. You don't even want to try, which I just can't understand why. It's almost depressing to see people actually think like this. To think like what? An honest person? I simply gave my honest answer as to why I would not watch it. No need to try attack me for it. Would I love to see this happen? Yes. Would I personally watch it on ESPN2? No. | ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
| ||
|
Cyrak
Canada536 Posts
On many days of the week I've got better things to do than sit on my ass during prime time and watch Starcraft games. I am really dubious about the 96% figure. I think it would have been better to have a qualified answer option like "depends". That is the category I'd fit into because I'd be willing to tune in if it was on at a convenient time and I had nothing better to do. | ||
|
Executor1
1353 Posts
Is anyone here part of the Nielsen family, and if you are make sure you set your box to say that 5 people are watching when you are watching it , that can make a huge difference as Nielsen extrapolates the numbers from 50,000 households that are part of the "Nielsen Family" to the number of tv's in north america (households with tv's rather) | ||
|
Pisko.
United States214 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:58 Seide wrote: + Show Spoiler + On October 01 2011 09:57 Pisko. wrote: This isn't just about you, this is for the players and the progression of the game. Saying garbage like this is extremely selfish. Being on TV makes the game more popular. It attracts people who normally wouldn't even know what a Zealot or Marauder even is. This brings in sponsors. Sponsors = money. Players start getting paid more as the game gets taken more seriously. There is literally nothing bad that can happen. If it fails we go back to streaming like we always do, oh well at least we tried. You don't even want to try, which I just can't understand why. It's almost depressing to see people actually think like this. Think like what? An honorable person? I simply gave my honest answer as to why I would not watch it. No need to attack me for it. Would I love to see this happen? Yes. Would I personally watch it on ESPN2? No. You think you're honorable because you don't want eSports to progress further into mainstream? And no it wasn't just you, I don't feel like quoting every negative post. | ||
|
Barbiero
Brazil5259 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:02 Pisko. wrote: You think you're honorable because you don't want eSports to progress further into mainstream? And no it wasn't just you, I don't feel like quoting every negative post. Everyone would love this to happen, but the question was "would you watch it?" and not "do you want it to happen?". He just answered honestly. | ||
|
Seravasi
United States1 Post
| ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
| ||
|
stormchaser
Canada1009 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:04 Zephirdd wrote: Everyone would love this to happen, but the question was "would you watch it?" and not "do you want it to happen?". He just answered honestly. I'm gonna step in here and say yes he did answer it honestly, but its obvious that the question implies much more than ''Would YOU watch it?'' | ||
|
nohbrows
United States653 Posts
Television does not have the same experience an internet stream can give you, nor the freedom that it gives you either. If this is about wanting to make SC2 mainstream, then I think that SC2 must attempt to make watching internet streams, and internet television in general more mainstream. Make people see how much of a benefit it is to watch things on the internet than over cable. And its bloody expensive to get cable. Why pay more when the internet can do what TV can do, and better?? | ||
|
Seide
United States831 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:02 Pisko. wrote: You think you're honorable because you don't want eSports to progress further into mainstream? And no it wasn't just you, I don't feel like quoting every negative post. I do want e-sports to progress into the mainstream. That does not mean I am personally interested in watching it on a television network. I would be happy to see it there, but I would not watch it. I believe the question was: "StarCraft on ESPN2... Would you tune in?" not "Would you like to see StarCraft featured on ESPN2?" As you see these are very different questions. Please stop using the "If you are not with us you are against us" argument and attacking people because you cannot handle their opinion. | ||
|
Ruyguy
Canada988 Posts
| ||
|
NKzs
Canada102 Posts
Of course!! | ||
|
LoLAdriankat
United States4307 Posts
| ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
| ||
|
Arthemesia
United States292 Posts
| ||
|
Pisko.
United States214 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:10 Seide wrote: I do want e-sports to progress into the mainstream. That does not mean I am personally interested in watching it on a television network. I would be happy to see it there, but I would not watch it. I believe the question was: "StarCraft on ESPN2... Would you tune in?" not "Would you like to see StarCraft featured on ESPN2?" As you see these are very different questions. Please stop using the "If you are not with us you are against us" argument and attacking people because you cannot handle their opinion. It doesn't matter if you personally aren't going to watch it, just say yes. Why would you not want to push this as much as possible? This isn't just about you, putting SC2 on TV will attract a whole new crowd and greatly expand the scene. | ||
|
skatbone
United States1005 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:18 Pisko. wrote: It doesn't matter if you personally aren't going to watch it, just say yes. Why would you not want to push this as much as possible? This isn't just about you, putting SC2 on TV will attract a whole new crowd and greatly expand the scene. While I partially agree with, exposing a new audience to SCII would be great, the danger is that they try this out and don't get enough viewers, thus canning any future opportunity. tl;dr ESPN and their advertisers likely have a bottom line related to viewership. While I'm up for the idea, I'd rather not do it prematurely. We want enough people to watch so I think that will require mobilizing many of the diehards. | ||
|
Datum
United States371 Posts
| ||
|
SpiZe
Canada3640 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:18 Pisko. wrote: It doesn't matter if you personally aren't going to watch it, just say yes. Why would you not want to push this as much as possible? This isn't just about you, putting SC2 on TV will attract a whole new crowd and greatly expand the scene. You prefer lying to what may be the future promoters or sponsors of esports? You need to realise that you he isn't heliong anyone by lying about a simple question. This is a interest check, not some sort of vote yes even if you aren't going to watch it so when it does happen, few tunes in and promoters are dissapointed and never give it any attention again. | ||
|
ChineseWife
United States373 Posts
| ||
|
jonathan1
United States395 Posts
and the answer for a lot of people is --No. Why would i watch on TV what I can already watch online in a more comfortable setting? | ||
|
Goshdarnit
United States540 Posts
| ||
|
FusionMrWet
United States121 Posts
| ||
|
Roe
Canada6002 Posts
| ||
|
Seide
United States831 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:18 Pisko. wrote: It doesn't matter if you personally aren't going to watch it, just say yes. Why would you not want to push this as much as possible? This isn't just about you, putting SC2 on TV will attract a whole new crowd and greatly expand the scene. Simple, because Starcraft 2's success on ESPN is not a 100% gurantee. I'd rather vote no, and voice my opinion as to why, so that my reasons can possibly be taken into account. Even though it is unpopular, I am not willing to blindly trudge on for esports or anything for that matter, it is not my way as a person. If enough people are interested it will happen, I am in the minority, but a minority that exists and should be represented. | ||
|
nath
United States1788 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:23 jonathan1 wrote: people are totally missing the point. Sundance is asking IF starcraft was on TV, WOULD YOU WATCH IT? and the answer for a lot of people is --No. Why would i watch on TV what I can already watch online in a more comfortable setting? you are missing the point. as a fledgling industry, we need to promote the shit out of esports anywhere we can. motherfucking espn 2? just say yes. thats the point. | ||
|
nath
United States1788 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:29 Seide wrote: Simple, because Starcraft 2's success on ESPN is not a 100% gurantee. Lets run through this scenario: Ok, so I vote yes. SC2 goes on ESPN2, I don't watch it. SC2 does not do well on ESPN for some reason, eg: many still preferring streams or whatnot, reasons can be many and complicated. Thanks to my lies to for the sake of esports, esports is actually worse off, as a second chance is harder to get. I'd rather vote no, and voice my opinion as to why, so that my reasons can possibly be taken into account. Even though it is unpopular, I am not willing to blindly trudge on for esports or anything for that matter, it is not my way as a person. If enough people are interested it will still happen, I am in the minority, but a minority that exists and should be represented. fear of failure holds us back more than anything. | ||
|
Conquest101
United States1395 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:32 nath wrote: fear of failure holds us back more than anything. Actual failure holds us back too. | ||
|
Pisko.
United States214 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:29 Seide wrote: + Show Spoiler + On October 01 2011 10:18 Pisko. wrote: It doesn't matter if you personally aren't going to watch it, just say yes. Why would you not want to push this as much as possible? This isn't just about you, putting SC2 on TV will attract a whole new crowd and greatly expand the scene. Simple, because Starcraft 2's success on ESPN is not a 100% gurantee. Lets run through this scenario: Ok, so I vote yes. SC2 goes on ESPN2, I don't watch it. SC2 does not do well on ESPN for some reason, eg: many still preferring streams or whatnot, reasons can be many and complicated. Thanks to my lies to for the sake of esports, esports is actually worse off, as a second chance is harder to get. I'd rather vote no, and voice my opinion as to why, so that my reasons can possibly be taken into account. I am not willing to blindly trudge on for esports or anything for that matter, it is not my way as a person. If enough people are interested it will still happen, I am in the minority, but a minority that exists and should be represented. What is the difference between now and whenever you think it should be on TV? | ||
|
Seide
United States831 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:34 Pisko. wrote: What is the difference between now and whenever you think it should be on TV? I'm not the person to ask this question of, as I have said clearly that I am not interested in watching it on TV. Is the concept of being unwilling to lie for a random cause that difficult to understand and respect? | ||
|
FieryBalrog
United States1381 Posts
| ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10340 Posts
| ||
|
Elefanto
Switzerland3584 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:31 nath wrote: you are missing the point. as a fledgling industry, we need to promote the shit out of esports anywhere we can. motherfucking espn 2? just say yes. thats the point. No, that's wrong. Read Seides post, he explains extremely well why that's a bad way to promote Starcraft. That's just a premature view on the matter, without taking the long term success into consideration. | ||
|
Quenchiest
Canada286 Posts
| ||
|
Sorook
31 Posts
| ||
|
Pisko.
United States214 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:35 Seide wrote: + Show Spoiler + On October 01 2011 10:34 Pisko. wrote: What is the difference between now and whenever you think it should be on TV? I'm not the person to ask this question of, as I have said clearly that I am not interested in watching it on TV. Is the concept of being unwilling to lie for a random cause that difficult to understand and respect? Not lying is 100% respectable, I never said that was a bad thing. I'm just afraid this could be our only chance and I don't want it to go wrong. | ||
|
magnaflow
Canada1521 Posts
If a deal of some sort were to ever go through I would truly believe it would be make or break for ESPORTS on TV (In NA/EU of course) | ||
|
Seide
United States831 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:38 Pisko. wrote: Not lying is 100% respectable, I never said that was a bad thing. I'm just afraid this could be our only chance and I don't want it to go wrong. I can respect that, so lets just pocket our differences. We both want what's good for Starcraft. | ||
|
Grampz
United States2147 Posts
| ||
|
GypsyBeast
Canada630 Posts
| ||
|
pzea469
United States1520 Posts
I'd obviously tune in regardless of what they did though. | ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
Think smaller at first. | ||
|
TimeFlighT
Australia257 Posts
| ||
|
oDDable
United States54 Posts
| ||
|
funcmode
Australia720 Posts
| ||
|
Roe
Canada6002 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:31 nath wrote: you are missing the point. as a fledgling industry, we need to promote the shit out of esports anywhere we can. motherfucking espn 2? just say yes. thats the point. wouldn't you want its birth to be healthy? or are you more inclined to agree with quarterly profit-types? | ||
|
Grampz
United States2147 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:48 funcmode wrote: I didn't read all 20 pages so apologies if this was brought up, but do people not remember this awesome piece by Kennigit? sure, however that is 1 man's opinion out of a legion of fans | ||
|
[GiTM]-Ace
United States4935 Posts
On October 01 2011 09:57 Pisko. wrote: This isn't just about you, this is for the players and the progression of the game. Saying garbage like this is extremely selfish. Being on TV makes the game more popular. It attracts people who normally wouldn't even know what a Zealot or Marauder even is. This brings in sponsors. Sponsors = money. Players start getting paid more as the game gets taken more seriously. There is literally nothing bad that can happen. If it fails we go back to streaming like we always do, oh well at least we tried. You don't even want to try, which I just can't understand why. It's almost depressing to see people actually think like this. I don't think him being honest is him being selfish lol. Why lie? What if his vote is counted in a ## of expected viewers. If everyone voted yes not intending to watch how would that look? | ||
|
TheAmazombie
United States3714 Posts
| ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:49 Roe wrote: wouldn't you want its birth to be healthy? or are you more inclined to agree with quarterly profit-types? that's just the way it goes... if you don't advertise your product you'll be forever proud and forever broke. why do you think ESPORTS is all that special, even though it contains the only uppercase letters in this post | ||
|
NekoFlandre
United States497 Posts
| ||
|
Ome
Canada157 Posts
| ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:07 Ome wrote: I think it's a great idea if they can work around the length of individual games. I don't want to see commercial breaks in the middle of a game because they are preset and have to be at this time. That's actually a really good point. You can't really do live events via TV or it would just ruin it for the hardcore fans. PPV i guess? | ||
|
Epoch
Canada257 Posts
| ||
|
Yergidy
United States2107 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:23 jonathan1 wrote: people are totally missing the point. Sundance is asking IF starcraft was on TV, WOULD YOU WATCH IT? and the answer for a lot of people is --No. Why would i watch on TV what I can already watch online in a more comfortable setting? Hell Ya!! You know why? It's cooler to watch stuff on TV. Just seeing SC2 on TV would be a dream come true for me and for many other people. I have cable and I would watch the SHIT out of it. | ||
|
Retgery
Canada1229 Posts
| ||
|
CuSToM
United States1478 Posts
"There is no way that starcraft belongs on the same hallowed channel that brought us log throwing and bass fishing" Can somebody please explain to me why people want Starcraft on TV so badly? I can understand why organizations like MLG would want it but what does it do for a viewer? Do people really care if Timmy the 15 year old Halo player is flipping through his TV and stops on ESPN2 and starts playing Starcraft because of it? It's not like the scene will die if the game doesn't make it into the mainstream, so why are people so vigilant about this? I guess I never really bought into the whole "growth of e-sports" thing because I am always going to enjoy watching and playing the game whether 1,000 people are watching an event or 100,000. Watching it online through your computer is so much more convenient anyways. If you want to watch Starcraft on your TV, hook up your TV to your computer. Also, I don't really think the game is ready. I think too much money is going into Starcraft too soon. It's the hot game right now, but we still have two expansion packs and a bunch of patches until the game is finally where it's supposed to be balance wise. Too much can happen from now and when Legacy of the Void comes out. Everytime the meta-game starts to go into one direction, Blizzard comes in and forces a change upon it. I think that could hurt the viewing experience from a casual viewer who does not play the game. Starcraft is growing just fine and has probably exceeded everyone's expectations, no need to rush into things so fast. | ||
|
Yergidy
United States2107 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:08 Alejandrisha wrote: That's actually a really good point. You can't really do live events via TV or it would just ruin it for the hardcore fans. PPV i guess? They work around commercials for every sport,in baseball they take breaks in between innings no matter how long they are. In Football they just take breaks when they can like timeouts or after a score, after a quarter etc. They can find a way to make it work. | ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:13 Yergidy wrote: They work around commercials for every sport,in baseball they take breaks in between innings no matter how long they are. In Football they just take breaks when they can like timeouts or after a score, after a quarter etc. They can find a way to make it work. Yeah but SC2 doesn't have a time where the zealots and probes and stalkers run into the dugout for the transition into offense... and in football and other sports they actual have COMMERICIAL TIME OUTS. time outs not for the players or w/e, timeouts for commercial breaks. are you really going to have nestea PAUSE a game to take a break for commercials?? Think about it | ||
|
Elefanto
Switzerland3584 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:13 Yergidy wrote: They work around commercials for every sport,in baseball they take breaks in between innings no matter how long they are. In Football they just take breaks when they can like timeouts or after a score, after a quarter etc. They can find a way to make it work. Or the beginning of the Game. If there is a cheese they could switch into the game, as well as during the players set-up time (that's the way it is in bw with the set-up time) | ||
|
seaofsaturn
United States489 Posts
| ||
|
Soliduok
Canada222 Posts
Another point raised is the commercials. I don't see how this could ever be aired live. There is no problem with halting the game (well, not the actual game, but the program) and throwing to a commercial in a tense moment prior to an engagement. Television shows use this suspense envoking tactic nearly every time they air a commercial. I can see SC2 on ESPN being viable for these reasons, as long as the community gets together (literally, for viewing parties, otherwise we'll just continue our life of solidarity infront of our computers watching streams) and if there isn't an oversaturation of shows. | ||
|
Stropheum
United States1124 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:16 Alejandrisha wrote: Yeah but SC2 doesn't have a time where the zealots and probes and stalkers run into the dugout for the transition into offense... and in football and other sports they actual have COMMERICIAL TIME OUTS. time outs not for the players or w/e, timeouts for commercial breaks. are you really going to have nestea PAUSE a game to take a break for commercials?? Think about it Games last about 15 real minutes in most scenarios. One or two commercials between every game with a little intro/outro commentary isn't exactly a stretch. Also they could do commercial bursts. Instead of 2 commercials every 15 minutes they could just run 4/5 commercials every two games. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25270 Posts
I can forsee a slot opening up, people from TL just watching MLG on streams as they normally do, and the 'casual' playerbase that watches it on the TV not being sufficient. Executives would think 'we tried this once, never again' and this potentially lucrative revenue stream for the game would be shut off. Really not sure how I feel about this. | ||
|
Yergidy
United States2107 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:16 Alejandrisha wrote: Yeah but SC2 doesn't have a time where the zealots and probes and stalkers run into the dugout for the transition into offense... and in football and other sports they actual have COMMERICIAL TIME OUTS. time outs not for the players or w/e, timeouts for commercial breaks. are you really going to have nestea PAUSE a game to take a break for commercials?? Think about it In between games, when someone pauses for technical difficulties. Most games only last 20-30 mins which is just fine for commercials. Starcraft would have to have a baseball style commercial system because of course you can't pause in the middle of the game, it would mess up the players too much. | ||
|
Stropheum
United States1124 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:18 Soliduok wrote: I know an arguement one can make would be, why watch it on tv when you can just watch it online. Which is true, I don't really watch tv because I can never find something worth watching that I can't already watch online. But what would make tv an attractive alternative is that if it was a one night a week event that you could invite friends over for, or do the whole "barcraft" thing. If the show is being aired on ESPN won't the bars just have to pay the standard fee for airing ESPN in their bar? Another point raised is the commercials. I don't see how this could ever be aired live. There is no problem with halting the game (well, not the actual game, but the program) and throwing to a commercial in a tense moment prior to an engagement. Television shows use this suspense envoking tactic nearly every time they air a commercial. I can see SC2 on ESPN being viable for these reasons, as long as the community gets together (literally, for viewing parties, otherwise we'll just continue our life of solidarity infront of our computers watching streams) and if there isn't an oversaturation of shows. Wow. I mean I could see how that would aggrivate some people, but honestly, that'd be fine. As long as they're casting with vods, there'd be no issue with just pausing the game at a specified point and just doing a quick recap after the commericals end. | ||
|
StreetWise
United States594 Posts
| ||
|
Reason.SC2
Canada1047 Posts
| ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:20 Yergidy wrote: In between games, when someone pauses for technical difficulties. Most games only last 20-30 mins which is just fine for commercials. Starcraft would have to have a baseball style commercial system because of course you can't pause in the middle of the game, it would mess up the players too much. I don't know. I guess it's just be cause all the stations that are big have their schedules based around the advertisers ie you have to have a cliff hanger/dramatic moment at this time that fits into a commercial break sched. I could foresee a system where instead of a commercial break every 8 minutes they could skip it and have 2 breaks every other 16. but you're only accounting for the typical. What do you do in the case where you have a 55 minute tvt? could you imagine watching the whole game up to minute 53 and then suddenly the next scheduled program for the netword you're on comes on? And you missed the most insane viking cloud / dual prong nuke / mass yamato all over MVP's face. | ||
|
iky43210
United States2099 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:20 Yergidy wrote: In between games, when someone pauses for technical difficulties. Most games only last 20-30 mins which is just fine for commercials. Starcraft would have to have a baseball style commercial system because of course you can't pause in the middle of the game, it would mess up the players too much. 20-30 minute? its much shorter than that real time. and I could care less if Esports grows, all it matter for me is that starcraft is growing since I don't watch anything from Esport but starcraft anyway. | ||
|
zeOllie
Australia486 Posts
so awesome ESPORTS <3 | ||
|
futsel
163 Posts
if TV only than no. love the idea of starcraft on TV, but we don't have ESPN in our country | ||
|
Yergidy
United States2107 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:24 Alejandrisha wrote: I don't know. I guess it's just be cause all the stations that are big have their schedules based around the advertisers ie you have to have a cliff hanger/dramatic moment at this time that fits into a commercial break sched. I could foresee a system where instead of a commercial break every 8 minutes they could skip it and have 2 breaks every other 16. but you're only accounting for the typical. What do you do in the case where you have a 55 minute tvt? could you imagine watching the whole game up to minute 53 and then suddenly the next scheduled program for the netword you're on comes on? And you missed the most insane viking cloud / dual prong nuke / mass yamato all over MVP's face. No just like in baseball they would wait until the inning(game) is over and have commercials after that. Sports have much more leeway with commercials than normal programming, they won't take breaks that will make you miss action. | ||
|
Joey Wheeler
Korea (North)276 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:13 CuSToM wrote: taken from the Facebook group: "There is no way that starcraft belongs on the same hallowed channel that brought us log throwing and bass fishing" Can somebody please explain to me why people want Starcraft on TV so badly? I can understand why organizations like MLG would want it but what does it do for a viewer? Do people really care if Timmy the 15 year old Halo player is flipping through his TV and stops on ESPN2 and starts playing Starcraft because of it? It's not like the scene will die if the game doesn't make it into the mainstream, so why are people so vigilant about this? I guess I never really bought into the whole "growth of e-sports" thing because I am always going to enjoy watching and playing the game whether 1,000 people are watching an event or 100,000. Watching it online through your computer is so much more convenient anyways. If you want to watch Starcraft on your TV, hook up your TV to your computer. Also, I don't really think the game is ready. I think too much money is going into Starcraft too soon. It's the hot game right now, but we still have two expansion packs and a bunch of patches until the game is finally where it's supposed to be balance wise. Too much can happen from now and when Legacy of the Void comes out. Everytime the meta-game starts to go into one direction, Blizzard comes in and forces a change upon it. I think that could hurt the viewing experience from a casual viewer who does not play the game. Starcraft is growing just fine and has probably exceeded everyone's expectations, no need to rush into things so fast. Destiny, a single person, almost gets as many viewers a day as NASL. IPL rarely gets over 3000 viewers. How could you possibly say that the scene is growing when there are simply not enough people to help contribute in justifying the investment in a high budget (or at least somewhat high budget) tourney? There are exceptions, such as live touranments but that is a completely different thing. I'm sure you 're not going to end up enjoying watching Starcraft 2 when pro gamers eventually find it isn't a sustainable profession. | ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:29 Yergidy wrote: No just like in baseball they would wait until the inning(game) is over and have commercials after that. Sports have much more leeway with commercials than normal programming, they won't take breaks that will make you miss action. Wow I just had a case of crazy esports bias lol. I was just sitting here, like yeah, they actually never go to break in a 60-pitch-inning-middle-reliever-meltdown situation. But would a network allow for an ~hour (sc2 mins) without having a break and then showing like 5-6 straight at the end? would be a pretty crazy contract to see laid out haha | ||
|
Dbars
United States273 Posts
| ||
|
Alabasern
United States4005 Posts
| ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:34 Dbars wrote: During football season hell no and im sure you would see a lot of angry people. Other than that id watch. Unless they were going to show the games on saturday then football season really doesn't have anything to do with it. College football is the only time there's a live football game on ESPN 2. | ||
|
Yergidy
United States2107 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:32 Alejandrisha wrote: Wow I just had a case of crazy esports bias lol. I was just sitting here, like yeah, they actually never go to break in a 60-pitch-inning-middle-reliever-meltdown situation. But would a network allow for an ~hour (sc2 mins) without having a break and then showing like 5-6 straight at the end? would be a pretty crazy contract to see laid out haha They have different ways around it besides just after games. In a 55 minute game there is going to be some down time to macro up, like when tastosis talks about peanut butter and furry creatures, it is easy to get a 30 second commercial in there and have a recap if any tech switches happen, they can also come back from commercial early if some big action happens. Keep in mind this will only need to happen on the rare super long games any game less than 30 minutes long would be fine to wait till after the game. | ||
|
justinpal
United States3810 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:34 Dbars wrote: During football season hell no and im sure you would see a lot of angry people. Other than that id watch. Who watches football on ESPN 2? ESPN 2 is the network that shows billiards, tennis, random college sports, a couple of baseball games, etc. ESPN shows football once a week on MNF. I don't see how this would make anyone angry. Football has always been local cable or that directv package. | ||
|
Sockso
United States57 Posts
| ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:37 Yergidy wrote: They have different ways around it besides just after games. In a 55 minute game there is going to be some down time to macro up, like when tastosis talks about peanut butter and furry creatures, it is easy to get a 30 second commercial in there and have a recap if any tech switches happen, they can also come back from commercial early if some big action happens. Keep in mind this will only need to happen on the rare super long games any game less than 30 minutes long would be fine to wait till after the game. Yeah but hour long games don't just become hour long games at the end of an hour. They are 15 min games that can end at the 17 min mark if player x does y, 17 min games that can end at the 19 min mark that could end if player z does a etc etc etc. It'd become an art to understand when you could go to commercial xD as in no player has any timings and even a complete moron would not try to force potentially game-ending taktikz | ||
|
zaii
Guam2611 Posts
I had to turn my phone off for a few. It went bananas with notifications. ![[image loading]](http://a.yfrog.com/img739/7454/8pjcvh.jpg) Sundance: http://twitter.com/#!/MLGSundance/status/119963916808888320 | ||
|
Yergidy
United States2107 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:41 Alejandrisha wrote: Yeah but hour long games don't just become hour long games at the end of an hour. They are 15 min games that can end at the 17 min mark if player x does y, 17 min games that can end at the 19 min mark that could end if player z does a etc etc etc. It'd become an art to understand when you could go to commercial xD as in no player has any timings and even a complete moron would not try to force potentially game-ending taktikz Ya I thought of that after posting it -_- lol. I'm still pretty confident they could work it out if enough people watch it. | ||
|
kofman
Andorra698 Posts
| ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:47 Yergidy wrote: Ya I thought of that after posting it -_- lol. I'm still pretty confident they could work it out if enough people watch it. those little things become extremely important though. they only make money from the ads and potential future money if people enjoy the production. so what entices a guy to watch a 55 min tvt and (knowing he's going to have to sit thru 15 mins of commercials thereafter) watch through commercials waiting for the next game? IDK maybe they already know enough about sc2 to figure out when this guy will just randomly run all his shit into a PF or if genius is actually going to be able to end the game with his gw/void ray builds and they're not telling us! xD | ||
|
NtroP
United States174 Posts
Hmm, looks like Starcraft is a sport. I'm not sure how players injure their hands if physical exertion isn't involved. | ||
|
marxgarza
United States373 Posts
| ||
|
CeriseCherries
6170 Posts
| ||
|
Joey Wheeler
Korea (North)276 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:52 NtroP wrote: "An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others." Hmm, looks like Starcraft is a sport. I'm not sure how players injure their hands if physical exertion isn't involved. It isn't involved because of the mediocre mechanics of most foreign players. | ||
|
Xkalibert
United States1404 Posts
Network slogans The Total Sports Network (1979–1985) The Number One Sports Network (1985–1991) All Sports, All the Time (1991–1994) America's No.1 Sports Network (1994–1998) The Worldwide Leader in Sports (1998– ) I think they just wanted to go to next level in their slogan The No. 1 CyberSport Leader in Sports (2012-- ) | ||
|
Kznn
Brazil9072 Posts
ESPORTS! | ||
|
Marl
United States692 Posts
| ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Hailene
United States80 Posts
| ||
|
Momildo
Brazil93 Posts
| ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
WAY. sudance is a goodddddd!! | ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On 1 hand it is good esport is trying to get bigger and even tough we don't even have it here i would find the idea pretty cool. On the other hand i am honestly disgusted by the "vote yes even if you lie" attitude. | ||
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37023 Posts
WE WIN. WE FINALLY WIN! | ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On October 01 2011 11:50 Alejandrisha wrote: those little things become extremely important though. they only make money from the ads and potential future money if people enjoy the production. so what entices a guy to watch a 55 min tvt and (knowing he's going to have to sit thru 15 mins of commercials thereafter) watch through commercials waiting for the next game? IDK maybe they already know enough about sc2 to figure out when this guy will just randomly run all his shit into a PF or if genius is actually going to be able to end the game with his gw/void ray builds and they're not telling us! xD Jeez guys. Ever watch REAL sports? You wouldn't need to speculate over this shit. They only break to commercial during dead time and between stuff. They will never break in the middle of shit. And the reason normal programming have those cliffhangers is because the networks know you will stick around around. It's not a requirement, but it pleases the sponsors so the networks can charge them up the ass for ad space if they can prove people stick around during the whole show. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:17 Ownos wrote: NFL, NBA, NCAA, etc. all take TV timeouts. So yeah... you're wrong.Jeez guys. Ever watch REAL sports? You wouldn't need to speculate over this shit. They only break to commercial during dead time and between stuff. They will never break in the middle of shit. The soccer/European method of advertising is really ideal but again, MLG is a day long event. Do you guys really think they're going to get a block like that? It'll be pre-recorded, pre-edited stuff handled by ESPN's production team. | ||
|
mtn
729 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:19 Jibba wrote: NFL, NBA, NCAA, etc. all take TV timeouts. So yeah... you're wrong. And so can Starcraft. It's not like SC2 game takes 1h everytime. Commercial after every set sounds good to me. | ||
|
Fangzhou
United States199 Posts
| ||
|
Jacopana
El Salvador210 Posts
| ||
|
ClysmiC
United States2192 Posts
| ||
|
Eschaton
United States1245 Posts
Can you imagine "WAITING FOR SERVER..." on ESPN? No, I can't either. | ||
|
Nemireck
Canada1875 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:19 Jibba wrote: NFL, NBA, NCAA, etc. all take TV timeouts. So yeah... you're wrong. The soccer/European method of advertising is really ideal but again, MLG is a day long event. Do you guys really think they're going to get a block like that? It'll be pre-recorded, pre-edited stuff handled by ESPN's production team. Keyword there is "timeout", they don't simply cut to commercial while the action continues off-air. There is plenty of opportunity for the network to get their advertising time in between games. | ||
|
Nefariously
277 Posts
| ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:19 Jibba wrote: NFL, NBA, NCAA, etc. all take TV timeouts. So yeah... you're wrong. The soccer/European method of advertising is really ideal but again, MLG is a day long event. Do you guys really think they're going to get a block like that? It'll be pre-recorded, pre-edited stuff handled by ESPN's production team. Even if it was live coverage, they would be fine because of the soccer/baseball (sometimes you get marathon innings) method. How many sc2 games actually go for an hour anyways? But I do agree that its going to be pre-recorded stuff at first at least, with the possibility of championship Sunday getting some live coverage. | ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
| ||
|
VPCursed
1044 Posts
| ||
|
Amornthep
Singapore2605 Posts
| ||
|
monx
Canada1400 Posts
| ||
|
IPA
United States3206 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:37 Vei wrote: Fuck EVERYONE who voted no. Why on earth? Because I don't watch TV? Because even if I did, I wouldn't want to buy a premium satellite package? | ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1598 Posts
| ||
|
VPCursed
1044 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:40 IPA wrote: Because I don't watch TV? Because even if I did, I wouldn't want to buy a premium satellite package? so you would hurt e-sports just because you can't enjoy it from your couch sound logic | ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
On October 01 2011 10:48 funcmode wrote: I didn't read all 20 pages so apologies if this was brought up, but do people not remember this awesome piece by Kennigit? I still think it was a terrible article. What successful, mainstream sport benefited from not having TV coverage? None. Poker -- the sport closest to SC2 (still a stretch) -- probably became huger with poker on ESPN / pokerstars and all that kind of stuff. That's just like.. ugh. Really really bad article, imo. | ||
|
Emreis
9 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:41 VPCursed wrote: so you would hurt e-sports just because you can't enjoy it from your couch sound logic The question is "would you tune in?" Some people just don't like lying as a principle | ||
|
mprs
Canada2933 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:41 VPCursed wrote: so you would hurt e-sports just because you can't enjoy it from your couch sound logic That is terrible logic. The point of the poll is to essentially let Sundance know how much support he would get. Why you would want to mislead him into making an incorrect assessment (and then possibly an incorrect investment) is beyond me. | ||
|
unDef
United States85 Posts
| ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:40 IPA wrote: Because I don't watch TV? Because even if I did, I wouldn't want to buy a premium satellite package? I don't watch TV either, but this is good for the scene as a whole. How selfish can you be? Because YOU don't watch TV you don't want to see our game be made accessible to the masses (TV)? To make it easier for bars? All because you don't want to watch it? And since when was ESPN2 a premium sat package? I mean I guess it probably is in some, but I'm sure they don't plan to introduce a new sport as a pay-to-watch when it's already free-to-watch online. I mean.. wtf. edit -- whoops the poll is about whether or not you would watch, if you honestly are unable to watch and voted no, then my bad. accurate poll results are good. | ||
|
sephius
United Kingdom200 Posts
My reasons are I think there's SO much SC2 content, and as a result it's spreading the overall viewership figures thin and too much content is a bit overwhelming. There's just so much content about that it, in a sense, trivializes all the other content. Another reason is that I can watch SC2 on demand anytime I want through the internet. I haven't watched TV properly for over a year now, and that's because the internet has made it redundant. I don't know whether it's worth the risk of a TV port when it's already working fine on the internet because you can watch it at your own discretion and on demand. I do however think it's a really cool idea, and I do hope it works out. But at the same time I think, personally, it's one of them 'if it ain't broken don't fix it' type of things. | ||
|
VPCursed
1044 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:43 mprs wrote: That is terrible logic. The point of the poll is to essentially let Sundance know how much support he would get. Why you would want to mislead him into making an incorrect assessment (and then possibly an incorrect investment) is beyond me. How could i overlook such a flaw in my logic. Thank you sir. | ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:19 Jibba wrote: NFL, NBA, NCAA, etc. all take TV timeouts. So yeah... you're wrong. The soccer/European method of advertising is really ideal but again, MLG is a day long event. Do you guys really think they're going to get a block like that? It'll be pre-recorded, pre-edited stuff handled by ESPN's production team. Timeouts would imply dead time? How about when Artosis and Tasteless are goofing off for 45 minutes before game 2 starts. This isn't hard too imagine where they can put commercials. MLG has 1 hour long crowd shots. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:19 Jibba wrote: The soccer/European method of advertising is really ideal I think this is debatable. There's something to be said for not having logos plastered all over uniforms. Although with SC2 this is alread the status quo, but we really don't see the players that much. | ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:45 Ownos wrote: Timeouts would imply dead time? How about when Artosis and Tasteless are goofing off for 45 minutes before game 2 starts. This isn't hard too imagine where they can put commercials. MLG has 1 hour long crowd shots. the point is you can't have an hour long shot on crowds on tv. the issue is not breaks between games. obviously you could have a commercial between games. we're talking about DURING the game | ||
|
mtn
729 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:48 Alejandrisha wrote: the point is you can't have an hour long shot on crowds on tv. the issue is not breaks between games. obviously you could have a commercial between games. we're talking about DURING the game Leagues already have changing logos ON SCREEN. You guys make big deals out of your ass. | ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:44 sephius wrote: Yes, but at the same time a huge resounding no. My reasons are I think there's SO much SC2 content, and as a result it's spreading the overall viewership figures thin and too much content is a bit overwhelming. There's just so much content about that it, in a sense, trivializes all the other content. Another reason is that I can watch SC2 on demand anytime I want through the internet. I haven't watched TV properly for over a year now, and that's because the internet has made it redundant. I don't know whether it's worth the risk of a TV port when it's already working fine on the internet because you can watch it at your own discretion and on demand. I do however think it's a really cool idea, and I do hope it works out. But at the same time I think, personally, it's one of them 'if it ain't broken don't fix it' type of things. Lots of people already tune into at a set time to watch a live tournament. Only difference is the medium in which it's delivered. It would not be difficult to put up VODs whether the live stream came from Twitch.tv or a TV broadcast. | ||
|
peekn
United States1152 Posts
| ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:48 Alejandrisha wrote: the point is you can't have an hour long shot on crowds on tv. the issue is not breaks between games. obviously you could have a commercial between games. we're talking about DURING the game And I said there is no issue because they would never do that. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:45 Ownos wrote: No, they take timeouts at scheduled intervals and it can interrupt the flow of the game. Basketball and Football have mini-interruptions built into them, which SC2 doesn't, so that's the queue to take a television timeout, but those still interrupt the game. They're not going to show a 45 minute block of ads to make up for it. They'll do something like 8-2-8-2-8-2 to get in their advertisements, like almost all shows do. Even when ESPN2 is showing paintball and MTG and that other stuff, I don't think they're covering it live.Timeouts would imply dead time? How about when Artosis and Tasteless are goofing off for 45 minutes before game 2 starts. This isn't hard too imagine where they can put commercials. MLG has 1 hour long crowd shots. | ||
|
dmnum
Brazil6910 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:55 Jibba wrote: No, they take timeouts at scheduled intervals and it can interrupt the flow of the game. Basketball and Football have mini-interruptions built into them, which SC2 doesn't, so that's the queue to take a television timeout, but those still interrupt the game. They're not going to show a 45 minute block of ads to make up for it. They'll do something like 8-2-8-2-8-2 to get in their advertisements, like almost all shows do. Even when ESPN2 is showing paintball and MTG and that other stuff, I don't think they're covering it live. Here in brazil(and I think in most countries) the commentators usually call out the sponsors, then their logomark appears on some corner of the tv and a voice say their slogans. All of that while the game is going on. I don't know if that's doable for SC2, because the games take different amounts of time(soccer takes like 45-50 minutes til' half time), but I think it's something to consider. | ||
|
Dalguno
United States2446 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:55 Jibba wrote: No, they take timeouts at scheduled intervals and it can interrupt the flow of the game. Basketball and Football have mini-interruptions built into them, which SC2 doesn't, so that's the queue to take a television timeout, but those still interrupt the game. They're not going to show a 45 minute block of ads to make up for it. They'll do something like 8-2-8-2-8-2 to get in their advertisements, like almost all shows do. Even when ESPN2 is showing paintball and MTG and that other stuff, I don't think they're covering it live. Would they ever stop in the middle of a game for an ad? I can't think it's too unrealistic, honestly. After an evenly-traded battle, or macro periods, etc. | ||
|
ak1knight
United States313 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:55 Jibba wrote: No, they take timeouts at scheduled intervals and it can interrupt the flow of the game. Basketball and Football have mini-interruptions built into them, which SC2 doesn't, so that's the queue to take a television timeout, but those still interrupt the game. They're not going to show a 45 minute block of ads to make up for it. They'll do something like 8-2-8-2-8-2 to get in their advertisements, like almost all shows do. Even when ESPN2 is showing paintball and MTG and that other stuff, I don't think they're covering it live. It works for soccer, they show small logos in the corner every so often and then take a bunch of commercials at the half. They could show small logos in dead areas on the screen and take a ton of commercials between games. | ||
|
mtn
729 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:55 Jibba wrote: No, they take timeouts at scheduled intervals and it can interrupt the flow of the game. Basketball and Football have mini-interruptions built into them, which SC2 doesn't, so that's the queue to take a television timeout, but those still interrupt the game. They're not going to show a 45 minute block of ads to make up for it. They'll do something like 8-2-8-2-8-2 to get in their advertisements, like almost all shows do. Even when ESPN2 is showing paintball and MTG and that other stuff, I don't think they're covering it live. Starcraft is Not Basketball, Soccer, Football or what ever else you will mention. If SC2 will be on ESPN, time for commercials will be found. | ||
|
peekn
United States1152 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:04 Dalguno wrote: Would they ever stop in the middle of a game for an ad? I can't think it's too unrealistic, honestly. After an evenly-traded battle, or macro periods, etc. I would really hate to miss a critical mineral line harass during a break. Which most players do after they lose a major engagement. I really do like the idea of having ad like things while they are still playing the game and just have logos poping up. But they will probably just do it pre recorded.. | ||
|
thingULTRA
United States48 Posts
| ||
|
Engore
United States1916 Posts
It would seem like they would need to run it pre-recorded just so they could easily plan ahead when breaks would be etc. This comes up quite often. I'm sure theres a format out there that would cover it, but i think we're still quite far off from having sc2 on US/international television. I'd love it, and watch it. God knows ESPN has the stations to run it. | ||
|
Utinni
Canada1196 Posts
| ||
|
Kluey
Canada1197 Posts
| ||
|
ReaperX
Hong Kong1758 Posts
| ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:55 Jibba wrote: No, they take timeouts at scheduled intervals and it can interrupt the flow of the game. Basketball and Football have mini-interruptions built into them, which SC2 doesn't, so that's the queue to take a television timeout, but those still interrupt the game. They're not going to show a 45 minute block of ads to make up for it. They'll do something like 8-2-8-2-8-2 to get in their advertisements, like almost all shows do. Even when ESPN2 is showing paintball and MTG and that other stuff, I don't think they're covering it live. They never take "scheduled" timeouts to force commercials. That's the silliest thing ever. In basketball, they rarely use timeouts early in the game or at regular intervals. Most of the time, at the end of a close game they abuse the shit out of timeouts to advance the ball and even then they sometimes don't even bother to cut to commercial. And it does not interrupt the flow of the game. It's a time out. -_- Never seen someone call timeout in the middle of a play lol. | ||
|
Kiyo.
United States2284 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:16 Ownos wrote: They never take "scheduled" timeouts to force commercials. That's the silliest thing ever. In basketball, they rarely use timeouts early in the game or at regular intervals. Most of the time, at the end of a close game they abuse the shit out of timeouts to advance the ball and even then they sometimes don't even bother to cut to commercial. And it does not interrupt the flow of the game. It's a time out. -_- Never seen someone call timeout in the middle of a play lol. Lol, yes they do. Especially in Basketball, but sometimes in football too. If you ever go to an actual game you'll hear the PA announcer announce it as a "Media Timeout". They do it at the end of a play or when the ball goes out of bounds, a foul happens, etc. | ||
|
Fionn
United States23455 Posts
It's crazy to believe that MLG, which is from Friday to Sunday, would get any live time on ESPN2. Those days are dedicated solely to football, football, and more football. When it's not football seasons, those hours are preoccupied with basketball, college basketball, and even more basketball. When it's not basketball, it's baseball 24/7. Even if it is on late at night and edited, I think it's a great move if it can happen. Even if totally bombs and only one hundred new people watch the game for the first time, it's still a success by getting one hundred new people to be interested about Starcraft and e-sports in general. | ||
|
Engore
United States1916 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:19 Fionn wrote: I don't think a lot of people are getting what this is. ESPN2 has been known to show many niche sports before. A few years ago, I remember waking up around 3:00 AM, switching through the channels and landing on a Magic the Gathering tournament on ESPN2. I fully expect, if this happens, for MLG's semifinals/finals to be edited down to a two or three hour showing where ESPN2 can put on at night with the other niche sports and reruns of the day's Sportscenter. It's crazy to believe that MLG, which is from Friday to Sunday, would get any live time on ESPN2. Those days are dedicated solely to football, football, and more football. When it's not football seasons, those hours are preoccupied with basketball, college basketball, and even more basketball. When it's not basketball, it's baseball 24/7. Even if it is on late at night and edited, I think it's a great move if it can happen. Even if totally bombs and only one hundred new people watch the game for the first time, it's still a success by getting one hundred new people to be interested about Starcraft and e-sports in general. Ya. It's like when they show paint ball and stuff like that. I've seen a bunch of those things. You see bowling quite often on saturday/sunday afternoon, which seems odd because it doesn't seem like a good sport to show but I'm sure theres a crowd for it. | ||
|
Kiyo.
United States2284 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:19 Fionn wrote: I don't think a lot of people are getting what this is. ESPN2 has been known to show many niche sports before. A few years ago, I remember waking up around 3:00 AM, switching through the channels and landing on a Magic the Gathering tournament on ESPN2. I fully expect, if this happens, for MLG's semifinals/finals to be edited down to a two or three hour showing where ESPN2 can put on at night with the other niche sports and reruns of the day's Sportscenter. It's crazy to believe that MLG, which is from Friday to Sunday, would get any live time on ESPN2. Those days are dedicated solely to football, football, and more football. When it's not football seasons, those hours are preoccupied with basketball, college basketball, and even more basketball. When it's not basketball, it's baseball 24/7. Even if it is on late at night and edited, I think it's a great move if it can happen. Even if totally bombs and only one hundred new people watch the game for the first time, it's still a success by getting one hundred new people to be interested about Starcraft and e-sports in general. While I think an edited version at a nonlive timeslot is more likely, ESPN 2 doesn't really show much on Sundays during the Finals timeslot. I could see a live broadcast of the last few rounds being viable. | ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:18 Kiyo. wrote: Lol, yes they do. Especially in Basketball, but sometimes in football too. If you ever go to an actual game you'll hear the PA announcer announce it as a "Media Timeout". They do it at the end of a play or when the ball goes out of bounds, a foul happens, etc. All this really treads on conspiracy than fact. Maybe you're experiences are different. Yeah, fouls happen, huddles happen, dead time happens. If everytime someone's keyboard fails or their sound goes out, and MLG cuts to commercial that's totally planned to right? I'm sure Leenock was paid to pause and say his keyboard's conveniently not working anymore lol. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:16 Ownos wrote: They never take "scheduled" timeouts to force commercials. That's the silliest thing ever. In basketball, they rarely use timeouts early in the game or at regular intervals. Most of the time, at the end of a close game they abuse the shit out of timeouts to advance the ball and even then they sometimes don't even bother to cut to commercial. And it does not interrupt the flow of the game. It's a time out. -_- Never seen someone call timeout in the middle of a play lol. I don't know what to tell you, but I don't think you follow sports very closely or you don't attend live games. They absolutely take television timeouts. Like I said, the European system for advertising during sporting events is better imo, but that's just not the way it's done in the US except for soccer. You can keep talking about the ideal situation and what SC2 deserves, I'm just telling you how television and advertising breaks actually work in the US, even during sports. That's what they'll most likely be working with. And again, when ESPN2 shows niche stuff like log rolling, paintball, MTG, etc. they're never live. It sounds like people expect MLG Sunday to be cast in full, live and I just don't see how that'll happen. It's unrealistic. Fionn's post is exactly right. | ||
|
Torpedo.Vegas
United States1890 Posts
Basically, I was thinking that if this partnership were to seriously occur, MLG could schedule the matches such that the most popular and biggest name players play within a certain "primetime" time slot. Where generally, the big games of the day for the most part are played in this 2-3 hour window. This is coincidentally the same window that ESPN would then air on their channel. At the beginning and end of the broadcast, and even during it, ESPN could provide instructions on how to watch more of this content, possibly being restreamed through their site. If it gets really popular they could always expand the window, but I think this is a good middle ground to test the waters. ESPN could also leverage their channels to advertise MLG and SC2 in the weeks leading up to the event. That would get a lot of viewer attention that may not otherwise know about MLG. The only true way to televise an ESPORT as big and volatile (time wise) as SC2 is to have a dedicated channel like MBC or OGN, where they could cater commercials to the current environment. But that isn't realistic unless there is a new eESPN or something, but that still a long ways off. | ||
|
Ksquared
United States1748 Posts
| ||
|
Skullflower
United States3779 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:40 IPA wrote: Because I don't watch TV? Because even if I did, I wouldn't want to buy a premium satellite package? Premium package? Are you serious? ESPN is pretty standard by now. It's not like HBO or Showtime. Also, they could go with what they do for soccer in regards to commericals where it's uninterrupted until halftime. | ||
|
redFF
United States3910 Posts
| ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:26 Ownos wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_timeoutAll this really treads on conspiracy than fact. Maybe you're experiences are different. Yeah, fouls happen, huddles happen, dead time happens. If everytime someone's keyboard fails or their sound goes out, and MLG cuts to commercial that's totally planned to right? I'm sure Leenock was paid to pause and say his keyboard's conveniently not working anymore lol. Time-outs are usually called by coaches or players, although for some sports, TV timeouts are called to allow media to air commercial breaks. Do you really want to keep pursuing this? You're so unbelievably misguided about it and how broadcasting works. Does this not sound scheduled to you? + Show Spoiler + College basketball: at the first dead ball after 4 minute intervals (beyond the 16:00, 12:00, 8:00 and 4:00 minute mark of each half). Additionally, the first 30-second team timeout in the second half is expanded to a television timeout. Previously in College Basketball a timeout could not take place before free throws were shot but they had to be shot first. If second one was missed then play would continue. However, if free throws are to be shot, the timeout is taken first. Akin to not being allowed to ice the shooter on a media timeout. Something teams do frequently during a close game when shooter is on the line. NHL: during stoppages of play, at the discretion of the TV timeout coordinator and typically after passing the following marks of each period (Less than 14:00, Less than 10:00 and Less than 6:00 minutes) in each period. One of the linesmen wears a pager that alerts him when a TV timeout should be taken. NBA: at the first dead ball after 6:00 and 3:00 in each quarter. First TV timeout is charged to the home team and second TV timeout is charged to the away team, assuming no other timeouts have been called (those would then replace the mandatory TV timeouts). In addition, a timeout at 9:00 in the second and fourth quarter charged to neither team. | ||
|
Kiyo.
United States2284 Posts
And the answer for everyone should be yes. It would bring so much to the esports scene. | ||
|
hitpoint
United States1511 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:33 Kiyo. wrote: The poll wasn't asking if you'd watch Starcraft on ESPN. It was just asking Starcraft on ESPN? And the answer for everyone should be yes. It would bring so much to the esports scene. Then the poll should be fixed. Sundance asked - "Twitter and Reddit nation. StarCraft on ESPN2... Would you tune in? I am sitting with a TV exec who wants to know. You've got an hour." | ||
|
jimmyjingle
United States472 Posts
would they have to obs at like 480p though? | ||
|
Saturnize
United States2473 Posts
| ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1598 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:38 jimmyjingle wrote: i would buy espn from my cable provider to watch starcraft on TV. would they have to obs at like 480p though? They would broadcast it in the highest definition possible. 1080. Why? Cuz it is cable sup. | ||
|
Torpedo.Vegas
United States1890 Posts
| ||
|
starcraft911
Korea (South)1263 Posts
| ||
|
Rocco605
United States19 Posts
| ||
|
Sandro
897 Posts
| ||
|
jimmyjingle
United States472 Posts
| ||
|
sensenmann
United States172 Posts
| ||
|
Kiyo.
United States2284 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:45 Sandro wrote: So, has Sundance tweeted anything relevant ever since the initial talks? MLGSundance Sundance DiGiovanni Thank you Reddit and Twitter for answering the call. Front-page of reddit and well over a thousand replies and retweets. Made an impression. Was the most relevant tweet after. | ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:32 Jibba wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_timeout Do you really want to keep pursuing this? You're so unbelievably misguided about it and how broadcasting works. Does this not sound scheduled to you? + Show Spoiler + College basketball: at the first dead ball after 4 minute intervals (beyond the 16:00, 12:00, 8:00 and 4:00 minute mark of each half). Additionally, the first 30-second team timeout in the second half is expanded to a television timeout. Previously in College Basketball a timeout could not take place before free throws were shot but they had to be shot first. If second one was missed then play would continue. However, if free throws are to be shot, the timeout is taken first. Akin to not being allowed to ice the shooter on a media timeout. Something teams do frequently during a close game when shooter is on the line. NHL: during stoppages of play, at the discretion of the TV timeout coordinator and typically after passing the following marks of each period (Less than 14:00, Less than 10:00 and Less than 6:00 minutes) in each period. One of the linesmen wears a pager that alerts him when a TV timeout should be taken. NBA: at the first dead ball after 6:00 and 3:00 in each quarter. First TV timeout is charged to the home team and second TV timeout is charged to the away team, assuming no other timeouts have been called (those would then replace the mandatory TV timeouts). In addition, a timeout at 9:00 in the second and fourth quarter charged to neither team. OK cool, but doesn't change that they aren't cutting to commercial in the middle of the action. So they extend dead time that happens anyways. Cool. Play a few more commercials before Leenock can unpause, but considering the amount of time players are fiddling with their peripherals it wouldn't even be needed. Besides, even if they do cut in action, they almost always cut back if something happens or they can just pause if the game continues over 20 minutes. Players can pause for all sorts of stupid or valid reasons, phone, bathroom, lag, w/e. So why not an ad. This is not a problem that is insurmountable. | ||
|
Panzerfaust7
United States38 Posts
| ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:55 Ownos wrote: Like I said before, it's not a problem at all because you're not getting live SC2. Watch, it'll be pre-recorded and cut together with great editing, possibly even past MLG footage. All of their niche sport coverage works that way. And I'm not complaining about it, I'll still look forward to it and watch it. I'm just saying you're out of your mind if you think you're getting live coverage of a full MLG Sunday.OK cool, but doesn't change that they aren't cutting to commercial in the middle of the action. So they extend dead time that happens anyways. Cool. Play a few more commercials before Leenock can unpause, but considering the amount of time players are fiddling with their peripherals it wouldn't even be needed. Besides, even if they do cut in action, they almost always cut back if something happens or they can just pause if the game continues over 20 minutes. Players can pause for all sorts of stupid or valid reasons, phone, bathroom, lag, w/e. So why not an ad. This is not a problem that is insurmountable. | ||
|
Engore
United States1916 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:55 Ownos wrote: OK cool, but doesn't change that they aren't cutting to commercial in the middle of the action. So they extend dead time that happens anyways. Cool. Play a few more commercials before Leenock can unpause, but considering the amount of time players are fiddling with their peripherals it wouldn't even be needed. Besides, even if they do cut in action, they almost always cut back if something happens or they can just pause if the game continues over 20 minutes. Players can pause for all sorts of stupid or valid reasons, phone, bathroom, lag, w/e. So why not an ad. This is not a problem that is insurmountable. The thing about pausing for a commercial is where do you do it? I mean you typically don't want any pauses unless it's really required, i.e. my keyboard won't work etc. You can't really set a specific time to do it because you could abuse that. Just seems odd to have that. Just for another example of a sport that doesn't pause for commercials, nascar. They cut to commercials during the live race and you do miss action, they cut back for wrecks. Obviously comparing normal sports to sc2 is a bit difficult on the television side. But like i said earlier people in that business will be able to come up with a format for it. That's why they do it for a living. Hopefully it would just get good enough ratings to continue to be broadcast :o And ya I think pre-recorded is the best thing to do. Although i prefer live sc2, i would still watch pre-recorded stuff with no problem. | ||
|
Diglett
600 Posts
unfortunately i think sundance means only sc2 :[ but i would still watch for the sake of ESPORTS | ||
|
Captain Peabody
United States3110 Posts
| ||
|
PresenceSc2
Australia4032 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:29 Ksquared wrote: MLG and ESPN have partnered before so its not that crazy Wow..... Captain negative gtfo please. Gogo sundance ur a total boss!! | ||
|
leperphilliac
United States399 Posts
I have a feeling a lot of people who voted yes voted so because they want to promote ESports into mainstream media, but if given a choice are going to watch it from their computers anyways. | ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On October 01 2011 14:37 Za7oX wrote: Wow..... Captain negative gtfo please. Gogo sundance ur a total boss!! Not sure if that was a miss-quote or idiocy because the post or portion of a post that you quoted has no real negativity in it. It just looks like he's saying they've partnered before so it wouldn't be surprising if they did so again. As for the question at hand, in all honesty... I don't know if I'd watch televised Starcraft unless it's done really well and really big and I don't think that could happen due to the nature of the game. I think that having pre-planned pauses for commercials would ruin it for live audiences which I feel really add to the experience and are one of the reasons I like watching MLG events, it would also have an impact on the gameplay. Pauses clearly affect the players, when you're strenuously maintaining 200+ effective APM for 20 minutes and suddenly you stop so they can play a few commercials, it could potentially throw you off. If it goes the route of recorded footage, edited for television, it would make more sense, but that would kill some of the reason I'm more interested in MLG events over the replay-cast IPL events, quite simply, I feel a lot more excitement knowing that the game is being played right then. There's a lot of issues that would have to be addressed to get Starcraft onto ESPN, and even if all of those are addressed, I'm not certain if I would be prompted to watch it if an online alternative were available. To be honest, I'm not even sure if some of those issues can be addressed without some sacrifices being made on the part of the Starcraft broadcast or on the part of ESPN. | ||
|
Muffinman53
571 Posts
| ||
|
Twistacles
Canada1327 Posts
| ||
|
seiferoth10
3362 Posts
Would I tune in? Nope, rather watch on a stream so I can multitask in the meantime. These days with HTPCs and such, I see no reason to confine myself to a tv. | ||
|
kofman
Andorra698 Posts
On October 01 2011 14:37 Za7oX wrote: Wow..... Captain negative gtfo please. Gogo sundance ur a total boss!! Wtf? How is anything he said negative? Actually, by calling him "captain negative" and telling him to "gtfo please", you're the one who's being negative. Please learn to read, so that you don't post stupid stuff like this anymore. | ||
|
ThaZenith
Canada3116 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 108965
1096 Posts
| ||
|
strikerz200
58 Posts
60 inch tv Vs 20 inch lcd screen? TV ALL THE WAY not to mention the surround system I have going on in my living room? fuk yea I'd watch it on TV and grab my popcorn and lie down on my couch. This would one time i watch TV lol | ||
|
DeadCell
Canada256 Posts
| ||
|
IPA
United States3206 Posts
On October 01 2011 12:44 Vei wrote: I don't watch TV either, but this is good for the scene as a whole. How selfish can you be? Because YOU don't watch TV you don't want to see our game be made accessible to the masses (TV)? To make it easier for bars? All because you don't want to watch it? And since when was ESPN2 a premium sat package? I mean I guess it probably is in some, but I'm sure they don't plan to introduce a new sport as a pay-to-watch when it's already free-to-watch online. I mean.. wtf. edit -- whoops the poll is about whether or not you would watch, if you honestly are unable to watch and voted no, then my bad. accurate poll results are good. The question is "Would I tune in?" My answer is no. As you said, accurate poll results are good. I love all the ESSSPURTSSS fans getting hurt over my response. I love this game but I wouldn't watch it on TV because...I can't and don't want to (again, no TV). | ||
|
IPA
United States3206 Posts
On October 01 2011 13:48 Kiyo. wrote: Was the most relevant tweet after. Also, lol at 1k replies. To ESPN that is peanuts. Not trying to be a prophet of doom (I <3 SC with all my heart) but that isn't really something to brag about. Sundance to ESPN folk: "We got 1k replies!" ESPN folk: "PBA Bowling Championship gets 17k replies..." | ||
|
DrakanSilva
Chile932 Posts
On October 01 2011 15:13 IPA wrote: Also, lol at 1k replies. To ESPN that is peanuts. Not trying to be a prophet of doom (I <3 SC with all my heart) but that isn't really something to brag about. Sundance to ESPN folk: "We got 1k replies!" ESPN folk: "PBA Bowling Championship gets 17k replies..." Mmm If ESPN 2 shows live MLG during those 3 days it would get A LOT more than 17k replies. do a twitt about PBA Bowling at some hour during the day and see if it gets 17k replies. I'm not sure. It will all dependes if the casters are good. Yeah I would love to see day9, jp, djwheat, tastosis and some more on ESPN, but there are others I wouldn't watch. So I voted yes. | ||
|
RESTRiCT
Canada123 Posts
BUT I WOULD TUNE IN | ||
|
KazeHydra
Japan2788 Posts
| ||
|
Setev
Malaysia390 Posts
But realistically, I'll probably watch on computer anyways. | ||
|
KimJongChill
United States6429 Posts
| ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On October 01 2011 14:45 Mordiford wrote: Not sure if that was a miss-quote or idiocy because the post or portion of a post that you quoted has no real negativity in it. It just looks like he's saying they've partnered before so it wouldn't be surprising if they did so again. As for the question at hand, in all honesty... I don't know if I'd watch televised Starcraft unless it's done really well and really big and I don't think that could happen due to the nature of the game. I think that having pre-planned pauses for commercials would ruin it for live audiences which I feel really add to the experience and are one of the reasons I like watching MLG events, it would also have an impact on the gameplay. Pauses clearly affect the players, when you're strenuously maintaining 200+ effective APM for 20 minutes and suddenly you stop so they can play a few commercials, it could potentially throw you off. If it goes the route of recorded footage, edited for television, it would make more sense, but that would kill some of the reason I'm more interested in MLG events over the replay-cast IPL events, quite simply, I feel a lot more excitement knowing that the game is being played right then. There's a lot of issues that would have to be addressed to get Starcraft onto ESPN, and even if all of those are addressed, I'm not certain if I would be prompted to watch it if an online alternative were available. To be honest, I'm not even sure if some of those issues can be addressed without some sacrifices being made on the part of the Starcraft broadcast or on the part of ESPN. Yeah if it goes onto TV and it's prerecorded it wouldn't be for people already in the sc2 community who watch streams all the time.. we would just find out the results via the internet and watch in online :/ | ||
|
Jinsho
United Kingdom3101 Posts
On October 01 2011 14:45 Mordiford wrote: I don't know if I'd watch televised Starcraft unless it's done really well and really big and I don't think that could happen due to the nature of the game. I think that having pre-planned pauses for commercials would ruin it for live audiences which I feel really add to the experience and are one of the reasons I like watching MLG events, it would also have an impact on the gameplay. Pauses clearly affect the players, when you're strenuously maintaining 200+ effective APM for 20 minutes and suddenly you stop so they can play a few commercials, it could potentially throw you off. This is a pretty dumb thing to say to be honest. Have you never watched football (soccer)? There are no breaks for 45 minutes, so very obviously no commercials are played during that time. I'm sure they'd manage. | ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On October 01 2011 15:36 Jinsho wrote: This is a pretty dumb thing to say to be honest. Have you never watched football (soccer)? There are no breaks for 45 minutes, so very obviously no commercials are played during that time. I'm sure they'd manage. You realize that's not the only issue I was addressing, perhaps I was overly general, but despite Football's viewer base being absolutely massive, there's also a fairly set expectation for the length of time of a game. They could quite easily have someone ready to play commercials whenever a Starcraft game ends but you could also run into advertising issues if say on any given day, you have 50 minute TvTs back to back for 5 hours. I'm not sure if live Starcraft coverage would at all be possible for an event like MLG simply because of the volatility, for show-matches it could sort of work. Also, none of these issues are unresolvable, I'm just not sure what kind of product would be viable on ESPN. Sundance is a smart guy, I'm sure he's thought most of this stuff through a dozen times but ultimately the only reasonable broadcasting format I can see is mainly pre-recorded, to which my response would be, Sorry, not interested. | ||
|
IPA
United States3206 Posts
On October 01 2011 15:36 Jinsho wrote: This is a pretty dumb thing to say to be honest. Have you never watched football (soccer)? There are no breaks for 45 minutes, so very obviously no commercials are played during that time. I'm sure they'd manage. That's because soccer is ridiculously popular. Enormous companies will cover the cost of commercial time (match presented by Pepsi!) -- Kingston Hyper X won't be able to cover 45 minutes worth of commercial time on ESPN2, this I promise you. We're a loooooooong way away from this kind of scenario. | ||
|
PepperoniPiZZa
Sierra Leone1660 Posts
If they take a hint from how eurosport approaches snooker, I would maybe give it a try. | ||
|
GMonster
686 Posts
| ||
|
strikerz200
58 Posts
im using rogers | ||
|
Jetaap
France4814 Posts
| ||
|
sleeepy
Canada777 Posts
| ||
|
MalakhWing
United States16 Posts
Well - @HuskyStarcraft i hope you don't mind that I used you as one of my caster examples during the meeting." Sounds like husky would be invited to cast assuming it all goes through with ESPN. I am pleased as Husky has really improved, and his beloved husketeers can only be helpful when it comes to gathering an audience. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
| ||
|
Zzoram
Canada7115 Posts
| ||
|
PPTouch
99 Posts
On October 01 2011 16:52 Zzoram wrote: Whatever caster they put on ESPN2, it has to be someone who can speak to people new to the game. day9 imo | ||
|
firehand101
Australia3152 Posts
| ||
|
KunA
United States46 Posts
| ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
| ||
|
raph
United States204 Posts
| ||
|
Tommylew
Wales2717 Posts
| ||
|
Zidane
United States1686 Posts
| ||
|
marttorn
Norway5211 Posts
But anyway, this would be really amazing for the growth of SC2 and eSports. ESPN is definitely NOT hurting said electronic sports if they do this. | ||
|
Treetop
United States140 Posts
If it gets televised, things can only go up. Once again, even if it flops, we could still have a pretty strong influx of thousands of watchers/promoters/sponsors and players show up. Sounds fairly slam-dunk to me. Plus ESPN knows how to broadcast their stuff. They have been the leading sports networks for a long time for a reason. | ||
|
crappen
Norway1546 Posts
On October 01 2011 16:23 Jetaap wrote: I voted No. I one of these guys who doesn't event have a TV anymore. I don't really know if sc2 is adapted to TV, honestly isthink it would be the same than watching on the internet, but with less interactivity and less liberty. Me too, haven't had a TV for 6 years now. TV is a very outdated platform, internet and on-demand entertainment via VODs etc is where its at. I actually uses only VOD's at SC2, as Im too busy when its live. We have a good thing going on with SC2 now. I would hope we can stay on our ground and make it better. I am very happy with GSL right now, but quality overall could be even better. | ||
|
IveReturned
Turkey258 Posts
| ||
|
Zooper31
United States5710 Posts
On October 01 2011 17:36 IveReturned wrote: Do you pay to watch ESPN 2? You pay for cable so yes technically you do. To all the people saying TV is an outdated platform. I just lol in your face and walk away. Maybe to a 20yr old atm TV is outdated compared to all the technology we have now but thats not the point in this thread. The point is that bringing it to TV, and the biggest sports channel in argueably the world, would bring so much mainstream attention to SC2 that we desperately need. Who cares if TV is gonna be phased out in 10-20yrs. We are talking about now, not some hipster future... | ||
|
Malinor
Germany4727 Posts
| ||
|
shell
Portugal2722 Posts
| ||
|
laguu
Finland278 Posts
| ||
|
IveReturned
Turkey258 Posts
Hmm... I think I could watch ESPN... | ||
|
FairForever
Canada2392 Posts
I'm going to say no though, unfortunately for a few reasons. There's 0 ways that SC2 is better on TV than online for the viewer. ESPN will absolutely not be showing 30 minute games (or Rain v Boxer 1 hr games) without commercials. In short, it can't be live, or we're going to miss some of the action. The other argument is sponsorship/exposure. I don't think having SC2 online is going to provide lots of exposure to be honest - this isn't prime time TV (eg. 7 PM), this is midday or mid-night (not midnight) showings where they usually insert Fishing, Moto, or other obsolete and unpopular sports. Fishing hasn't taken off as a sport - I have no reason to believe that SC2 would through the promotion of ESPN 2. I believe it would also subject SC2 to ridicule. ESPN's viewership is pretty robust in terms of feedback and to the ombudsman; I see potential issues when everyone complains that SC2 "isn't a real sport" (poker be damned). I think it would end up bombing after a few runs and then get cut anyway. In short... not really going to benefit the scene in the long-run, it would get dropped after a short period of time, and it might cause interruptions or problems with the games (or show prerecorded which isn't nearly as exciting anyway). | ||
|
FairForever
Canada2392 Posts
On October 01 2011 17:47 IveReturned wrote: If 35m people tune in to watch an epic season finale of a soap, Im sure being in a big Tv compant will make starcraft mainstream. Hmm... I think I could watch ESPN... You'd be crazy if you think even 1m people would be watching the finals of MLG. This isn't being shown at 6 PM. This would be shown at 3 AM or something to fill up time. | ||
|
Jakkerr
Netherlands2549 Posts
Starcraft doesn't have enough viewers by far to make it interesting for a tv company. Example: Last MLG had 250k consequetive viewers if I recall correctly. Let's say 150k watched Starcraft. Out of those 150k people there's only a certain % American, probably like 50%, so 75k American viewers. Out of those 75k not every1 will watch ESPN2, so let's say 50k people that will watch it on TV. That would get cancelled after 10 minutes. Don't think millions of people are gonna tune in just because a random game they have never heard of is on TV. | ||
|
Grimman
Finland54 Posts
| ||
|
crappen
Norway1546 Posts
On October 01 2011 17:37 Zooper31 wrote: You pay for cable so yes technically you do. To all the people saying TV is an outdated platform. I just lol in your face and walk away. Maybe to a 20yr old atm TV is outdated compared to all the technology we have now but thats not the point in this thread. The point is that bringing it to TV, and the biggest sports channel in argueably the world, would bring so much mainstream attention to SC2 that we desperately need. Who cares if TV is gonna be phased out in 10-20yrs. We are talking about now, not some hipster future... Just curious, but do SC2 desperately need more mainstream attention? Why? | ||
|
IveReturned
Turkey258 Posts
| ||
|
Roberi
Sweden347 Posts
| ||
|
Joey Wheeler
Korea (North)276 Posts
On October 01 2011 18:38 crappen wrote: Just curious, but do SC2 desperately need more mainstream attention? Why? bigger is better progamers get more money streams get more viewers blizzard takes more of an interest in their game I mean honestly, how would it being mainstream not be a good thing? I guess you think Brood War was "too mainstream"? And I also lol at the retards complaining about how TV is outdated. It's still the #1 media outlet. Are you saying that the fact Brood War was on 2 channels in Korea didn't help its popularity? Some people just can't think for themselves... | ||
|
Sighstorm
Netherlands116 Posts
I watch online stream on my tv most of the time, and only real television about once a month. I don't really care about what's on tv. Would be good however if this brings more sponsors into the game. | ||
|
Technique
Netherlands1542 Posts
| ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
| ||
|
Roberi
Sweden347 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:04 Technique wrote: No, what's the point of it when you can watch it any time at the internet? The point is for Starcraft as a sport in the west to grow and reach out to more people. Broadcasting the game on regular TV can help spread the culture of esports over a long term. I think something like this is necessary if we want the general public to acknowledge what we already know is an incredibly complex, exciting and interesting game. Edit: I'd also be very surprised if the MLG as an organization ignores its online viewers. People like us, on sites like these are what made the Pro Circuit possible. Simply giving up on live streaming and the internet community would be insane. | ||
|
blackone
Germany1314 Posts
I know, OGN and MBC were important for BWs success in Korea, but that started 10 years ago, before everybody had access to high quality online streams. | ||
|
ThyHate
240 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 124618
1142 Posts
On October 01 2011 17:57 Jakkerr wrote: I voted No. Starcraft doesn't have enough viewers by far to make it interesting for a tv company. Example: Last MLG had 250k consequetive viewers if I recall correctly. Let's say 150k watched Starcraft. Out of those 150k people there's only a certain % American, probably like 50%, so 75k American viewers. Out of those 75k not every1 will watch ESPN2, so let's say 50k people that will watch it on TV. That would get cancelled after 10 minutes. Don't think millions of people are gonna tune in just because a random game they have never heard of is on TV. Whatever the numbers were, 3 million hours of video was consumed or so. I am exited for the idea of SC2 in tv! Even though I am not sure how it would work properly. | ||
|
justinpal
United States3810 Posts
| ||
|
j0ker
275 Posts
Loving the armchair TV execs discussing programming length and commercial timing. Lets be realistic, this isn't going to get a primetime slot. Espn2 has a long history of covering niche "sports", and even has a history with Mlg. They also have a history of poker, which EXPLODED in popularity and spread like wildfire across the television medium and all over the internet. Poker coverage started on espn(2) as niche programming to fill in slots that were taken up by the 80th rerun of sportscenter. From espn's perspective, they are looking at a game/"esport" that is currently experiencing pretty incredible growth in the U.S.(and to a slightly lesser extent in Europe), and has a decade-long history of extreme popularity in South Korea. They are also very reminiscent of the explosion of poker, of which they were a very big helping hand. They see this as an opportunity to grab Starcraft 2 first, and to nurture it and help it explode like they did with poker. From the perspective of a Starcraft 2 fan, this has to be viewed as nothing other than a huge opportunity. I think we all agree that SC2 doesn't NEED to be shown on TV, the internet is the ideal medium and currently works best. But one has to realize that, despite programming becoming more and more popular online, there are ALWAYS going to be people that want to lay down on their couch and flip channels. And there are a lot more of those people than internet streamers like ourselves. A LOT more. Furthermore, ESPN leveraging their gigantic viewership and powerful advertising and self-promotion infrastructure on a game we all love is nothing but a good thing. We all know how addicting this game is to watch and we all know or know of dozens of people who have played little more than 5 games in bronze yet set their alarms to 2:10 AM to watch tastosis cover the GSL. It is naive to think that this addictive game isn't going to gain a pretty significant bump with exposure to MILLIONS of new sets of eyes. Logistically, SC2 tourneys are not ideal for programming and SC2 games are not ideal for commerical timings. Concessions can be made though, from both sides. Initially this is almost certainly going to be a late night time slot, therefore not live considering MLG is the tournament being discussed. I know we all prefer our sc2 as live as can be, but remember that this isn't necessarily targeted at you specifically, but targeted at your classmate who doesn't know he likes SC2 yet(although you bet your ass you will end up tuning in as well). An edited 2-3 hour program could cover the late bracket stages of an MLG with minimal downtime between games. TV likes its commercials short and frequent, but sports on TV are given flexibility in this regard. Soccer is a nightmare for commercials but is shown on TV. Keep in mind that most SC2 games average around 15 minutes or shorter. The format would probably look quite a bit like it does for baseball. (3 hour MLG final day condensed): Intro/casters/bracket rundown Commercial Game 1 Commercial after each game Double commercial after each match, with commentary and bracket stuff filled in Pretty doable to be honest. Any nightmare 45 minute+ games would be an issue, but these are quite rare and a quick commercial could even be added in if the coverage was not live. Live coverage would be a good deal more difficult logistically, but realistically the overall popularity would be so high at that point that they could work things out without much legitimate whining from the community. In closing, this would be an amazing opportunity for SC2 to grow and best of luck to Sundance and his staff. | ||
|
Azzur
Australia6259 Posts
| ||
|
Termit
Sweden3466 Posts
| ||
|
Azera
3800 Posts
| ||
|
Jakkerr
Netherlands2549 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:39 Termit wrote: Hahaha I can only imagine how the production would look like it they show VOD's and not live games. Let's say there is 40-50+ min game. I bet they would squeeze in some commercial in the middle of the game when there is some downtime and both players are just macroing without any action happening. It's american TV we are talking about, they will squeeze in 4 commericals in that time. | ||
|
ZaaaaaM
Netherlands1828 Posts
| ||
|
MGN
France383 Posts
Oh wait i dont even know wtf is ESPN | ||
|
Termit
Sweden3466 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:41 Jakkerr wrote: It's american TV we are talking about, they will squeeze in 4 commericals in that time. Yeah probably. I tried to watch some NFL the other night when I laid in bed and holy shit how can people stand the fucking production? Maybe 5-10 seconds gameplay into like 3 commercial and then repeat over and over again. T_T | ||
|
Tantaburs
Canada1825 Posts
I think that GSL would be a good fit though. Run Commercials during the breaks and its on at 2-5 so its not really prime advertising hours. | ||
|
jazzminkey
United States53 Posts
| ||
|
leveller
Sweden1840 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:54 Tantaburs wrote: I don't think we could realistically get MLG on ESPN at least not live. I think that GSL would be a good fit though. Run Commercials during the breaks and its on at 2-5 so its not really prime advertising hours. Of course they would want to partner with a tournament that functions in america and that has a lot of americans attending, not gsl with 31 koreans and huk. | ||
|
ondik
Czech Republic2908 Posts
| ||
|
Kira__
Sweden2672 Posts
| ||
|
crappen
Norway1546 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:01 Joey Wheeler wrote: bigger is better progamers get more money streams get more viewers blizzard takes more of an interest in their game I mean honestly, how would it being mainstream not be a good thing? I guess you think Brood War was "too mainstream"? And I also lol at the retards complaining about how TV is outdated. It's still the #1 media outlet. Are you saying that the fact Brood War was on 2 channels in Korea didn't help its popularity? Some people just can't think for themselves... Not sure why you are believe that bigger is better. Would classical music suddenly become better if it pops up at the mainstream radio? I dont think having a shitty channel with commercials all the time would do us viewers any good. Do you really think popularity is always a good thing? Blizzard is taking a good amount of interest in their game already, dont get greedy. Just throwing money at SC2 won't just magically make everything for the better. I dont see WoW with its huge population doing so much better then SC2 in terms of quality, do you? Cause I sure as hell dont. Or how about CoD? | ||
|
Vinland
Argentina136 Posts
On October 01 2011 20:16 crappen wrote: Just throwing money at SC2 won't just magically make everything for the better. Yeah the game wont change magically in two days. But money is always an incentive to people, specialy on "e-sports" where going pro is still a huuuge risk one has to take. I mean, a lot of these proplayers that we see every that sacrificed a lot to get where they are.. some of them didnt even finish school to start practicing. If SC2 had more money moving around, better sponsors and stuff, we would eventually see a couple more team houses and people trying to get better, and that would lead to better games. Is this a first good step or is it too soon? Not sure. But MLG finals seem more interesting than Darts anyway. | ||
|
Milvus
Switzerland400 Posts
| ||
|
Milvus
Switzerland400 Posts
| ||
|
iyoume
2501 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:11 DannyJ wrote: As long as it doesnt cut into my NFL viewing im all for it. haha. ESPN only has Monday Night Football. but i doubt they'd want to air MLG. Saturday is college FB day, and i'm sure they'd much rather dedicate their airtime to that than starcraft. | ||
|
Kiyo.
United States2284 Posts
On October 01 2011 20:55 Milvus wrote: wait a sec, is that the same guys who wanted to have football (the real one) being organised in four quarters in order to show more ads? What? They show MLS and Premier League games normally, with commercials at the same time as everyone else. | ||
|
feanor1
United States1899 Posts
On October 01 2011 20:16 crappen wrote: Not sure why you are believe that bigger is better. Would classical music suddenly become better if it pops up at the mainstream radio? I dont think having a shitty channel with commercials all the time would do us viewers any good. Do you really think popularity is always a good thing? Blizzard is taking a good amount of interest in their game already, dont get greedy. Just throwing money at SC2 won't just magically make everything for the better. I dont see WoW with its huge population doing so much better then SC2 in terms of quality, do you? Cause I sure as hell dont. Or how about CoD? If you SC2 t survive as a "sport" where people make a living playing it Bigger is without a doubt better. No if Classical music was just on the mainstream radio it wouldn't magically become better. But it would make it a topic of conversation, boost sales, expose more people to classical music and get kids interested in studying it. | ||
|
ArcticFox
United States1092 Posts
On October 01 2011 20:59 iyoume wrote: haha. ESPN only has Monday Night Football. but i doubt they'd want to air MLG. Saturday is college FB day, and i'm sure they'd much rather dedicate their airtime to that than starcraft. They probably wouldn't air it live, but they don't have to. The already hardcore fans like us are watching it online anyway, and it's not in MLG's interest to have ESPN competing directly against it. As was mentioned before, ESPN had a HUGE hand in exploding poker popularity, and I could see a similar style of show being created for MLG. ESPN doesn't broadcast poker live (at least on regular TV, of course there's PPV and online streams, which MLG already has) and instead condenses a long, large event down into its most exciting moments. I could easily see something similar happening where they show the backstories for all the players, enhance the rivalries, and show some of the best games being re-casted by an MLG-hired casting crew (hopefully one of their primary streaming crews, and not one of the people that does the post-MLG casting). If it's done poorly, like more or less every other video game production I've seen on ESPN, nothing is really lost -- everything will continue on as it has. If it's done well, it could be absolutely huge in bringing Starcraft into the mainstream, and that should excite everybody here. It's the first big step toward making SC2 here like BW was in Korea. Please contain your erections. | ||
|
Cedstick
Canada3336 Posts
| ||
|
Treble557
United States221 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:34 j0ker wrote: You have to take a step back and look at this objectively. This isn't a new league or tournament that is relying on TV viewership to sustain itself. This is MLG, currently a staple of foreign sc2 and a very successful, sustainable business model that is potentially offering programming to Espn. The only risk here is that Espn wouldn't bother itself with SC2 again, which would be fine if this turned out to be unsuccessful. Loving the armchair TV execs discussing programming length and commercial timing. Lets be realistic, this isn't going to get a primetime slot. Espn2 has a long history of covering niche "sports", and even has a history with Mlg. They also have a history of poker, which EXPLODED in popularity and spread like wildfire across the television medium and all over the internet. Poker coverage started on espn(2) as niche programming to fill in slots that were taken up by the 80th rerun of sportscenter. From espn's perspective, they are looking at a game/"esport" that is currently experiencing pretty incredible growth in the U.S.(and to a slightly lesser extent in Europe), and has a decade-long history of extreme popularity in South Korea. They are also very reminiscent of the explosion of poker, of which they were a very big helping hand. They see this as an opportunity to grab Starcraft 2 first, and to nurture it and help it explode like they did with poker. From the perspective of a Starcraft 2 fan, this has to be viewed as nothing other than a huge opportunity. I think we all agree that SC2 doesn't NEED to be shown on TV, the internet is the ideal medium and currently works best. But one has to realize that, despite programming becoming more and more popular online, there are ALWAYS going to be people that want to lay down on their couch and flip channels. And there are a lot more of those people than internet streamers like ourselves. A LOT more. Furthermore, ESPN leveraging their gigantic viewership and powerful advertising and self-promotion infrastructure on a game we all love is nothing but a good thing. We all know how addicting this game is to watch and we all know or know of dozens of people who have played little more than 5 games in bronze yet set their alarms to 2:10 AM to watch tastosis cover the GSL. It is naive to think that this addictive game isn't going to gain a pretty significant bump with exposure to MILLIONS of new sets of eyes. Logistically, SC2 tourneys are not ideal for programming and SC2 games are not ideal for commerical timings. Concessions can be made though, from both sides. Initially this is almost certainly going to be a late night time slot, therefore not live considering MLG is the tournament being discussed. I know we all prefer our sc2 as live as can be, but remember that this isn't necessarily targeted at you specifically, but targeted at your classmate who doesn't know he likes SC2 yet(although you bet your ass you will end up tuning in as well). An edited 2-3 hour program could cover the late bracket stages of an MLG with minimal downtime between games. TV likes its commercials short and frequent, but sports on TV are given flexibility in this regard. Soccer is a nightmare for commercials but is shown on TV. Keep in mind that most SC2 games average around 15 minutes or shorter. The format would probably look quite a bit like it does for baseball. (3 hour MLG final day condensed): Intro/casters/bracket rundown Commercial Game 1 Commercial after each game Double commercial after each match, with commentary and bracket stuff filled in Pretty doable to be honest. Any nightmare 45 minute+ games would be an issue, but these are quite rare and a quick commercial could even be added in if the coverage was not live. Live coverage would be a good deal more difficult logistically, but realistically the overall popularity would be so high at that point that they could work things out without much legitimate whining from the community. In closing, this would be an amazing opportunity for SC2 to grow and best of luck to Sundance and his staff. This post deserves more credit then it's getting, imo. Very informative, and makes alotta good points. Personally, I hope it works out, but I also worry about how people will react to it. It really could go either way once it's on TV.. but we have to try none the less and see what happens. This could be SC2's big chance! | ||
|
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
Seriously? | ||
|
Sighstorm
Netherlands116 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:56 jazzminkey wrote: 5% of the people ITT are killing e-sports. No, 5% is legitimatly concerned it will be killed for them. In my experience ESPN doesn't care about online communities or my country... I'm afraid their executives care too much about exclusive right and stuff and don't care about the current viewership of MLG. If all content remains available online (through legal channels), i'm completely supportive, but history is not at our side. | ||
|
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
On October 01 2011 21:16 Treble557 wrote: This post deserves more credit then it's getting, imo. Very informative, and makes alotta good points. Personally, I hope it works out, but I also worry about how people will react to it. It really could go either way once it's on TV.. but we have to try none the less and see what happens. This could be SC2's big chance! He made that post 9 minutes before you... of course he hasn't been recognized by his peers for it. ^^ | ||
|
crappen
Norway1546 Posts
On October 01 2011 21:06 feanor1 wrote: If you SC2 t survive as a "sport" where people make a living playing it Bigger is without a doubt better. No if Classical music was just on the mainstream radio it wouldn't magically become better. But it would make it a topic of conversation, boost sales, expose more people to classical music and get kids interested in studying it. Classical music already has kids studying it, it does make a conversation, it does everything it needs to for it to survive. Classical isn't as popular as Justin Bieber, but it does not need to be, for it to survive and create an awesome community and events. Classical music has its own production, its own community. We dont need Justin Bieber amount of fans for something to succeed, for people to make a living for it. I am not saying we should not get new people into SC2, and give up and stagnate. I'm just saying that bigger is not always better, and that what we have now, is really really great. We have one hell of a community, it can grow a little each year with both Blizzards help with expansions and promotion, but also promotion of tournaments, and reqruiting of our friends. Not everyone likes SC2, and as seen in countless threads on these forums, many people are deadly afraid of playing SC2. I think, SC2 is not for everyone, its not a mainstream activity. Chess is hard, SC2 is hard, both these games needs hard work, emotions in check, patience and willpower to win. MMO's, FPS games like CoD, single player game events do not. A last note I do think its a good idea to spread SC2 and reach new players and individuals like us. Maybe 0.1% of those who would watch ESPN would give SC2 a try. I really liked the idea of only showing highlights of rivals, interviews, and then a great match. Nothing more really. | ||
|
Indez
Australia37 Posts
| ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:34 j0ker wrote: This is MLG, currently a staple of foreign sc2 and a very successful, sustainable business model that is potentially offering programming to Espn. This really hasn't proven to be true at all. A year ago MLG was deep in the red and while 2011 was great for them, we don't know how much it's improved (consider that they've contracted the event number.) MLG is less of a staple than all the major organizations that have fallen before it. It's not an unequivocal situation, there are definitely major setbacks that could occur. If you don't keep that and the history of ESPORTS in mind, then you're setting yourself up for the fall. Be positive about the (potential) news, but don't be ignorant. | ||
|
j0ker
275 Posts
On October 01 2011 21:48 Jibba wrote: This really hasn't proven to be true at all. A year ago MLG was deep in the red and while 2011 was great for them, we don't know how much it's improved (consider that they've contracted the event number.) MLG is less of a staple than all the major organizations that have fallen before it. It's not an unequivocal situation, there are definitely major setbacks that could occur. If you don't keep that and the history of ESPORTS in mind, then you're setting yourself up for the fall. Be positive about the (potential) news, don't be ignorant. thats kind of beside my point. Their SC2 play is currently sustainable through live admission and streams. Offering rights to ESPN to do some sort of supplementary television coverage would not be a risk in that they would be completely fine if it remained online. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
| ||
|
Awesomeness
Germany1361 Posts
| ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
| ||
|
Cpadolf
Sweden1199 Posts
On October 01 2011 21:18 TehTemplar wrote: 206 people voted no? Seriously? The only reason I'd watch it on ESPN (if I had ESPN to begin with), would be for the sake of supporting E-sports. I don't actually want to watch Starcraft on TV. I don't really want to watch anything on TV, and haven't done so (at home) in over a year. The internet is starting to make TV more and more irrelevant. | ||
|
Sea_Food
Finland1612 Posts
| ||
|
Diks
Belgium1880 Posts
On October 01 2011 22:10 Awesomeness wrote: A bo5 tennis-match can last between 2 and 5+ hours and they still show tennis on TV...I don't think it's a huge issue as long as there are enough people watching. Yeah, as long as SC2 is as popular as Tennis, this is not a problem... .... Oh wait, it's actually a problem | ||
|
deadjawa
United States179 Posts
| ||
|
Pants536
Canada16 Posts
For those of you who have cable though, vote yes! | ||
|
amazingoopah
United States1925 Posts
| ||
|
Sanguinarius
United States3427 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9378 Posts
On October 01 2011 17:57 Jakkerr wrote: I voted No. Starcraft doesn't have enough viewers by far to make it interesting for a tv company. Example: Last MLG had 250k consequetive viewers if I recall correctly. Let's say 150k watched Starcraft. Out of those 150k people there's only a certain % American, probably like 50%, so 75k American viewers. Out of those 75k not every1 will watch ESPN2, so let's say 50k people that will watch it on TV. That would get cancelled after 10 minutes. Don't think millions of people are gonna tune in just because a random game they have never heard of is on TV. It probably wont be a huge scces however your missing a huge factor in your calculations (aka potential new viewers, which is the main point of getting it on TV). | ||
|
reneg
United States859 Posts
On October 01 2011 21:48 Jibba wrote: This really hasn't proven to be true at all. A year ago MLG was deep in the red and while 2011 was great for them, we don't know how much it's improved (consider that they've contracted the event number.) MLG is less of a staple than all the major organizations that have fallen before it. It's not an unequivocal situation, there are definitely major setbacks that could occur. If you don't keep that and the history of ESPORTS in mind, then you're setting yourself up for the fall. Be positive about the (potential) news, but don't be ignorant. Going off of this, I'm becoming slightly concerned that MLG is trying to acquire too much new stuff too quickly. Yes, we all want ESPORTS to succeed, we all want to have successful tournaments brought to as many people as possible (via ESPN, webcasts, whatever), but MLG has one great year, and all of a sudden they're rushing out to try to get bigger prizepools in some respects, and they're now talking to TV Execs. I mean, i want it to be on ESPN as much as the next person, but i also don't want to set us up to have one year that's not 100% incredible, and suddenly have the whole system collapsing around us. I just want a tempered approach!! | ||
|
FragRaptor
United States184 Posts
| ||
|
shifty
United States280 Posts
On October 01 2011 23:30 FragRaptor wrote: In my opinion, MLG shouldn't go through with it. My first reaction was fucking yes, I was so excited. But after thinking about it. Now that ESPN Wants starcraft 2 we should dangle it in front of them and say not yet so they they get hungrier for it and really research well on it. The system we have right now is working. Let's not break it by bringing it to TV :/ How would it break from TV is a good question. My feeling is that we just wouldn't get enough viewers and they would shut it down. | ||
|
RusHXceL
United States1004 Posts
failed/ | ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1598 Posts
Now, if there was an ESPNGaming channel that could peak some interest especially if it didn't depend on SC2 to be it's crutch. Replays of tournaments. Side shows that talk about gaming (djwheat type stuff). ESPNG's tournament. Other game's tournaments. Then you could also advertise during the games on screen with the company's logo. | ||
|
killamane
United States138 Posts
On October 01 2011 23:30 FragRaptor wrote: In my opinion, MLG shouldn't go through with it. My first reaction was fucking yes, I was so excited. But after thinking about it. Now that ESPN Wants starcraft 2 we should dangle it in front of them and say not yet so they they get hungrier for it and really research well on it. The system we have right now is working. Let's not break it by bringing it to TV :/ I kind of agree with this character. We dont need on ESPN yet. make them wait another year. We have all the starcraft we want without them. Even though i dream of a day of watching sc2 from my recliner on the tv. | ||
|
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
The question is, what would I stream on my laptop while I watch SC2 on TV ? | ||
|
Grettin
42381 Posts
On October 01 2011 23:36 RusHXceL wrote: WHY ISN'T this on the FRONTPAGE OF TL. failed/ Eh, why should it be? Nothing is confirmed or anything and Sundance already got his replies regarding this and told them forward. | ||
|
thanhbao86
Canada199 Posts
| ||
|
zul
Germany5427 Posts
| ||
|
Aterons_toss
Romania1275 Posts
| ||
SundanceMLG
33 Posts
My goal is to get live competitive gaming out there in bits and pieces. May take some time but it can happen. Also - trust me when I say that I promise not to fuck it up. At least not that much. Expect some familiar faces calling the matches if and when the time comes. | ||
|
Timurid
Guyana (French)656 Posts
| ||
|
zul
Germany5427 Posts
| ||
|
Ghostalker
United States19 Posts
On October 02 2011 01:03 SundanceMLG wrote: ESPN is one of the outlets that we have access to EuroSport is another. There are more. IMG is an asset there. My goal is to get live competitive gaming out there in bits and pieces. May take some time but it can happen. Also - trust me when I say that I promise not to fuck it up. At least not that much. Expect some familiar faces calling the matches if and when the time comes. Sweeet | ||
|
Madera
Sweden2672 Posts
On October 02 2011 01:03 SundanceMLG wrote: ESPN is one of the outlets that we have access to EuroSport is another. There are more. IMG is an asset there. My goal is to get live competitive gaming out there in bits and pieces. May take some time but it can happen. Also - trust me when I say that I promise not to fuck it up. At least not that much. Expect some familiar faces calling the matches if and when the time comes. Awesome! I love you Sundance. <3 | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
| ||
|
Grettin
42381 Posts
On October 02 2011 01:03 SundanceMLG wrote: ESPN is one of the outlets that we have access to EuroSport is another. There are more. IMG is an asset there. My goal is to get live competitive gaming out there in bits and pieces. May take some time but it can happen. Also - trust me when I say that I promise not to fuck it up. At least not that much. Expect some familiar faces calling the matches if and when the time comes. Good to hear. Good luck! | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 02 2011 01:03 SundanceMLG wrote: ESPN is one of the outlets that we have access to EuroSport is another. There are more. IMG is an asset there. My goal is to get live competitive gaming out there in bits and pieces. May take some time but it can happen. Also - trust me when I say that I promise not to fuck it up. At least not that much. Expect some familiar faces calling the matches if and when the time comes. In Sundance I trust. I think Wheat/Day9 would work perfectly on TV, assuming Brent Musburger is already taken. | ||
|
Sighstorm
Netherlands116 Posts
On October 02 2011 01:03 SundanceMLG wrote: LOLAlso - trust me when I say that I promise not to fuck it up. At least not that much... I just check and i still have Eurosport in my tv package, so i'm a little less afraid i won't have access to all the MLG content. As long as it's about competative play and not the scene/community... IIRC i once saw a show about IEM that was pretty boring and showed like 1 minute of in-game content total. Not worth it. | ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:34 j0ker wrote: You have to take a step back and look at this objectively. This isn't a new league or tournament that is relying on TV viewership to sustain itself. This is MLG, currently a staple of foreign sc2 and a very successful, sustainable business model that is potentially offering programming to Espn. The only risk here is that Espn wouldn't bother itself with SC2 again, which would be fine if this turned out to be unsuccessful. Loving the armchair TV execs discussing programming length and commercial timing. Lets be realistic, this isn't going to get a primetime slot. Espn2 has a long history of covering niche "sports", and even has a history with Mlg. They also have a history of poker, which EXPLODED in popularity and spread like wildfire across the television medium and all over the internet. Poker coverage started on espn(2) as niche programming to fill in slots that were taken up by the 80th rerun of sportscenter. From espn's perspective, they are looking at a game/"esport" that is currently experiencing pretty incredible growth in the U.S.(and to a slightly lesser extent in Europe), and has a decade-long history of extreme popularity in South Korea. They are also very reminiscent of the explosion of poker, of which they were a very big helping hand. They see this as an opportunity to grab Starcraft 2 first, and to nurture it and help it explode like they did with poker. From the perspective of a Starcraft 2 fan, this has to be viewed as nothing other than a huge opportunity. I think we all agree that SC2 doesn't NEED to be shown on TV, the internet is the ideal medium and currently works best. But one has to realize that, despite programming becoming more and more popular online, there are ALWAYS going to be people that want to lay down on their couch and flip channels. And there are a lot more of those people than internet streamers like ourselves. A LOT more. Furthermore, ESPN leveraging their gigantic viewership and powerful advertising and self-promotion infrastructure on a game we all love is nothing but a good thing. We all know how addicting this game is to watch and we all know or know of dozens of people who have played little more than 5 games in bronze yet set their alarms to 2:10 AM to watch tastosis cover the GSL. It is naive to think that this addictive game isn't going to gain a pretty significant bump with exposure to MILLIONS of new sets of eyes. Logistically, SC2 tourneys are not ideal for programming and SC2 games are not ideal for commerical timings. Concessions can be made though, from both sides. Initially this is almost certainly going to be a late night time slot, therefore not live considering MLG is the tournament being discussed. I know we all prefer our sc2 as live as can be, but remember that this isn't necessarily targeted at you specifically, but targeted at your classmate who doesn't know he likes SC2 yet(although you bet your ass you will end up tuning in as well). An edited 2-3 hour program could cover the late bracket stages of an MLG with minimal downtime between games. TV likes its commercials short and frequent, but sports on TV are given flexibility in this regard. Soccer is a nightmare for commercials but is shown on TV. Keep in mind that most SC2 games average around 15 minutes or shorter. The format would probably look quite a bit like it does for baseball. (3 hour MLG final day condensed): Intro/casters/bracket rundown Commercial Game 1 Commercial after each game Double commercial after each match, with commentary and bracket stuff filled in Pretty doable to be honest. Any nightmare 45 minute+ games would be an issue, but these are quite rare and a quick commercial could even be added in if the coverage was not live. Live coverage would be a good deal more difficult logistically, but realistically the overall popularity would be so high at that point that they could work things out without much legitimate whining from the community. In closing, this would be an amazing opportunity for SC2 to grow and best of luck to Sundance and his staff. Most people haven't really said anything that goes entirely against what you've said. I specifically said that it could work in a non-live format, but I would be uninterested in watching that and would much prefer just watching MLG live on a stream. So to answer Sundance's question of whether I would tune in, my honest response would have to be "No" unless it was live coverage of an MLG event which I don't see happening any time soon. Even it were event coverage, MLG is fucking long, it doesn't take a genius to realize that ESPN wouldn't be willing to put in those resources into niche programming which you've basically said yourself. So, as a "3 hour MLG final day condensed"... No, I'm sorry, I wouldn't watch it. I'd much rather just watch it live on a stream. As for way down the line, if Starcraft explodes like Poker and we get long-ass live coverage, sure I may watch it, but even then, I much prefer online delivery. | ||
|
kilergrunt
United States263 Posts
| ||
|
Teim
Australia373 Posts
In the worst case it fails miserably and we never try to have it on TV again. In that case, who cares? We just go back to watching streams as we always have. Maybe we've gained a few viewers who enjoyed the broadcast. Maybe not. But the best case has massive potential. Most importantly a chance to bring in a market of people who are still untouched. More viewers leads to more sponsors leads to more tournaments and teams, etc, etc. | ||
|
DNA61289
United States665 Posts
On October 02 2011 01:03 SundanceMLG wrote: ESPN is one of the outlets that we have access to EuroSport is another. There are more. IMG is an asset there. My goal is to get live competitive gaming out there in bits and pieces. May take some time but it can happen. Also - trust me when I say that I promise not to fuck it up. At least not that much. Expect some familiar faces calling the matches if and when the time comes. Thank you Sundance. I know you wouldn't sacrifice the quality and the growth of the SC2 community just to get it on TV. Hopefully everything turns out well. | ||
|
c0ldfusion
United States8293 Posts
On October 02 2011 01:03 SundanceMLG wrote: ESPN is one of the outlets that we have access to EuroSport is another. There are more. IMG is an asset there. My goal is to get live competitive gaming out there in bits and pieces. May take some time but it can happen. Also - trust me when I say that I promise not to fuck it up. At least not that much. Expect some familiar faces calling the matches if and when the time comes. Thanks for the update Sundance! | ||
|
galtdunn
United States977 Posts
| ||
|
dodelol
Netherlands68 Posts
| ||
|
SpiritAshura
United States1271 Posts
| ||
|
nerdoplex
United States15 Posts
| ||
|
FetusFondler
United States246 Posts
| ||
|
BrodiaQ
United States892 Posts
| ||
|
OhMyGawd
United States264 Posts
| ||
|
fant0m
964 Posts
On October 02 2011 00:03 zul wrote: I dont know if one can watch ESPN in germany. Since I got rid of my TV years ago, can anyone post if this is possible or not? (a little extra question: Can you watch ESPN online for free?) [url="http://espn.go.com/watchespn/index/_/source/espn3/"]espn3.com[/url] is free for most internet providers. Caveat... most of the ISPs partnered with espn3 are U.S. based, as far as I know. You can give it a shot though. If it doesn't recognize the IP that you're coming from (that's how it identifies who your ISP is) it will ask you to choose an ISP from the approved list and enter account info (which you wouldn't have if you didn't have an account with one of the partner ISPs). You can't watch actual ESPN/ESPN2 online (not legally), but ESPN 3 has a lot of the less popular stuff broadcast on it. | ||
|
KingOfAmerica
United States246 Posts
Starcraft 2 the viewing experience is a superior product, which is why we all carry the banner the way we do. I would be thrilled if it gets on ESPN ocho at 3 AM instead of the 2011 crossfit challenge, spends a couple of months bouncing around, and finds an audience. I think it just needs to be given a chance. | ||
|
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
| ||
|
Corrik
United States1416 Posts
| ||
|
Bortlett
United States302 Posts
On October 02 2011 02:52 nerdoplex wrote: No, ESPN is made for real sports, not eSports. I love them both but keep eSports online and off American TV. Because Scrabble, poker, and darts are real sports, unlike Starcraft. As others have said, there's zero downside. This probably won't even cost that much for ESPN, and Starcraft caters to the valuable 18-35 male demographic. It's not like MLG is broadcasting on ESPN instead of streams. | ||
|
stormchaser
Canada1009 Posts
| ||
|
Corrik
United States1416 Posts
It's really hard to broadcast a tournament with such a small time slot. I assume they would just be broadcasting the finals of the tournament if they did do it. | ||
|
babo213
United States266 Posts
| ||
|
Joey Wheeler
Korea (North)276 Posts
On October 02 2011 03:31 Corrik wrote: No offense but MLG tried television before. It was a disaster. It's really hard to broadcast a tournament with such a small time slot. I assume they would just be broadcasting the finals of the tournament if they did do it. MLG lacked popularity back then. Do you think TV execs would be willing to try again if they weren't confident in this? | ||
|
IveReturned
Turkey258 Posts
On October 02 2011 03:26 Bortlett wrote: Because Scrabble, poker, and darts are real sports, unlike Starcraft. As others have said, there's zero downside. This probably won't even cost that much for ESPN, and Starcraft caters to the valuable 18-35 male demographic. It's not like MLG is broadcasting on ESPN instead of streams. Fakesports | ||
|
Corrik
United States1416 Posts
On October 02 2011 03:35 Joey Wheeler wrote: MLG lacked popularity back then. Do you think TV execs would be willing to try again if they weren't confident in this? I don't know. I thought MLG recently lost it's support on espn.com (or at least I can't find portals to it anymore), but I could be wrong. Obviously they think it working is possible. But, I don't know... I just can't see a really good way to broadcast an event in such a time slot. Maybe they could try poker's way, but you can't have that many episodes per tournament. Some games last an hour alone (TvT lol). How could you possibly do it? I'm open to the idea of it...I just don't see it being viable for a TV slot (unless fully broadcasted on G4 maybe). | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32051 Posts
there could always be something like what NBC did with the Olympics, showing some games and directing viewers to their site for others. But even if the goal was to only show the finals as 100% live, that's such a difficult task. If it's a BoX series, there's a very real possibility of having a five minute first game because of some aggressive play, followed by a really conservative 40 something minute game... you're absolutely getting TV breaks during gameplay, which is setting up SC2 for a Heidi Game right off the bat. There's also the fact that ESPN wouldn't be able to accurately set their programming for the day because of how wildly the length of say, a best of 3 series could vary. | ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
(joke answer in part: i'm sure they will either televise with a 3min delay to allow for c-breaks or be willing to not commercial during a long game, like they [i hear] are during other intense sports moments) | ||
|
Zooper31
United States5710 Posts
| ||
|
Jonoman92
United States9103 Posts
| ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:10 Jonoman92 wrote: Couldn't they just put a commercial in and jump right back in where the game was. I don't see why that's such a technical impossibility. Just don't do it mid-battle. That would only work with pre-recorded stuff. Can you imagine the rage when suddenly cut in the middle of a match for a commercial? | ||
pathy
Taiwan619 Posts
| ||
|
Bosu
United States3247 Posts
| ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32051 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:10 Jonoman92 wrote: Couldn't they just put a commercial in and jump right back in where the game was. I don't see why that's such a technical impossibility. Just don't do it mid-battle. You've played long enough to know that a LOT can happen within the 30 sec to 2min that an ad or a couple ads can run. You could make up for it in between games, but there's a lot of other issues at hand too. Many can be worked around, but a true live event seems quite difficult. | ||
|
Novalisk
Israel1818 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:08 Zooper31 wrote: Any update from Sundance? It's been way more than an hour and I doubt he's still in this meeting. Yep. @MLGSundance Sundance DiGiovanni Thank you Reddit and Twitter for answering the call. Front-page of reddit and well over a thousand replies and retweets. Made an impression. 19 hours ago He also acknowledged the TL votes. | ||
|
Primadog
United States4411 Posts
On October 01 2011 19:34 j0ker wrote: You have to take a step back and look at this objectively. This isn't a new league or tournament that is relying on TV viewership to sustain itself. This is MLG, currently a staple of foreign sc2 and a very successful, sustainable business model that is potentially offering programming to Espn. The only risk here is that Espn wouldn't bother itself with SC2 again, which would be fine if this turned out to be unsuccessful. Loving the armchair TV execs discussing programming length and commercial timing. Lets be realistic, this isn't going to get a primetime slot. Espn2 has a long history of covering niche "sports", and even has a history with Mlg. They also have a history of poker, which EXPLODED in popularity and spread like wildfire across the television medium and all over the internet. Poker coverage started on espn(2) as niche programming to fill in slots that were taken up by the 80th rerun of sportscenter. From espn's perspective, they are looking at a game/"esport" that is currently experiencing pretty incredible growth in the U.S.(and to a slightly lesser extent in Europe), and has a decade-long history of extreme popularity in South Korea. They are also very reminiscent of the explosion of poker, of which they were a very big helping hand. They see this as an opportunity to grab Starcraft 2 first, and to nurture it and help it explode like they did with poker. From the perspective of a Starcraft 2 fan, this has to be viewed as nothing other than a huge opportunity. I think we all agree that SC2 doesn't NEED to be shown on TV, the internet is the ideal medium and currently works best. But one has to realize that, despite programming becoming more and more popular online, there are ALWAYS going to be people that want to lay down on their couch and flip channels. And there are a lot more of those people than internet streamers like ourselves. A LOT more. Furthermore, ESPN leveraging their gigantic viewership and powerful advertising and self-promotion infrastructure on a game we all love is nothing but a good thing. We all know how addicting this game is to watch and we all know or know of dozens of people who have played little more than 5 games in bronze yet set their alarms to 2:10 AM to watch tastosis cover the GSL. It is naive to think that this addictive game isn't going to gain a pretty significant bump with exposure to MILLIONS of new sets of eyes. Logistically, SC2 tourneys are not ideal for programming and SC2 games are not ideal for commerical timings. Concessions can be made though, from both sides. Initially this is almost certainly going to be a late night time slot, therefore not live considering MLG is the tournament being discussed. I know we all prefer our sc2 as live as can be, but remember that this isn't necessarily targeted at you specifically, but targeted at your classmate who doesn't know he likes SC2 yet(although you bet your ass you will end up tuning in as well). An edited 2-3 hour program could cover the late bracket stages of an MLG with minimal downtime between games. TV likes its commercials short and frequent, but sports on TV are given flexibility in this regard. Soccer is a nightmare for commercials but is shown on TV. Keep in mind that most SC2 games average around 15 minutes or shorter. The format would probably look quite a bit like it does for baseball. (3 hour MLG final day condensed): Intro/casters/bracket rundown Commercial Game 1 Commercial after each game Double commercial after each match, with commentary and bracket stuff filled in Pretty doable to be honest. Any nightmare 45 minute+ games would be an issue, but these are quite rare and a quick commercial could even be added in if the coverage was not live. Live coverage would be a good deal more difficult logistically, but realistically the overall popularity would be so high at that point that they could work things out without much legitimate whining from the community. In closing, this would be an amazing opportunity for SC2 to grow and best of luck to Sundance and his staff. This post should be quoted on the topic to get people to stop talking nonsense. While it may still be premature for StarCraft, Sundance is creating a huge opportunity for our sport, so let's support him. | ||
|
Awesomeness
Germany1361 Posts
| ||
|
Vansetsu
United States1454 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:29 Primadog wrote: This post should be quoted on the topic to get people to stop talking nonsense. While it may still be premature for StarCraft, Sundance is creating a huge opportunity for our sport, so let's support him. I second this notion, should be added to the OP. This is written with a lot of clarity. | ||
|
nerdoplex
United States15 Posts
On October 02 2011 03:26 Bortlett wrote: Because Scrabble, poker, and darts are real sports, unlike Starcraft. As others have said, there's zero downside. This probably won't even cost that much for ESPN, and Starcraft caters to the valuable 18-35 male demographic. It's not like MLG is broadcasting on ESPN instead of streams. Games need to stay where it belongs, on the internet. I believe this would ruin ESPN but if they made a channel just for games then it seems fine to me. The channel can support news, tournaments, upcoming information, etc and be completely separate from ESPN. | ||
|
Novalisk
Israel1818 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:30 Awesomeness wrote: Eurosport would be great imo. They air a lot of sports that aren't very popular and always try to show as much live-content as possible. They also did bits about eSport in the past so it would be fitting. I'm looking forward to the day when I see SC2 on Eurosport cast by TB+Apollo. | ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:39 nerdoplex wrote: Games need to stay where it belongs, on the internet. I believe this would ruin ESPN but if they made a channel just for games then it seems fine to me. The channel can support news, tournaments, upcoming information, etc and be completely separate from ESPN. lmao you think this would ruin ESPN? how melodramatic... even if it failed completely it would ruin only some investments made by MLG/ESPN producers, not ESPN. | ||
|
Terranist
United States2496 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQuXalg4PKs this failed hard. especially because as an average viewer, i have no interest in MTG and would've changed the channel after trying to figure out this freakshow for 30 seconds. sorry, it's the truth. | ||
|
NewteN
United States179 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:39 nerdoplex wrote: Games need to stay where it belongs, on the internet. I believe this would ruin ESPN but if they made a channel just for games then it seems fine to me. The channel can support news, tournaments, upcoming information, etc and be completely separate from ESPN. Genuinely ruining e-sports. Finally a useful meme | ||
|
Oreo7
United States1647 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:52 Terranist wrote: for the non gamer, watching SC on espn will be about as interesting as watching paint dry. they tried it with MTG and it didn't end well. + Show Spoiler + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQuXalg4PKs this failed hard. especially because as an average viewer, i have no interest in MTG and would've changed the channel after trying to figure out this freakshow for 30 seconds. sorry, it's the truth. Magic the gathering is much harder to understand than SC IMO. Sc you see shit blowing up everywhere, MTG is a card game. Biiig difference. I think people would at least get curious in sc. | ||
|
IveReturned
Turkey258 Posts
) watch this thing or keep the TV open when this show starts. Cmon guys we should stop bashing ESPN or Starcraft and UNITE :p actually there is a giant crowd who never heard of Starcraft. Those people will possibly hear " hey look at this, a game is on TV" | ||
|
Soluhwin
United States1287 Posts
| ||
|
IveReturned
Turkey258 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:59 Oreo7 wrote: Magic the gathering is much harder to understand than SC IMO. Sc you see shit blowing up everywhere, MTG is a card game. Biiig difference. I think people would at least get curious in sc. I only needed to watch the first 30 secs, nothing blows or ground doesnt cover in blood. Btw MTG is a nerdfest and "normal people" (Thats what they call themselves I suppose)dont like nerdy looking stuff | ||
|
Veldril
Thailand1817 Posts
On October 02 2011 07:02 IveReturned wrote: Watched the first 30 secs, nothing blows or ground doesmt cover blood. Or tune in during the middle of the game to see drops everywhere, lings run by and DRG's muta control. | ||
|
Oreo7
United States1647 Posts
| ||
|
cOoLiD
Canada168 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:52 Terranist wrote: for the non gamer, watching SC on espn will be about as interesting as watching paint dry. they tried it with MTG and it didn't end well. + Show Spoiler + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQuXalg4PKs this failed hard. especially because as an average viewer, i have no interest in MTG and would've changed the channel after trying to figure out this freakshow for 30 seconds. sorry, it's the truth. While watching that I couldn't help but notice that the commentary was incredibly boring. I think if you had Day[9], HD/Husky, ect. commentating it would be much more entertaining to the average viewer rather than listening to monotone voices. | ||
|
Petninja
United States159 Posts
On October 02 2011 06:52 Terranist wrote: for the non gamer, watching SC on espn will be about as interesting as watching paint dry. they tried it with MTG and it didn't end well. + Show Spoiler + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQuXalg4PKs this failed hard. especially because as an average viewer, i have no interest in MTG and would've changed the channel after trying to figure out this freakshow for 30 seconds. sorry, it's the truth. I remember visiting my mothers house during the MLG with the hour long Boxer TvT, and my mother was absolutely absorbed in it. She had never seen the game before, and never watched games when I was growing up, but it made enough sense to her to be entertaining. It's a fun game to watch, even if you don't know it intimately. You don't give it nearly enough credit. Football should be more boring if anything, but tons of people watch Football without understanding the strategy that goes into it. | ||
|
courtpanda
866 Posts
its not like they would have a 2 hour block of starcraft every day. at most, it would probably be saturday/sunday afternoons after football season. it cant be any worse to watch than billiards the only problem i can see is that some of the language casters use is a bit esoteric. it would be hard for them to explain whats going on while making it newbie-friendly | ||
|
Corrupted
United States1255 Posts
On October 02 2011 07:01 Soluhwin wrote: TV is a downgrade from streaming in my opinion, I would only prefer this if it would get my family to watch it with me. Yeah...the first point is my opinion as well. I never understand this desire from people to move onto television. The internet is so much better than TV in virtually every way. TV ruins things that are incredibly cool without it. I don't even own a television anymore...and have no intention of getting one anytime soon. | ||
|
justinpal
United States3810 Posts
On October 02 2011 07:41 Corrupted wrote: Yeah...the first point is my opinion as well. I never understand this desire from people to move onto television. The internet is so much better than TV in virtually every way. TV ruins things that are incredibly cool without it. I don't even own a television anymore...and have no intention of getting one anytime soon. It'd be like getting excited about having SC2 games reported by telegraphers in an auditorium with Tasteless updating a big board with the supplies of two players. | ||
|
Bedrock
United States395 Posts
If he's talking about the exec VP of content I hope he has a good case. He can put anything on anywhere. I see him fairly often, but I need to put together a good proposal before presenting. | ||
|
FairForever
Canada2392 Posts
On October 02 2011 07:05 Oreo7 wrote: MLG just needs to not fuck this up. They need to make sure that ESPN will run complete games, sets, etc. not just some high light reel to fit the tv schedule. ESPN needs to be willing to play to Starcraft, not vice versa. I have faith that esports will one day be main stream etc, and I hope this is the beginning. Uhh yeah right... you have to be kidding me. ESPN will definitely not run MLG live (for reasons mentioned millions of times). And you're crazy if you think they'd make the time to run SC2 for more than an hour or two at a time. That's enough for two, maybe three BO3s. Exactly why I'm against this idea. If you really think ESPN is going to show SC2 on a Sunday (keep in mind this is MLG, so you are in the same/similar time zones) over... 1) Fantasy Football Pre-Game Show 2) A Soccer Game (Real Madrid is on ESPN tomorrow) 3) Multiple Random Programming (College Women's Volleyball, BodyBuilding) 4) WNBA 5) Women's Billiards You gotta be kidding me. Maybe ESPN would cut one of the latter 3. But they aren't going to spend more than a few hours (which is how much each of these programming items get) showing Starcraft. | ||
|
vx70GTOJudgexv
United States3161 Posts
On October 02 2011 07:11 Petninja wrote: I remember visiting my mothers house during the MLG with the hour long Boxer TvT, and my mother was absolutely absorbed in it. She had never seen the game before, and never watched games when I was growing up, but it made enough sense to her to be entertaining. It's a fun game to watch, even if you don't know it intimately. You don't give it nearly enough credit. Football should be more boring if anything, but tons of people watch Football without understanding the strategy that goes into it. Cases like this are remote, if anything. Hate to break it to you. I'm all for seeing SC2 on ESPN, but I'm not about to get my hopes up that the masses will be converted here. | ||
|
TemplarCo.
Mexico2870 Posts
| ||
|
archonOOid
1983 Posts
| ||
|
eleaf
526 Posts
| ||
|
Corrik
United States1416 Posts
| ||
|
Tewks44
United States2032 Posts
| ||
|
Primadog
United States4411 Posts
On October 02 2011 10:03 vx70GTOJudgexv wrote: Cases like this are remote, if anything. Hate to break it to you. I'm all for seeing SC2 on ESPN, but I'm not about to get my hopes up that the masses will be converted here. Have you ever been to a LAN? How about a BarCraft? I have. Unlike your theory, I have seen people converted to fandom, once they give it a chance. My brother was one of them, and I have heard many, many stories of similar results from other barcraft organizers. Give some faith to the game we all love and the general public's ability to grasp competition. StarCraft will not get anywhere with that kind of defeatist attitude. | ||
|
JoeKer
United States9 Posts
| ||
|
Marcus420
Canada1923 Posts
| ||
|
Ixirawr
United States86 Posts
The idea that someone can get rich playing games appeals to a lot of people. | ||
|
Ponyo
United States1231 Posts
| ||
|
Darclite
United States1021 Posts
| ||
|
genius_man16
United States749 Posts
On October 02 2011 07:41 Corrupted wrote: Yeah...the first point is my opinion as well. I never understand this desire from people to move onto television. The internet is so much better than TV in virtually every way. TV ruins things that are incredibly cool without it. I don't even own a television anymore...and have no intention of getting one anytime soon. TV = more money. That's essentially the benefit. Instead of MLG giving the 1st place winner $5,000 they would have the money to give them $500,000. And that's not a big deal? Maybe the internet is "better" but there is no comparison when it comes to the money. | ||
|
ELA
Denmark4608 Posts
Imagine if every stage of the tour was boiled down into 5 minutes... I wouldnt watch that I just dont believe that IF this is indeed happening, that TV networks such as EPSN/Eurosport will have the patience to show full games.. We'd be shown 3 minute snippets of each match.. If not full matches are shown, I would rather have none at all.. | ||
|
alwaid
United States96 Posts
| ||
|
Darclite
United States1021 Posts
| ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On October 02 2011 12:02 ELA wrote: Starcraft on television would have to work like Tour de France on television... There may be some times where it SEEMES that nothing is happening, but these moments are actually when the mood and the setting is made for the sport.. Imagine if every stage of the tour was boiled down into 5 minutes... I wouldnt watch that I just dont believe that IF this is indeed happening, that TV networks such as EPSN/Eurosport will have the patience to show full games.. We'd be shown 3 minute snippets of each match.. If not full matches are shown, I would rather have none at all.. The tour de france works on TV for the same reason that other sports work on TV and for the same reason that Starcraft is probably the worst sport to pick for a live series and thats that for the previous examples they have a rough idea how long the games will last. They schedule 3 hours for football and sometimes they go over and sometimes they go under but usually when they are under or over it isnt by more than 20% of the time asigned or 30 minutes each way. If I were to schedule a Bo5 it could go either 4 hours or 30 minutes and thats just a massive time descrepancy to deal with as a scheduler. Even if you were to use only 1 or 2 games a day then you still dont know whether you are going to fill 2 hours or barely fill 30 minutes. This is rather signifigant to advertisers who like to know there products are being advertised during the primary thing they bought. If you were to start with broadcasting Esports over live TV it would have to be something like either Halo or Gears of War in America for there popularity and there ability to look nice enough on a TV to draw a national or even global audiance (unlike BW and CS 1. 6 would struggle in that department). If you pick those games then you have a rought timeline of how long it will take to within about 15 minutes depending on if a Bo5 goes 3 games or 5. If they were to broacast it though it would either have to be prerecorded and done with highlights and player reactions (like the madden series they did awhile back) or part of a gaming block so that you could ensure advertisers got what they wanted and would want to pay for. Slightly off topic I would be willing to bet that ESPN's interest was probably garnered by either the reaction they got to the Gorden Hayward article or when they saw the numbers Starcraft was getting when researching it. | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On October 02 2011 12:18 Darclite wrote: Couldn't you run it like tennis, have like four matches at once and just switch to show the interesting parts until you get to semifinals and grand finals and show the whole games? That is actually an idea I hadnt thought of but is probably something ESPN could make work to fix the time issue. | ||
|
ELA
Denmark4608 Posts
On October 02 2011 12:52 Adreme wrote: The tour de france works on TV for the same reason that other sports work on TV and for the same reason that Starcraft is probably the worst sport to pick for a live series and thats that for the previous examples they have a rough idea how long the games will last. They schedule 3 hours for football and sometimes they go over and sometimes they go under but usually when they are under or over it isnt by more than 20% of the time asigned or 30 minutes each way. If I were to schedule a Bo5 it could go either 4 hours or 30 minutes and thats just a massive time descrepancy to deal with as a scheduler. Even if you were to use only 1 or 2 games a day then you still dont know whether you are going to fill 2 hours or barely fill 30 minutes. This is rather signifigant to advertisers who like to know there products are being advertised during the primary thing they bought. If you were to start with broadcasting Esports over live TV it would have to be something like either Halo or Gears of War in America for there popularity and there ability to look nice enough on a TV to draw a national or even global audiance (unlike BW and CS 1. 6 would struggle in that department). If you pick those games then you have a rought timeline of how long it will take to within about 15 minutes depending on if a Bo5 goes 3 games or 5. If they were to broacast it though it would either have to be prerecorded and done with highlights and player reactions (like the madden series they did awhile back) or part of a gaming block so that you could ensure advertisers got what they wanted and would want to pay for. Slightly off topic I would be willing to bet that ESPN's interest was probably garnered by either the reaction they got to the Gorden Hayward article or when they saw the numbers Starcraft was getting when researching it. It is sucessfully done with Tennis and Kroket... A tennis match can potentially go between 40 minutes to 5 hours - A croket match can last a couple of hours up till 3 days They can make it work, if they want to make it work A halfarsed 30 minute show with highlights from a tournament that you just know will have no appeal to a person who's never seen starcraft before... Yeah, i'd rather do without However, lets see what happens - I might get positively surprised | ||
|
Oreo7
United States1647 Posts
On October 02 2011 09:50 FairForever wrote: Uhh yeah right... you have to be kidding me. ESPN will definitely not run MLG live (for reasons mentioned millions of times). And you're crazy if you think they'd make the time to run SC2 for more than an hour or two at a time. That's enough for two, maybe three BO3s. Exactly why I'm against this idea. If you really think ESPN is going to show SC2 on a Sunday (keep in mind this is MLG, so you are in the same/similar time zones) over... 1) Fantasy Football Pre-Game Show 2) A Soccer Game (Real Madrid is on ESPN tomorrow) 3) Multiple Random Programming (College Women's Volleyball, BodyBuilding) 4) WNBA 5) Women's Billiards You gotta be kidding me. Maybe ESPN would cut one of the latter 3. But they aren't going to spend more than a few hours (which is how much each of these programming items get) showing Starcraft. Re-read my post before you condescend, I say exactly the same thing you do, except I'm optimistic and you're pessimistic for no real reason with no facts to back up your reasoning. Sundance has proven time after time he knows what he's doing. | ||
|
RodneyEdge
United States8 Posts
I mean, do you realize how awesome it'd be to watch an epic game of Starcraft at your house, sitting on the couch with some of your best buds? Jumping up and yelling after seeing an awesome play? That's the appeal of it. I'd much rather take the social setting of watching in the living room rather than watching it by myself in a dark room on a smaller screen. And even if I were to get some friends to watch with me on a computer, it's not as appealing to hunch and gather around a computer. If this happens, it'll be amazing. I can imagine a friend calling me and asking "hey, you wanna come over and watch the game?" And I'd be like "hell yeah!" | ||
|
bluehawky
United Kingdom183 Posts
| ||
|
MarcH
United Kingdom362 Posts
The other way is all Delayed broadcasting and you get rid of all the between match delays and can schedule adverts much better. The main issues with this is that if you delay the games too much they become out of date, it is more conduceive to a fixed time and long games can screw that over and may end up being cut out but as long as Replays are released It wont be too big of an issue for most people I think. | ||
|
howLiN
Portugal1676 Posts
And to the people that are saying they prefer to watch SC2 on streams, this isn't aimed at you. Stuff doesn't grow if it's always being catered to the same people. | ||
|
tarodotoxin
United States110 Posts
| ||
|
Tippecanoe
United States342 Posts
On October 03 2011 07:34 tarodotoxin wrote: sc2 is an esport, not a real sport....they should put it on g4 tv....that channel has so much garbage, SC2 seems like a very viable option for that channel How is SC2 not a real sport? An athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature. Taken from Dictionary.com | ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On October 03 2011 07:46 Tippecanoe wrote: How is SC2 not a real sport? An athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature. Taken from Dictionary.com The problem here is the first part, athletic activity. Go ask random ppl if they consider playing a video game as athletic activity. The closest with starcraft at this time you will get is esport. | ||
|
Pulzlulz
Germany412 Posts
On October 03 2011 08:40 Assirra wrote: The problem here is the first part, athletic activity. Go ask random ppl if they consider playing a video game as athletic activity. The closest with starcraft at this time you will get is esport. Random people aren't defining words. | ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
Sure, then please tell me where it saids that starcraft is an athletic activity or how it is considered as one. | ||
|
SgtDK
United States54 Posts
| ||
|
groms
Canada1017 Posts
| ||
|
wishbones
Canada2600 Posts
I say that gaming will be considered as a sport some day. It will be in its own catagory and not compared to other sports, but be in itself a sport, problem is that people have their heads up their asses so they dont think to when sports were made up, there was no technology. Now there is. Times change sports come from different types of games. Whether the game is hockey, starcraft, or fishing. Welcome to the future nay sayers. And for anyone saying that starcraft is not physically demanding enough to be a sport, i just have to say, go watch golf. Sad that we still have to compare starcraft to other sports, but gaming is not that far ahead yet, in the next ten years it will be for sure though, so 2020 gaming will be considered sports but it will just be called gaming. I thought people knew this already... | ||
|
MERLIN.
Canada546 Posts
| ||
|
Sky0
United States214 Posts
| ||
|
Escoffier
United States120 Posts
| ||
|
Everhate
United States640 Posts
On October 03 2011 09:04 Escoffier wrote: if chess is a sport why isn't starcraft? Same for car racing (though it could be argued there's more of a physical component there than gaming...but not a huge disparity) and ESPN airs both that and poker tournaments. I believe they even had a few madden tournaments a couple of years ago, so it seems within reason that sc could be included at some point. It would certainly broaden the audience to a different base. | ||
|
Novalisk
Israel1818 Posts
Things like Poker, Curling, Snooker, Darts, Bowling, Golf, etc. All have their controversy concerning this matter and it will never go away, simply because individuals have their own standards. But if Poker got accepted by ESPN as a sport, then SC2 can also be accepted as a sport regardless of what you or the dictionary definition says. | ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On October 03 2011 08:58 wishbones wrote: to anyone trying to say starcraft is not sport, then you can hear this. I say that gaming will be considered as a sport some day. It will be in its own catagory and not compared to other sports, but be in itself a sport, problem is that people have their heads up their asses so they dont think to when sports were made up, there was no technology. Now there is. Times change sports come from different types of games. Whether the game is hockey, starcraft, or fishing. Welcome to the future nay sayers. And for anyone saying that starcraft is not physically demanding enough to be a sport, i just have to say, go watch golf. Sad that we still have to compare starcraft to other sports, but gaming is not that far ahead yet, in the next ten years it will be for sure though, so 2020 gaming will be considered sports but it will just be called gaming. I thought people knew this already... Sigh, its not about nay saying or anything. We are talking about ESPN, a channel for the mainstream audience (i think, not american). Its simple, if the masses don't consider it as one, it doesn't matter if it fits in the definition and such. The fact is, for them you are still just playing a video game. So since the they don't consider it as one, do you think it will get the same rules as one? I mean about the ppl talking here but in x sport its like that. Believe me, i want it to be considered as one, and we are making progress but we simply aren't there yet. | ||
|
rd
United States2586 Posts
On October 03 2011 09:11 Assirra wrote: Sigh, its not about nay saying or anything. We are talking about ESPN, a channel for the mainstream audience (i think, not american). Its simple, if the masses don't consider it as one, it doesn't matter if it fits in the definition and such. The fact is, for them you are still just playing a video game. So since the they don't consider it as one, do you think it will get the same rules as one? I mean about the ppl talking here but in x sport its like that. Believe me, i want it to be considered as one, and we are making progress but we simply aren't there yet. Who cares? If they can't enjoy it to the point they'll refuse to acknowledge it's classification as a sport, they wouldn't be watching in the first place. Anyone who would enjoy watching SC2 on ESPN would probably admit it's a sport. If they enjoy watching it and won't admit it, well, they're still watching. | ||
|
crocodile
United States615 Posts
On October 03 2011 08:42 Assirra wrote: Sure, then please tell me where it saids that starcraft is an athletic activity or how it is considered as one. Your profile says you're from Belgium. Do you not understand what the word "or" means? | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Drmooose
United States390 Posts
| ||
|
Tehs Tehklz
United States330 Posts
On October 03 2011 09:29 crocodile wrote: Your profile says you're from Belgium. Do you not understand what the word "or" means? ...do you? I cannot imagine in what way you have interpreted that definition so that it would include video games. | ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On October 03 2011 09:29 crocodile wrote: Your profile says you're from Belgium. Do you not understand what the word "or" means? Oh i do, except it seems not in the middle of the night. Sorry for that, my mistake. also, its quite lame to say stuff like that but thanks for filling the stereotypical american bucket some more. | ||
|
CaptainSlow
Malaysia164 Posts
| ||
|
Tehs Tehklz
United States330 Posts
On October 03 2011 09:56 Assirra wrote: Oh i do, except it seems not in the middle of the night. Sorry for that, my mistake. also, its quite lame to say stuff like that but thanks for filling the stereotypical american bucket some more. What? No, you didn't make a mistake. That definition says that a sport is an athletic activity. It also says that this athletic activity must require skill or physical prowess. According to that definition, video games do not count. Also: Uh, random people are exactly who defines words. Do you think there is some committee of intelligentsia who rule on these matters? Some kind of linguistic oligarchy? Do they do this at the UN? Maybe they just ask the Queen of England? Or did ol' Johnny English write down all the definitions for all the words when he invented the language? Perhaps Merriam and Webster use a ouija board and blood sacrifice to ask god, since everyone knows he speaks English anyways? Random people are exactly who define words - the the mass collective of society defines words and I'd be willing to bet that if you surveyed every single native English speaker and asked them if video games qualify as an athletic activity, the vast majority would say no. | ||
|
bigbadgreen
United States142 Posts
The time thing. Many other sports often don't follow their projected time slots. Overtime is a huge one. Sports all the time are tied and need overtime. Programs are rearranged all the time to accomodate these things. Things like golf, tennis and baseball are widely unpredictable reguarding time estimates. Nascar is interrupted all the time by rain and the announcers have to use all kinds of filler stories to kill time. Similar things can be done with SC2. Third is the secret weapon of SC2. Day 9. Plain and simple he is an awesome abassador. He can relate to the general public. If joe public tunes in and hears day 9 and his excitment and approach to the game they will be sucked in. Excitement breeds excitement. He has developed a way to relate the game to the general public. I'm not even sure if he has realized how much he has honed this skill through his dailies. Newbie tuesday is custom catered to people who don't know everything about the game and breaks it down into easy to understand content. I think with all of these things going as well as the growth of esports it's atleast worth looking at and I'm glad espn and sc2 promoters are coming together. In the mind of the general public tv legitimizes things. If it's on tv then it's for real. This could be the push that SC2 needs to really break wide open. If it fails it won't effect anything anyways because the structure for streaming and the community following is already there. | ||
|
bigbadgreen
United States142 Posts
| ||
|
Munk-E
United States672 Posts
| ||
|
NinjaDarkMatter
8 Posts
| ||
|
Whole
United States6046 Posts
On October 03 2011 10:36 bigbadgreen wrote: as a side note i can't call sc2 a sport. Your physical conditioning is never a concern to your playing readiness or ability. I don't think approaching this from an sc2 is a sport perspective is the right way to go. You risk taking on the battle of other things that aren't sports trying to gain importance by claiming to be a sport. sc2 is a game, but that game requires skill and much dedication to excel at. It follows characteristcs of sports but lacks the actual physical aspect. Therefore it's right to be shown on espn, but wrong to be marketed as a sport. I think esport is a fine term to use though because it distinguishes it from sport. When players are lifting weights and running miles at a time to improve their play then it's a sport, until then it's a game. A lot of non physical things are on ESPN 2. Poker, pool, ect. | ||
|
zoLo
United States5896 Posts
On October 03 2011 10:42 NinjaDarkMatter wrote: I'm all for starcraft on TV, don't get me wrong, but I also want my fair dose of baseball, football, hockey, etc..... So Just make GomTV Gom TV There's a reason why it's called ESPN 2. | ||
|
wishbones
Canada2600 Posts
On October 03 2011 09:11 Assirra wrote: Sigh, its not about nay saying or anything. We are talking about ESPN, a channel for the mainstream audience (i think, not american). Its simple, if the masses don't consider it as one, it doesn't matter if it fits in the definition and such. The fact is, for them you are still just playing a video game. So since the they don't consider it as one, do you think it will get the same rules as one? I mean about the ppl talking here but in x sport its like that. Believe me, i want it to be considered as one, and we are making progress but we simply aren't there yet. im sorry you dont understand whats really happening, i hope you start playing tons of starcraft 2, i wish i could. if you have watched this scene since 2005, then go for it, tell me im wrong, but otherwise just hear what im saying as the reality thats coming, and dive in if you have a computer capable of playing starcraft 2. | ||
|
j3i
United States357 Posts
| ||
|
wattabeast
United States957 Posts
| ||
|
bigbadgreen
United States142 Posts
On October 03 2011 10:36 bigbadgreen wrote: as a side note i can't call sc2 a sport. Your physical conditioning is never a concern to your playing readiness or ability. I don't think approaching this from an sc2 is a sport perspective is the right way to go. You risk taking on the battle of other things that aren't sports trying to gain importance by claiming to be a sport. sc2 is a game, but that game requires skill and much dedication to excel at. It follows characteristcs of sports but lacks the actual physical aspect. Therefore it's right to be shown on espn, but wrong to be marketed as a sport. I think esport is a fine term to use though because it distinguishes it from sport. When players are lifting weights and running miles at a time to improve their play then it's a sport, until then it's a game. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A lot of non physical things are on ESPN 2. Poker, pool, ect. covered that, plus my previous post right above the one quoted gives my reasons why this works on the espn network | ||
|
xlava
United States676 Posts
| ||
|
tsuxiit
1305 Posts
| ||
|
xlava
United States676 Posts
| ||
|
polysciguy
United States488 Posts
| ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
FragRaptor
United States184 Posts
On October 03 2011 11:00 wattabeast wrote: they should make another ESPN chanel, call it ESpN (ES(P)ortsNetwork). That'd be sickckkkkk eSPN (eSportsProgrammingNetwork) FTFY I hope Sundance made the right decision. | ||
|
xlava
United States676 Posts
On October 03 2011 11:12 polysciguy wrote: if poker is defined as enough of a sport to be showed on espn, im sure starcraft can qualify. also i would like to note that curling is considered a sport.......how much physical activity is actually involved? bowling? Horse racing? nascar? Horse racing and nascar, believe it or not, actually take an incredible amount of physical endurance, but I see your point and completely agree with you | ||
|
Silentenigma
Turkey2037 Posts
| ||
|
Wren
United States745 Posts
As much as it would hurt the easy-access-for-new-viewers angle, the television model that works for starcraft is Pay Per View. Ideally, you could offer SD on a free channel, HD for-pay, and basically recreate the streaming model that MLG uses now. Obviously, this is less flexible than internet streaming, so it would not be particularly feasible at current interest levels. However, as popularity grows, the numbers may start to work out. TV broadcasting is also appealing, even if it replicates other services, because service tends to be more stable, and it requires less infrastructure, especially on large or multiple screens (Barcraft gets a LOT easier if it's on TV). | ||
|
StreetWise
United States594 Posts
On October 03 2011 11:19 xlava wrote: Horse racing and nascar, believe it or not, actually take an incredible amount of physical endurance, but I see your point and completely agree with you I would argue that even starcraft takes physical endurance. When I go on a gaming Marathon, I get mentally and to some extent physically tired. I imagine Pros, who are concentrating much harder than I do, probably feel drained after a long day of gaming as well. Although its easy to say that Starcraft is more of a mental contest than a physical one. | ||
|
Nyctophobia
Canada99 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Play ads during the game in one of the corners, where there's normally just an overlay with the tournament logo. These could be static ads which rotate, or video ads which come on intermittently. I'm sure this idea could be refined, but this could allow near constant advertisement with static or animated ads, or not interrupt game-flow with video ads. Basically, they use the empty space which is normally just reserved for the tournament logo. | ||
|
Conquerer67
United States605 Posts
On October 03 2011 14:10 StreetWise wrote: I would argue that even starcraft takes physical endurance. When I go on a gaming Marathon, I get mentally and to some extent physically tired. I imagine Pros, who are concentrating much harder than I do, probably feel drained after a long day of gaming as well. Although its easy to say that Starcraft is more of a mental contest than a physical one. Do you have any idea what it's like to sit in a car for 500 miles, piss and shit yourself for a few hours? In StarCraft, you can get up, get some water, piss and shit in a toilet, and fall asleep without dying. And with running marathons... egghhh. You lose like 5-8% of your body weight by the time the thing is over. | ||
|
Kurr
Canada2338 Posts
1) I don't have cable 2) It's easier to just pick a stream I want online with no hassle. 3) Commercials. How will they handle long games? 4) Possible if not likely dumbing down of commentary and/or pre game to help the masses. 5) Probable 3am play time, as I highly doubt ESPN is going to put SC2 on a normal zone. The biggest plus would be production value. Otherwise, I don't really care if SC2 doesn't get more popular as I don't need a large amount of people to watch the same thing I do to validate my liking it. Overall, I don't think it would have a huge effect on popularity. I feel it would be largely shunned by most ESPN viewers anyway, but it's still worth a try if you're desperate to garner more attention for the game. The biggest challenge are the commentators. There aren't many casters that could fill the role. Needs are : -Good knowledge AND capable of transmitting it to people that have never played while keeping us nerds entertained. -Good voice, without FAKE enthusiasm but real one. -Looks respectable. Not super important normally but there's a pretty high standard in TV broadcasts. -Able to keep nerd jokes completely out of commentary. This I feel is the biggest challenge. All the casters are used to joking around, and it's not a bad thing if SC2 is to be played on TV, but the jokes need to be adapted. -No inside jokes, knowledge, etc. Keeping it professional (for example, not cheering for a person you know very well) and not basing your analysis on subjective things such as friendship (it feels like professionnal when a caster talks like he's best friends with all the players, even if he is. -Not saying anything that could offend anyone.... yep. And finally, the games would need to be perfect to keep the attention of a decent number of viewers. It can't be a 1-sided game or anything with a ton of bad mistakes or boring drawn out fights. Depending on luck or staged games, to be honest, would be the only way to make it work. You don't get 100s of chances, and if the games turn out terrible, people tune out. It's different from a normal sports in that it's hard to appreciate effort if the games turn out badly were as you can easily spot positives from say a hockey player who has a bad game but still tries hard. Basically, the same problems as an event such as MLG, but amplified x100 for TV standards. People are taking them too lightly IMO. | ||
|
Corrik
United States1416 Posts
On October 04 2011 11:58 Conquerer67 wrote: Do you have any idea what it's like to sit in a car for 500 miles, piss and shit yourself for a few hours? In StarCraft, you can get up, get some water, piss and shit in a toilet, and fall asleep without dying. And with running marathons... egghhh. You lose like 5-8% of your body weight by the time the thing is over. Do you seriously piss and shit yourself if you don't go in a few hours? You might need to see a doctor. | ||
|
GeorgeForeman
United States1746 Posts
On October 04 2011 11:58 Conquerer67 wrote: Do you have any idea what it's like to sit in a car for 500 miles, piss and shit yourself for a few hours? In StarCraft, you can get up, get some water, piss and shit in a toilet, and fall asleep without dying. And with running marathons... egghhh. You lose like 5-8% of your body weight by the time the thing is over. Sometimes, when I make long trips, I sit in a car for 5 hours straight. Granted, I'm doing 70 not 200, but I've yet to either piss or shit myself. | ||
|
hiyo_bye
United States737 Posts
On October 03 2011 09:56 Assirra wrote: Oh i do, except it seems not in the middle of the night. Sorry for that, my mistake. also, its quite lame to say stuff like that but thanks for filling the stereotypical american bucket some more. For what it's worth, I think Assirra is right... I don't consider SC2 an athletic ability. The "or" refers to the skill or physical prowess part. So the definition means that a sport is: AN ATHLETIC ACTIVITY that requires skill OR physical prowess. In both cases it still needs to be an athletic activity. But still, I'd watch SC2 on ESPN; I think it's more of a sport than Poker which I also watch on ESPN | ||
|
Vehemus
United States586 Posts
On October 04 2011 12:27 GeorgeForeman wrote: Sometimes, when I make long trips, I sit in a car for 5 hours straight. Granted, I'm doing 70 not 200, but I've yet to either piss or shit myself. Lol. Seriously. I'm pretty sure they use the restroom before they start the race. If you think going for longer than three hours without using the restroom is impossible, I suggest you see a doctor. | ||
|
danl9rm
United States3111 Posts
On October 03 2011 09:29 crocodile wrote: Your profile says you're from Belgium. Do you not understand what the word "or" means? Your post pisses me off for two reasons. One, Assirra obviously has a good grip on the English language, the language used on TL, and has been quite the cordial man in his posts. Two, you correct the dude with your superiorly incorrect English when he was the one that was right! Now, I demand you apologize to avoid further staring of my evil eye, also known as my e-vil eye. Your choice. | ||
|
arb
Noobville17921 Posts
On October 04 2011 12:18 Kurr wrote: I'll be honest, I wouldn't watch for a few reasons. 1) I don't have cable 2) It's easier to just pick a stream I want online with no hassle. 3) Commercials. How will they handle long games? 4) Possible if not likely dumbing down of commentary and/or pre game to help the masses. 5) Probable 3am play time, as I highly doubt ESPN is going to put SC2 on a normal zone. The biggest plus would be production value. Otherwise, I don't really care if SC2 doesn't get more popular as I don't need a large amount of people to watch the same thing I do to validate my liking it. Overall, I don't think it would have a huge effect on popularity. I feel it would be largely shunned by most ESPN viewers anyway, but it's still worth a try if you're desperate to garner more attention for the game. The biggest challenge are the commentators. There aren't many casters that could fill the role. Needs are : -Good knowledge AND capable of transmitting it to people that have never played while keeping us nerds entertained. -Good voice, without FAKE enthusiasm but real one. -Looks respectable. Not super important normally but there's a pretty high standard in TV broadcasts. -Able to keep nerd jokes completely out of commentary. This I feel is the biggest challenge. All the casters are used to joking around, and it's not a bad thing if SC2 is to be played on TV, but the jokes need to be adapted. -No inside jokes, knowledge, etc. Keeping it professional (for example, not cheering for a person you know very well) and not basing your analysis on subjective things such as friendship (it feels like professionnal when a caster talks like he's best friends with all the players, even if he is. -Not saying anything that could offend anyone.... yep. And finally, the games would need to be perfect to keep the attention of a decent number of viewers. It can't be a 1-sided game or anything with a ton of bad mistakes or boring drawn out fights. Depending on luck or staged games, to be honest, would be the only way to make it work. You don't get 100s of chances, and if the games turn out terrible, people tune out. It's different from a normal sports in that it's hard to appreciate effort if the games turn out badly were as you can easily spot positives from say a hockey player who has a bad game but still tries hard. Basically, the same problems as an event such as MLG, but amplified x100 for TV standards. People are taking them too lightly IMO. The same way OGN handles it imagine, play the entire game out then play the commercials afterwords,(which can take like 6-7 minutes to get all the commercials but still) Oh, and on topic: SC2 no BW yes. | ||
|
Steel
Japan2283 Posts
On October 03 2011 12:17 Wren wrote: So the big hurdles for putting Starcraft on regular TV are two: irregular game duration and advertising difficulty. However, both of these are fairly simple to overcome by looking at the currently televised event that shares those characteristics: boxing. As much as it would hurt the easy-access-for-new-viewers angle, the television model that works for starcraft is Pay Per View. Ideally, you could offer SD on a free channel, HD for-pay, and basically recreate the streaming model that MLG uses now. Obviously, this is less flexible than internet streaming, so it would not be particularly feasible at current interest levels. However, as popularity grows, the numbers may start to work out. TV broadcasting is also appealing, even if it replicates other services, because service tends to be more stable, and it requires less infrastructure, especially on large or multiple screens (Barcraft gets a LOT easier if it's on TV). Honestly, if leagues go on TV, I think they should all be cast on replays for the professionalism and the irregular time issue. Sure those big events would be streamed live, and it could get long or short, but it's like that for a lot other sports to. | ||
|
mufin
United States616 Posts
On October 03 2011 11:19 xlava wrote: Horse racing and nascar, believe it or not, actually take an incredible amount of physical endurance, but I see your point and completely agree with you if it gets money and views and is competitive, call it a sport and put it on your network. all this labeling crap and definition mongering of "is it actually a sport" is completely meaningless. | ||
|
VillageBC
322 Posts
| ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
| ||
|
OptimusYale
Korea (South)1005 Posts
if its shown on espn korea will definitely watch in a bar <3 Note: Just show the tournaments, none of these bullshit ultimate gamer shows or anything like that...maybe show something to explain SC2 like KR did with the WCG qualifiers when they had boxer talking about the differences in the game! | ||
|
Keifru
United States179 Posts
On October 04 2011 10:13 Mr. Wiggles wrote: Here's an idea: Play ads during the game in one of the corners, where there's normally just an overlay with the tournament logo. These could be static ads which rotate, or video ads which come on intermittently. I'm sure this idea could be refined, but this could allow near constant advertisement with static or animated ads, or not interrupt game-flow with video ads. Basically, they use the empty space which is normally just reserved for the tournament logo. I would refuse to watch on ESPN if they had constant ads like this, or if the Ads blocked any gameplay. Its the whole reason I refuse to take off adblock; I got sick and tired of missing bits of gameplay due to an ad rolling around. I think replayed games would be the best run on a TV, because you know how long the game will be and thus you know when/how long you need to run your ad breaks. Hell, I wouldn't mind (as much as I already mind regular ads) if they paused the game right after an intense battle to do an ad run, then resume just after (seamless transition on tv, of course) | ||
|
Mvrio
689 Posts
| ||
|
bRiz
United States113 Posts
| ||
|
Skullflower
United States3779 Posts
On October 04 2011 16:06 Mvrio wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U39kfgjuie4 This made me laugh far more than it should have. Kudos | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On October 04 2011 15:59 Keifru wrote: I would refuse to watch on ESPN if they had constant ads like this, or if the Ads blocked any gameplay. Its the whole reason I refuse to take off adblock; I got sick and tired of missing bits of gameplay due to an ad rolling around. I think replayed games would be the best run on a TV, because you know how long the game will be and thus you know when/how long you need to run your ad breaks. Hell, I wouldn't mind (as much as I already mind regular ads) if they paused the game right after an intense battle to do an ad run, then resume just after (seamless transition on tv, of course) You wouldn't miss any of the game. In fact, you already see ads like this on almost every tournament stream, and some player streams as well. Adblock doesn't help either, as it has to do with the streamer and not the page it's being streamed on. Next time DJWheat is streaming something, check out the ads to either side of the unit portraits, and the show logo above the unit command card. you wouldn't even need to put it in three places, as you could just plop one ad over the unit command card and be done with it. The only difference between this and the ads already being used, is that they would cycle, instead of staying the same constantly. | ||
|
Sm3agol
United States2055 Posts
On October 03 2011 10:31 bigbadgreen wrote: I would love to see SC2 on espn. I would dvr it, and promote it to friends. To blow up arguements being put against it there are valid comparisons to other programing already on espn. You can get sponsors to pay for in game ads so you don't have to cut away. This exact thing is implemented in both soccer and racing. They can either have a small banner and have a bigger blow up that says this broadcast is brought to you commercial free by whoever, or like espn ahs already done with IRL racing, they can splitscreen commercials and if anything exciting happens blow up the action and get back to the commercials when they can. The time thing. Many other sports often don't follow their projected time slots. Overtime is a huge one. Sports all the time are tied and need overtime. Programs are rearranged all the time to accomodate these things. Things like golf, tennis and baseball are widely unpredictable reguarding time estimates. Nascar is interrupted all the time by rain and the announcers have to use all kinds of filler stories to kill time. Similar things can be done with SC2. Third is the secret weapon of SC2. Day 9. Plain and simple he is an awesome abassador. He can relate to the general public. If joe public tunes in and hears day 9 and his excitment and approach to the game they will be sucked in. Excitement breeds excitement. He has developed a way to relate the game to the general public. I'm not even sure if he has realized how much he has honed this skill through his dailies. Newbie tuesday is custom catered to people who don't know everything about the game and breaks it down into easy to understand content. I think with all of these things going as well as the growth of esports it's atleast worth looking at and I'm glad espn and sc2 promoters are coming together. In the mind of the general public tv legitimizes things. If it's on tv then it's for real. This could be the push that SC2 needs to really break wide open. If it fails it won't effect anything anyways because the structure for streaming and the community following is already there. I can't agree with the Day9 bit. I love Day9, and love watching his dailies and hearing him cast, but he is waaaayyyy too much of a nerd for the average sports watcher. When I started watching SC, even I was off-put a bit with his style and look. Someone like Husky would be far better. Not that Husky is better, but he is just a lot more like a "regular" sporting event caster that doesn't explain overly much, but just follows the action with enthusiasm, and keeps a really good, entertaining word flow going. When you're just starting to watch SC2, hearing Day9 orgasm over a well-timed 1 gate/robo FE build...is just a little weird. | ||
|
sixfour
England11061 Posts
| ||
|
Deckkie
Netherlands1595 Posts
| ||
|
firehand101
Australia3152 Posts
On October 04 2011 21:28 Sm3agol wrote: I can't agree with the Day9 bit. I love Day9, and love watching his dailies and hearing him cast, but he is waaaayyyy too much of a nerd for the average sports watcher. When I started watching SC, even I was off-put a bit with his style and look. Someone like Husky would be far better. Not that Husky is better, but he is just a lot more like a "regular" sporting event caster that doesn't explain overly much, but just follows the action with enthusiasm, and keeps a really good, entertaining word flow going. When you're just starting to watch SC2, hearing Day9 orgasm over a well-timed 1 gate/robo FE build...is just a little weird. I understand what you are saying, but i think we should give it a shot and release him to the world. I think he is a great icon for us and really represents who we are. I mean sure, we could get ESPN to hire hunky casters who also have superior knowledge about the game, but then it would be like any other casters. People like Day 9 make SC2 what it is, and we should be proud ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/SuRQp.gif) (but yes, the nerdiness is very apparent) | ||
|
Escape
Canada306 Posts
It doesn't have to be tournaments, it could be weekly updates or pro interviews. | ||
|
Champ24
177 Posts
It only really makes sense if the games weren't shown live for this reason. Who knows though, I'm sure they could think of something. They did make poker incredibly fun to watch (at least for me) and boomed that industry the past decade. | ||
|
Adventurekid
Sweden505 Posts
| ||
|
Loxley
Netherlands2480 Posts
On October 04 2011 21:28 Sm3agol wrote: I can't agree with the Day9 bit. I love Day9, and love watching his dailies and hearing him cast, but he is waaaayyyy too much of a nerd for the average sports watcher. When I started watching SC, even I was off-put a bit with his style and look. Someone like Husky would be far better. Not that Husky is better, but he is just a lot more like a "regular" sporting event caster that doesn't explain overly much, but just follows the action with enthusiasm, and keeps a really good, entertaining word flow going. When you're just starting to watch SC2, hearing Day9 orgasm over a well-timed 1 gate/robo FE build...is just a little weird. ![[image loading]](http://wireninja.com/starcraft2/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/day9-perfume-560x372.jpg) The nerd can be tamed. Thats a sportscaster right there. | ||
|
Greggle
United States1131 Posts
On October 04 2011 21:41 firehand101 wrote: I understand what you are saying, but i think we should give it a shot and release him to the world. I think he is a great icon for us and really represents who we are. I mean sure, we could get ESPN to hire hunky casters who also have superior knowledge about the game, but then it would be like any other casters. People like Day 9 make SC2 what it is, and we should be proud (but yes, the nerdiness is very apparent) I think Tasteless would be the best mainstream caster, I often times imagine him and John Madden just yelling about things. He would fit in perfectly. I like him right where he is in Korea though. | ||
|
RageBot
Israel1530 Posts
On October 04 2011 22:18 Loxley wrote: The nerd can be tamed. Thats a sportscaster right there. Is that a real perfume/cologne? | ||
|
howLiN
Portugal1676 Posts
On October 04 2011 13:09 arb wrote: Oh, and on topic: SC2 no BW yes. SC2 is a far more spectator-friendly game. | ||
|
Noev
United States1105 Posts
| ||
|
Sylverin
United States480 Posts
On October 04 2011 22:18 Loxley wrote: The nerd can be tamed. Thats a sportscaster right there. I hope thats a real product Thats fucking awesome! nicely done sir OT: ESPN2 OR BUST!!!! | ||
|
Kerm
France467 Posts
| ||
|
twoliveanddie
United States2049 Posts
seems like a perfect fit for streaming some SC2 let alone all the other games they already stream. POKER anyone??? | ||
|
JustJonny
Canada294 Posts
| ||
|
Tal0n
United States175 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
| ||
|
Nyct0
United Kingdom33 Posts
| ||
|
KRJeongSooYeon
Korea (South)20 Posts
OH MY GOD.. ITS SO COOL | ||
|
courtpanda
866 Posts
| ||
|
silencesc
United States464 Posts
| ||
|
zaii
Guam2611 Posts
On October 05 2011 14:33 silencesc wrote: why is this not on r/starcraft? I can't find the link... it's been there, 2 threads of it with over a thousand comments | ||
|
Swig
United States54 Posts
| ||
|
Captain Falcon
United States17 Posts
At that, people who do not play or even know of SC2 would have NO IDEA what is going on in the game. I voted yes anyway, casting Archon back to the U.S.!! | ||
|
IMSmooth
United States679 Posts
NIKE: Just All-In | ||
|
ZackAttack
United States884 Posts
| ||
|
Praetorial
United States4241 Posts
| ||
|
royyoo123
United States6 Posts
| ||
|
Brainling
United States660 Posts
| ||
|
AsoSako
Bulgaria24 Posts
| ||
|
Imalengrat
Australia365 Posts
| ||
|
Comprissent
United States314 Posts
On October 01 2011 06:51 R0YAL wrote: I don't have a TV but if SC2 was on ESPN then id fucking find one. Mostly this, seeing as I have a computer at school but no tv No matter what, this is a pretty huge deal ! | ||
|
Vul
United States685 Posts
On October 06 2011 13:50 Comprissent wrote: Mostly this, seeing as I have a computer at school but no tv No matter what, this is a pretty huge deal ! This for me too, stream on ESPN.com? | ||
|
Ketch
Netherlands7285 Posts
On October 06 2011 03:50 IMSmooth wrote: I cant wait for Nike to make a ESPORTS line after recognition from espn. Finally have someone other than razor sponsor EVERY team :p NIKE: Just All-In You mean: ? | ||
|
SilverPotato
United States560 Posts
| ||
|
Kanidan
United States8 Posts
| ||
|
Archybaldie
United Kingdom818 Posts
| ||
|
bLooD.
Germany470 Posts
On October 08 2011 01:40 Archybaldie wrote: if all the major events went to TV ... wouldnt that screw twitch over? Also what about sc2 fans that dont have espn? Even if they start to broadcast over ESPN, why would they stop broadcasting over the internet? | ||
|
scaban84
United States1080 Posts
| ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
| ||
|
tutsicockroach
United States57 Posts
it would be a huge breakthrough in the NA esports scene. it would be one step closer to bring esports in america to how it is in korea. | ||
|
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
| ||
|
StrifeIsBack
United States31 Posts
| ||
|
-ForeverAlone-
274 Posts
On October 08 2011 02:57 Bane.RemedY wrote: I'd like to know from the 200 something odd people why the hell they voted No. o_o Are you insane? Some people genuinely think that television is a bad format for SC2 matches because of: -Lack of solid time slots for each match -Removes the independent broadcasting approach that is happening now -Shifts focus away from Internet broadcasting and I'm sure there are tons of other reasons... | ||
|
Achaia
United States643 Posts
On October 08 2011 03:05 -ForeverAlone- wrote: Some people genuinely think that television is a bad format for SC2 matches because of: -Lack of solid time slots for each match -Removes the independent broadcasting approach that is happening now -Shifts focus away from Internet broadcasting and I'm sure there are tons of other reasons... The biggest complaint I've heard about SC2 on TV is the time format thing but people only have compared it to shows that air regularly for a specific time window (i.e. 30 minute sitcoms on abc). Sporting events of any kind don't really follow that model though. Baseball, football and basketball games run long all the time. They have more time than they think it will take to play the game but sometimes it takes longer. In the sports world you can't account for every time delay so the networks just have an understanding that when they air something like that it may take longer than the allotted time to broadcast the entire thing. That being said I'm sure that it's possible for them to interpret using it in a 30 minute time slot as a "good idea" which we all know would obviously not work, but if they are willing to give it the room to breathe and they take their commercial breaks in between sets I don't see any reason why it can't work in a television format. | ||
|
Ignorant prodigy
United States385 Posts
On October 08 2011 01:47 cLutZ wrote: How could it be any less popular than the poker tournaments they show? Whoa whoa whoa.. I’m as much a SC fan as the next guy.. but there’s a HUGE difference Complete apples and oranges argument. For one.. the world series of poker has cash prizes in the MILLIONS…. Secondly don’t under estimate poker’s following… it’s enormously more popular than SC2. Also the demographic who watches ESPN I would say does not directly correspond to that of computer gamers. Would I like to see it.. absolutely.. but comparing it to poker tournaments is just crazy talk | ||
|
SnuggleZhenya
596 Posts
| ||
|
Kal_rA
United States2925 Posts
Awesome ad! Kim Nam Gyu is all in. | ||
|
strikerz200
58 Posts
Why not ESPN? don't go ESPN2, that spells f a i l u r e.... you have to realize nobody watches TV nowadays. not to mention MLG matches are every once few hours.... and it's just much convenient and easier to follow e-sports on the internet via teamliquid.net twitter/facebook. If you want ppl to watch MLG on TV, it must be FREE of Charge. Mark my words, not as many people will stick up with what they said and buy ESPN2. | ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On October 08 2011 03:18 Achaia wrote: The biggest complaint I've heard about SC2 on TV is the time format thing but people only have compared it to shows that air regularly for a specific time window (i.e. 30 minute sitcoms on abc). Sporting events of any kind don't really follow that model though. Baseball, football and basketball games run long all the time. They have more time than they think it will take to play the game but sometimes it takes longer. In the sports world you can't account for every time delay so the networks just have an understanding that when they air something like that it may take longer than the allotted time to broadcast the entire thing. That being said I'm sure that it's possible for them to interpret using it in a 30 minute time slot as a "good idea" which we all know would obviously not work, but if they are willing to give it the room to breathe and they take their commercial breaks in between sets I don't see any reason why it can't work in a television format. You are comparing world wide known sports to a video game. The same rules do no apply. Also, the question was "would you tune in?" so why you ppl say yes when they simply won't? | ||
|
zeek0us
United States67 Posts
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have SC2 on TV and I'd definitely watch it, but I'd also love if all the highest rated shows (what are they, 2 1/2 Men and NCIS or something?) were canceled, along with every reality show and replaced with something much nerdier . . . so I've learned that my tastes in no way coincide with 99% of the population, and those are the people whose atrocious sensibilities dictate what's on TV. I could see a niche cable station airing some Starcraft, but it would have to be one that isn't selling advertising based on the expectation of more than a few tens of thousands of viewers. | ||
|
Jedclark
United Kingdom903 Posts
On October 08 2011 01:40 Archybaldie wrote: if all the major events went to TV ... wouldnt that screw twitch over? Also what about sc2 fans that dont have espn? What about football fans that don't have Sky Sports? It's the same thing with any sport. | ||
|
c0ldfusion
United States8293 Posts
| ||
|
roymarthyup
1442 Posts
i think it would be interesting, heh | ||
|
Bedrock
United States395 Posts
Step 1: ESPN360 + WatchESPN Step 2: If audience is big, move to bigger mediums. | ||
|
mutantmagnet
United States3789 Posts
On October 08 2011 05:39 Bedrock wrote: I think the right medium for something like SC2 would be to create a channel on ESPN360. I think SC2's home is the online space and after that is established, they can consider going to a bigger audience over TV. Step 1: ESPN360 + WatchESPN Step 2: If audience is big, move to bigger mediums. Agreed. People who are voting yes but have no intention of watching the games on ESPN are hurting esports. | ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On October 08 2011 05:38 roymarthyup wrote: about commercial breaks for live games. what about pausing a game and having a few minute commercial break in the game pause? i think it would be interesting, heh Yea i am sure pro gamers will be pleased with that... | ||
|
zDeath
United States25 Posts
| ||
|
naux
Canada738 Posts
why watch it on the tv when i can just watch it on the computer with no commericials | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On October 08 2011 07:14 naux wrote: internet is the new tv why watch it on the tv when i can just watch it on the computer with no commericials Because streams still have terrible quality compared to television. | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On October 08 2011 07:14 naux wrote: internet is the new tv why watch it on the tv when i can just watch it on the computer with no commericials Cuz i don't feel like paying tons of money a month in order to have good enough internet for 1080p without lagging the rest of my house. In addition to the tickets to watch the premium stream. | ||
|
Sandro
897 Posts
On October 08 2011 12:19 GinDo wrote: Cuz i don't feel like paying tons of money a month in order to have good enough internet for 1080p without lagging the rest of my house. In addition to the tickets to watch the premium stream. Point one I can agree with, but point number 2, a cable package is much more expensive, and with streams you can at least pick and choose, so if you want MLG and not NASL you can just get that, but with cable you get every channel, and all the costs associated with them. | ||
|
zmansman17
United States2567 Posts
I would eat to it I would sleep with it I would invite friends over and let it join our friend group I would dance alone in its presence I would invent songs to sing in front of it I would profess my love to it I would shine my shoes beside it I would dress up in the morning with 2 blacks socks and a 6 pool I would refuse to change the channel when other people came over and requested it I would be one with it I would break the sanction of infidelity with it I would run on a treadmill for a half marathon observing it I would act like it's not there, leave the room, come back in and re-discover it I would shadowbox it I would project it from my apartment onto the street I would cherish it I would like it. | ||
|
StickNMove
United States16 Posts
| ||
|
Primadog
United States4411 Posts
On October 08 2011 12:28 zmansman17 wrote: I would do everything to this channel I would eat to it I would sleep with it I would invite friends over and let it join our friend group I would dance alone in its presence I would invent songs to sing in front of it I would profess my love to it I would shine my shoes beside it I would dress up in the morning with 2 blacks socks and a 6 pool I would refuse to change the channel when other people came over and requested it I would be one with it I would break the sanction of infidelity with it I would run on a treadmill for a half marathon observing it I would act like it's not there, leave the room, come back in and re-discover it I would shadowbox it I would project it from my apartment onto the street I would cherish it I would like it. But will you put a ring on it? | ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
On October 09 2011 15:37 StickNMove wrote: So is this actually going to happen? You ask starcraft fans if they will watch starcraft, and you expect to get a lot of no's...? I really feel like asking the starcraft community is pointless. Either tell us it is happening and give us the news of when or dont even hype it up if it isnt going to happen in the first place. It's great that you are "in talks" with ESPN, but why even ask? Will the two people who reply to you on twitter saying "yes" or "no" dictate a decision so big with potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars on the line? It shouldnt. So if it is gonna happen then tell us already. Dont string us along and give false hope. Stuff like this takes time dude. He asked like a week ago. And i highly doubt it would take place this season. He asked to show the tv executives that people will watch. Seeing thousands of people reply on twitter/TL/reddit in an hour does make an impression to TV executives. | ||
|
Terranist
United States2496 Posts
| ||
|
Animism
Switzerland130 Posts
let's ask ourselves a question - would you rather turn on your TV to watch SC2 on ESPN, with probably a larger amount of commercials, or would you rather use your computer to stream the content? Sure, TV's generally have a larger display, and are easier to have larger groups of people tune into, but TV's (generally) have less capability than modern video streaming software. For example IPL3 allowed us to control our streamer by letting us watch player cameras, two streams at once on the same page etc. This is something that would probably be difficult to control without an application - something that will only be found on fairly modern and fairly expensive Televisions. So the question here is really - What is more convenient for the viewers? But there is also another issue - exposure. If SC2 was broadcasted on mainstream sports network it would expose e-sports to the mainstream world, which is a very large audience. A larger audience means more sponsors and will cause existing sponsors to throw even more money at the scene because of the amount of attention its receiving. A larger audience would also probably cause the form of an organisation - similar to Kespa, except for the western world. This would cause E-sports to work similar to physical sports do (even though they already kind of do) except on a broader level, no doubt with more money involved. | ||
|
LimeNade
United States2125 Posts
| ||
|
gakkgakk
Norway902 Posts
If he likes it, then he better put a ring on it. | ||
|
SoKHo
Korea (South)1081 Posts
On October 12 2011 15:33 Terranist wrote: a big flaw in his approach is that a fair chunk of the twitter and reddit SC community are college aged kids like myself who don't even have cable TV. that's not true. I would think lots of college students do have cable. We watch sports all the time and I watch espn quite frequently. | ||
|
latan
740 Posts
On October 12 2011 15:45 Animism wrote: I was thinking about this and i'm sure a lot of people have said this already, but haven't we reached a point of time where TV has become semi abolished? let's ask ourselves a question - would you rather turn on your TV to watch SC2 on ESPN, with probably a larger amount of commercials, or would you rather use your computer to stream the content? Sure, TV's generally have a larger display, and are easier to have larger groups of people tune into, but TV's (generally) have less capability than modern video streaming software. For example IPL3 allowed us to control our streamer by letting us watch player cameras, two streams at once on the same page etc. This is something that would probably be difficult to control without an application - something that will only be found on fairly modern and fairly expensive Televisions. So the question here is really - What is more convenient for the viewers? all good points but having possibility of running into a sc2 broadcast while surfing channels sounds quite appealing to me. | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
On October 08 2011 12:13 cLutZ wrote: Because streams still have terrible quality compared to television. Wrong. 1) It's still in it's beginning phase, so we are nowhere near the maximum. 2) Many issues are due to the lack of good interent connection on the consumer side 3) Big companies, at least here in germany, have streaming services. They rock. | ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
On October 08 2011 12:13 cLutZ wrote: Because streams still have terrible quality compared to television. IPL3 looked better than my TV. Granted I don't have an HD TV but many people don't still... | ||
|
Imalengrat
Australia365 Posts
| ||
|
BrauL
Canada197 Posts
On October 08 2011 12:13 cLutZ wrote: Because streams still have terrible quality compared to television. How is that even remotely true? Half the streams here on TL already offer 1080p. | ||
|
sergedelacalle
France24 Posts
| ||
|
StarbugPilo
France37 Posts
| ||
|
eits
United States210 Posts
| ||
|
Tailss
Sweden233 Posts
| ||
|
Silu
Finland165 Posts
On October 12 2011 17:13 BrauL wrote: How is that even remotely true? Half the streams here on TL already offer 1080p. When is the last time your TV started buffering or hanged up completely for extended periods of time? Resolution isn't the sole quality measure. | ||
|
Torpedo.Vegas
United States1890 Posts
On October 12 2011 17:29 Silu wrote: When is the last time your TV started buffering or hanged up completely for extended periods of time? Resolution isn't the sole quality measure. You could flip that around though and say when is the last time you could watch two channels at the same time while chatting with people around the world and monitoring TL....on your TV. | ||
|
redrain
1 Post
| ||
|
CHOMPMannER
Canada175 Posts
Internet is for e-sports. Maybe show some big tournaments on G4 | ||
|
Kaizoku
Sweden96 Posts
On October 14 2011 19:33 CHOMPMannER wrote: no thanks I watch real sports on espn. Internet is for e-sports. Maybe show some big tournaments on G4 Isnt this just the thing we are working towards not thinking.. Thought we all worked towards getting esports the recogniztion as a sport. | ||
|
Tanith
United Kingdom108 Posts
| ||
|
T3tra
United States406 Posts
On October 14 2011 19:39 Tanith wrote: I wouldn't pay for ESPN to watch sc2, just isn't worth it. I wouldn't either tbh. And honestly after hearing djWHEAT's argument against having SC2 on ESPN I'm feeling a bit iffy about it. I'd love for e-sports to be a mainstream thing, but public television may not be the best medium with all the commercial breaks and what not. | ||
|
CHOMPMannER
Canada175 Posts
On October 14 2011 19:35 Kaizoku wrote: Isnt this just the thing we are working towards not thinking.. Thought we all worked towards getting esports the recogniztion as a sport. Unfortunately leagues like the NHL, NBA, NFL, and MLB will always be superior because of the big corporations and million dollar TV deals. | ||
|
gatorling
United States30 Posts
and guess what? A lot of times the college games don't always get covered by the big networks, a lot of times they air on ESPN... So there you go, a lot of college students will have cable. Getting national exposure on a major cable network can be nothing but good for E-sports in terms of growth. That is a CRAP ton of ad-revenue, like A CRAP TON. Blizzard will be rolling in cash. | ||
|
mav451
United States1596 Posts
And soccer only has two halves (barring OT), so what has to be done is one-screen ads, with informational bubbles sponsored by XYZ. I can see SC2 being successful if it goes that route. Obviously they aren't taking ad-breaks during games, but between games. | ||
|
Jedclark
United Kingdom903 Posts
| ||
|
Alianian
United States15 Posts
| ||
|
Qumquat
Israel353 Posts
| ||
|
R0YAL
United States1768 Posts
On October 12 2011 17:13 BrauL wrote: Because streams still have terrible quality compared to television. It looks fucking amazing on tv. | ||
|
Jakkerr
Netherlands2549 Posts
There are nowhere near enough people interested in watching this on TV. It will just fail miserably and get cancelled, try getting back on after that. | ||
|
hobosrus
United States99 Posts
On October 14 2011 19:33 CHOMPMannER wrote: no thanks I watch real sports on espn. Internet is for e-sports. Maybe show some big tournaments on G4 You are exactly the kind of person that is hurting e sports. We are trying to get it recognized as an actually sport and then people like you come along and say... video games aren't sports, they don't involve competition and training | ||
|
elSupremo
United States6 Posts
| ||
|
MonkSEA
Australia1227 Posts
On October 17 2011 13:37 elSupremo wrote: I highly doubt it. I've been playing Paintball for years and their scene is going through similar struggles to get mainstream media attention. We've gotten some events televised, including national and college events, but that's rare if that. Even then the argument that ESPN would play more of the conventional sports hold more true to paintball, not necessarily Starcraft. While I know Paintball has a competitive side, most people view it as for fun. Sound similar? They're on the same boat imo. | ||
|
Goshdarnit
United States540 Posts
| ||
|
TheSwamp
United States1497 Posts
| ||
|
TheSwamp
United States1497 Posts
On October 17 2011 10:22 hobosrus wrote: You are exactly the kind of person that is hurting e sports. We are trying to get it recognized as an actually sport and then people like you come along and say... video games aren't sports, they don't involve competition and training Starcaft players don't have an off season either. They train with same intensity all year long. | ||
|
Flamingo777
United States1190 Posts
| ||
|
NEgroidZerg
United States244 Posts
| ||
|
Thurokiir
United States779 Posts
On October 17 2011 13:57 NEgroidZerg wrote: ESPN could use something better at night than world series of poker reruns. Thereeee we go haha, A+ | ||
|
Treadmill
Canada2833 Posts
| ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
| ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
NBA TV has been averaging 11k, yes just 11k viewers recently. FuelTV has been averaging 7k viewers. Obviously NBA TV's will go up when the lock out ends, but Fuel TV is a whole network that averages less than 10k viewers. MLG was consistently above 100k this weekend, the viewers are there. Primetime viewers? No. Viewers to displace the major sports? No. But there is a lot of time to be filled for ESPN. SC2 can fill that well imo. | ||
|
MonkSEA
Australia1227 Posts
On October 17 2011 16:40 jmbthirteen wrote: For people who think sc2 doesn't get enough viewers for tv: NBA TV has been averaging 11k, yes just 11k viewers recently. FuelTV has been averaging 7k viewers. Obviously NBA TV's will go up when the lock out ends, but Fuel TV is a whole network that averages less than 10k viewers. MLG was consistently above 100k this weekend, the viewers are there. Primetime viewers? No. Viewers to displace the major sports? No. But there is a lot of time to be filled for ESPN. SC2 can fill that well imo. You're forgetting that MLG was broadcasted over the internet. A lot of people from many different countries were able to tune into it. ESPN is on a television set, so there is going to be a lot less people tuning in just because it's not on a global scale. With that being said, I'm interested in the MLG country viewer ship %. | ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
On October 17 2011 16:47 MonkSEA wrote: You're forgetting that MLG was broadcasted over the internet. A lot of people from many different countries were able to tune into it. ESPN is on a television set, so there is going to be a lot less people tuning in just because it's not on a global scale. With that being said, I'm interested in the MLG country viewer ship %. for either raleigh or anaheim it was 45% US/55% World. So yes the numbers would dip, but i think its safe to say at least 50k would be able to tune in on ESPN 2. Not to mention random curious ESPN watchers (a lot of people just have ESPN on all the time, myself included). | ||
|
DoomsVille
Canada4885 Posts
On October 17 2011 16:40 jmbthirteen wrote: For people who think sc2 doesn't get enough viewers for tv: NBA TV has been averaging 11k, yes just 11k viewers recently. FuelTV has been averaging 7k viewers. Obviously NBA TV's will go up when the lock out ends, but Fuel TV is a whole network that averages less than 10k viewers. MLG was consistently above 100k this weekend, the viewers are there. Primetime viewers? No. Viewers to displace the major sports? No. But there is a lot of time to be filled for ESPN. SC2 can fill that well imo. ESPN air time is much more valuable than Fuel TV. I'd be much more interested to know the ratings of ESPNs worst programs (and the times they are on) then other stations. The question isn't whether SC2 belongs on TV... it's whether ESPN should pick it up. And bare in mind, that 100k viewership is worldwide. There are a ton of europeans watching as well. ESPN2 is an american station. Hell I don't get ESPN in Canada... let alone ESPN2 (which is where starcraft would go). EDIT: Also, I should add, SC2 probably does get enough viewers. The viewer numbers were at least compelling enough for Sundance to get in touch with ESPN execs. I'm sure everyone on both ends will study it thoroughly and know exactly whether the numbers are there. What they want to know is whether the starcraft community would all flock to see it on TV. I know a ton of people (myself included) would rather just watch it on my computer (hell thats how I watch the NBA now... thank god for league pass). | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
| ||
|
Reptilia
Chile913 Posts
GO FOR IT ! inb4 massive success | ||
|
darklight54321
United States361 Posts
| ||
|
Steveling
Greece10806 Posts
| ||
|
Meeks
United States132 Posts
| ||
|
justinpal
United States3810 Posts
On October 20 2011 05:35 Reptilia wrote: i don't know what could go terribly wrong to not try it. GO FOR IT ! inb4 massive success I think it can go terribly terribly wrong. For example, no one watches it and the feedback is largely negative from the general audience. ESPN cancels it after a few weeks and esports will never be on TV again. That seems bad to me. | ||
|
GumThief
Canada284 Posts
On October 20 2011 06:34 justinpal wrote: I think it can go terribly terribly wrong. For example, no one watches it and the feedback is largely negative from the general audience. ESPN cancels it after a few weeks and esports will never be on TV again. That seems bad to me. Well it will either A) Never be on TV or B) Never be on TV AGAIN So it's worth a shot for it to be on TV at least once in the west, right?? Who would you rather do it? ESPN 2 partnering with MLG would be the best shot we could give. | ||
|
DueSs
United States765 Posts
But, yeah--I'd watch. | ||
|
NoobieOne
United States1183 Posts
| ||
|
GumThief
Canada284 Posts
On October 20 2011 06:38 NoobieOne wrote: However if it fails then whatever chance it might have in the future has this to look down on .. and what does the future hold that is more promising compared to attempting this now??? | ||
|
LimeNade
United States2125 Posts
On October 20 2011 06:34 justinpal wrote: I think it can go terribly terribly wrong. For example, no one watches it and the feedback is largely negative from the general audience. ESPN cancels it after a few weeks and esports will never be on TV again. That seems bad to me. and the world will fall into darkness destroying esports as we know it as the coming apocalypse comes just to kick us in the nuts. Dude you are out of your mind lol ESPN is probably one of if not the best stations to handle something like this. You see what they did with poker? Try going to a casino and watching people play, its possibly one of the most boring things ever if you are not playing. But ESPN with card cameras and what not made poker what it is today online and off. And if it doesnt work on ESPN then there was probably no chance it would ever work anyways. Not like you can make a gaming channel for Sc2. The idea behind this is to attract a bigger audience. If you were to put it on a gaming channel on TV all you would be doing is moving the people who watch streams to watching it on TV without an increase in viewers. Think before you post negative thoughts or just make outlandish comments bout loom and doom. | ||
|
nucleo
292 Posts
On October 14 2011 19:33 CHOMPMannER wrote: no thanks I watch real sports on espn. Internet is for e-sports. Maybe show some big tournaments on G4 like poker? | ||
|
theBizness
United States696 Posts
| ||
|
Kal_rA
United States2925 Posts
On October 20 2011 06:34 justinpal wrote: I think it can go terribly terribly wrong. For example, no one watches it and the feedback is largely negative from the general audience. ESPN cancels it after a few weeks and esports will never be on TV again. That seems bad to me. Not only TV, but if it fails other sponsors will look at how bad it failed and not support e-sports. Or current sponsors might pull out. They have one shot, and they gotta do it right.. I dunno if were ready yet. Yet. | ||
|
Zinroc
Canada73 Posts
Pretty much look at the explosion of the UFC and how long they are holding out for the perfect network deal. | ||
|
AWakefield
Canada420 Posts
| ||
|
Kiyo.
United States2284 Posts
On October 30 2011 16:07 Zinroc wrote: Unless a TV network comes begging with a proposal they have been working on for a long time for putting SC2 on TV I don't think its worth it to do because if they treat it like a freak sideshow it won't do anything for Esports. Pretty much look at the explosion of the UFC and how long they are holding out for the perfect network deal. What? The UFC didn't hold out for a perfect TV deal. They were still operating in the red and looking for a way to break into the mainstream when they came up with the idea for The Ultimate Fighter reality series, which they sold to Spike for pretty cheap. That led to more cooperation with Spike and eventually live events. It was a good deal for both parties in the end, the UFC benefited tremendously from the exposure, but the UFC never "held out" for a perfect deal. | ||
|
LXR
357 Posts
| ||
|
Wegandi
United States2455 Posts
| ||
|
Wegandi
United States2455 Posts
On October 30 2011 16:26 LXR wrote: To be honest... I watch sc2 on my computer. It's way more convenient than watching on tv.... if they stream on espn.com then i wouldn't care at all but if they only stream over TV then i'm probably not going to watch it You telling me you would rather watch SC on your computer which most likely is under 28' and is probably not 1080P HD or better. Sure, I usually watch the games on the couch or my bed with my laptop, but laptops have an even worse screen size than desktops and running HDMI to the TV is one more step than if ESPN took up the mantle for me. :p Would be cool if they had casters for ESPN Radio also. Wouldn't mind listening to play-by-play on my way home or going on a trip somewhere. | ||
|
T3tra
United States406 Posts
| ||
|
North2
134 Posts
If you start with a smaller TV station, there's almost no doubt that we will be able to give more traffic than they can lose. That's very solid incentive for the TV station to put SC2 up in the future. Even if it fails, it won't be monumental to the point where nobody will want to try it again. I just don't see any benefit whatsoever to start with ESPN. | ||
|
jeeeeohn
United States1343 Posts
| ||
|
SnowFantasy
4173 Posts
Don't forget the spelling bee. That is on ESPN. | ||
|
howLiN
Portugal1676 Posts
On October 20 2011 06:40 GumThief wrote: .. and what does the future hold that is more promising compared to attempting this now??? It's a question of timing. If the scene isn't big or interesting enough to attract viewers putting it on TV would fail, but if you wait some more time for the scene to naturally grow and only then put it on TV, then maybe it could survive. | ||
|
Phyanketto
United States505 Posts
1) Success - With even moderate success, more money from supporters, sponsorships and the like will bring more skill and attention to the scene. More money in tournaments, more production value, more gg, more skill. 2) Failure - People with think we are nerds. I like the outcomes of both. | ||
|
Catatonic
United States699 Posts
| ||
|
Jakkerr
Netherlands2549 Posts
On October 30 2011 18:12 Phyanketto wrote: I'l just say this to the people that are against putting SC2 on Tv... There are two possible outcomes. 1) Success - With even moderate success, more money from supporters, sponsorships and the like will bring more skill and attention to the scene. More money in tournaments, more production value, more gg, more skill. 2) Failure - People with think we are nerds. I like the outcomes of both. It can't be succesful, just look at the facts. ESPN is American only? atleast half of the americans won't tune in to ESPN cuz they either don't have a TV, don't have a subscription for ESPN or just prefer watching it on their pc. Don't think people that never heard about it are gonna watch, cuz that's false hope. I know people think TV is a good idea and every1 wants to rush things, but the community isn't big enough at all. | ||
|
MethodSC
United States928 Posts
On October 30 2011 18:24 Jakkerr wrote: It can't be succesful, just look at the facts. ESPN is American only? atleast half of the americans won't tune in to ESPN cuz they either don't have a TV, don't have a subscription for ESPN or just prefer watching it on their pc. Don't think people that never heard about it are gonna watch, cuz that's false hope. I know people think TV is a good idea and every1 wants to rush things, but the community isn't big enough at all. Sometimes they have some obscure shit on ESPN, especially ESPN2, and I'll tune in just to see what it's all about. I'm sure it would draw at least a little attention from the average viewer, especially with the right casters. | ||
|
Phyanketto
United States505 Posts
On October 30 2011 18:24 Jakkerr wrote: It can't be succesful, just look at the facts. ESPN is American only? atleast half of the americans won't tune in to ESPN cuz they either don't have a TV, don't have a subscription for ESPN or just prefer watching it on their pc. Don't think people that never heard about it are gonna watch, cuz that's false hope. ESPN is American only. Ok, that's a baseline of 350,000,000 people. Let's say that 60% of people do not watch TV. That's 140,000,000 left over. Let's say that a good 10% of those that do have TV's watch ESPN (hint: it's actually a lot more, as American handegg is one of the biggest media events in the nation, and that is broadcast on ESPN). That number is 14,000,000. Let's say that even 10% of people that watch ESPN in our little hypothetical debate would even give SC2 a chance. That's 1,400,000. Add that in with the demographic we're shooting for (males 13-30) and we'd have a fairly healthy number. That's certainly larger than any MLG stream numbers for SC2 so far. Add that to the fact that people that already watch SC, let's say they're a good 100k, would watch and spread the word, etc. More and more people play video games. Those that were gamers as children are now growing up. There will be more and more gamers in the media industry (perhaps disproportionately so, given the leanings of graphic design, PR, etc) meaning that sooner or later, competitive gaming will end up on TV. | ||
|
Kommissar
Australia48 Posts
| ||
|
Wegandi
United States2455 Posts
On October 30 2011 18:24 Jakkerr wrote: It can't be succesful, just look at the facts. ESPN is American only? atleast half of the americans won't tune in to ESPN cuz they either don't have a TV, don't have a subscription for ESPN or just prefer watching it on their pc. Don't think people that never heard about it are gonna watch, cuz that's false hope. I know people think TV is a good idea and every1 wants to rush things, but the community isn't big enough at all. Before ESPN started to show poker it was relatively a small niche community and who would have figured watching people play poker would draw so many in? There are a lot of great personalities that you can parallel and the casters for Poker are as enjoyable as Tastosis and other SC2 casters. Honestly, if they still continue to show Bowling and Spelling Bees on ESPN 2 & 3 then I doubt SC would be less successful than those programs. They simply cannot just throw a bunch of money in the beginning. I think a lot of people would be surprised how many folks watch the poker shows who normally never play poker because of the mind games, personalities, and money on the line. The same dynamics are at work with SC and it is more visceral which brings in a broader demographic. They would have to cast replays since a live broadcast just wouldn't work that well. EX: After MLG is over they could break down the segments into hour long and have it shown over the course of a week or so with interviews, histories, documentaries, etc. Get to know the players, just like in Poker. IdrA would be the Phil Helmuth of SC2. I think people would tune in. In enough numbers to make a profit. It wouldn't be all that expensive for ESPN and e-Sports is continuing to grow. All the gamer nerds who grew up playing games are getting older with jobs & money to put towards their hobbies, etc. No one is arguing (or at least they shouldn't) that ESPN should host a league with teams, or individual tournaments. Honestly, the downside is very limited. It's a much more enjoyable experience to watch the games on your 40+ inch HD TV while lounging on the couch, instead of on your 18-20' laptop screen. (Not to mention you can TIVO/DVR the games and watch them later, instead of having to hunt them down on folks Twitch.TV or Youtube with horribad quality) PS: I don't know how it is in the NL, but 98% of the American population owns a TV and many own 3+. As for cable...yes, that number is lower, but it is still a majority of households in the US. | ||
|
dahornnn
United Kingdom395 Posts
On October 30 2011 20:15 Wegandi wrote: Before ESPN started to show poker it was relatively a small niche community and who would have figured watching people play poker would draw so many in? There are a lot of great personalities that you can parallel and the casters for Poker are as enjoyable as Tastosis and other SC2 casters. Honestly, if they still continue to show Bowling and Spelling Bees on ESPN 2 & 3 then I doubt SC would be less successful than those programs. They simply cannot just throw a bunch of money in the beginning. I think a lot of people would be surprised how many folks watch the poker shows who normally never play poker because of the mind games, personalities, and money on the line. The same dynamics are at work with SC and it is more visceral which brings in a broader demographic. They would have to cast replays since a live broadcast just wouldn't work that well. EX: After MLG is over they could break down the segments into hour long and have it shown over the course of a week or so with interviews, histories, documentaries, etc. Get to know the players, just like in Poker. IdrA would be the Phil Helmuth of SC2. I think people would tune in. In enough numbers to make a profit. It wouldn't be all that expensive for ESPN and e-Sports is continuing to grow. All the gamer nerds who grew up playing games are getting older with jobs & money to put towards their hobbies, etc. No one is arguing (or at least they shouldn't) that ESPN should host a league with teams, or individual tournaments. Honestly, the downside is very limited. It's a much more enjoyable experience to watch the games on your 40+ inch HD TV while lounging on the couch, instead of on your 18-20' laptop screen. (Not to mention you can TIVO/DVR the games and watch them later, instead of having to hunt them down on folks Twitch.TV or Youtube with horribad quality) Is it not fair to say the biggest probable reason people stay on a channel when they see poker is because the amount of cash changing hands ;o? | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20285 Posts
I disagree. Most TV broadcasters dont support higher resolution stuff (I know sky, pretty much THE uk broadcaster, wont go past 1280x720p) and having that blown up onto a 40" screen gives me headaches. Much more comfortable with a 21" screen running 1920x1200 only 1-2 feet away from you and having a nice comfy chair with wheels etc and a desk to put stuff on, a way to talk to friends and other people about the game etc... | ||
|
Wegandi
United States2455 Posts
On October 30 2011 20:21 dahornnn wrote: Is it not fair to say the biggest probable reason people stay on a channel when they see poker is because the amount of cash changing hands ;o? Sure, that plays a part, and there is a lot of money changing hands in the major SC2 tournaments also (just not in the millions...). However, a lot of people tune in to watch the personalities, the mind games, and as entertainment. (luck, random chance on the river, suspense, etc.) Poker and SC have a lot of the same qualities just ask ElkY, Rekrul, etc. | ||
|
ILoveAustralia
Bangladesh104 Posts
Solution: JASON LEE for ESPN!!!!!!!!!! | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On October 30 2011 19:55 Kommissar wrote: Yes, but tonnes of people on reddit think this was just some guy trolling Well some guys on the internet thought some guy was lying with no evidence. You've convinced me! | ||
|
D u o
Canada381 Posts
I disagree with it. I won't catch any of these things on tv because i'll be able to get a better experience on my pc. | ||
|
Wesso
Netherlands1245 Posts
On Oct 30 2011 15:28<span style='color:#d20000'> (12 min)</span> ih8Australia wrote: Problem with eSPN.. You cant have tasosis talking about dragonballz, pokemon or yugioh. This, I don't think the ESPN audience appreciates being called "nerd" every 30 seconds. Maybe TB or Husky? | ||
|
D u o
Canada381 Posts
On October 30 2011 23:41 Wesso wrote: This, I don't think the ESPN audience appreciates being called "nerd" every 30 seconds. Maybe TB or Husky? Why would we wan't either of those people who know very little about the game compaired to tasteless or artosis or day9 as the face of our community? | ||
|
MysteryHours
United States168 Posts
On October 30 2011 23:39 D u o wrote: TV does drama the best. Players bring drama. Sc2 as a game has 0 drama SC2 has no more or less drama than stuff like bowling and pool which seem to do fine on ESPN. Though if SC2 was on TV I'd prefer to see it on a techy/alternative channel rather than an ESPN channel. | ||
|
D u o
Canada381 Posts
On October 31 2011 00:11 MysteryHours wrote: SC2 has no more or less drama than stuff like bowling and pool which seem to do fine on ESPN. Bowling and pool don't have 55 minute TvT's which would overlap commercial breaks. Internet is a better outlet for watching SC2 because we won't have to be censored, overlapped and we will be able to watch a lot more of the actual events since we can have multiple streams and views on the players and the event. Poker and SC2 are along the same terms it's all about information deducing however poker has a huge social aspect you learn a lot of the players because they're constantly talking or not talking you get these views 100%. Changing the way Artosis or Tasteless are in front of a camera is bad for us as fans of WHAT they are and putting people with lackluster knowledge in front of the camera to be our face is also bad for what we want to show to the world. We are gamers, we're very passionate about the game and we shouldn't have to change the way we are to apply to a general audience, who watch bowling, pool, lumberjack competitions and bugle/drum competitions. If we will have to change the face's or be a lot more censored it's not good for our community. Sure it'll grow it. But growth isn't always the best thing. If the growth will change what I love about watching SC2 then I vote no for growth. Tournaments are rapidly getting bigger, regardless of TV or not. Our audience is getting more and more diverse WITHOUT TV ALREADY. Why do we NEED SC2 on TV if it even has ANY potential of changing these sorts of things. I have no doubt that it'll do good its what we'll have to change for it to actually be on TV. The comparison i can leave with anyone is just see how much worse pure pwnage got going from a no censor program to a more mainstream audience when it got put on TV. I know for myself it got hugely worse because they had to make less community references and had to change the personalities of characters. Sure this isn't a TV show but just going from one audience group to another there will be some changes that have to be made. I watch a lot of SC2 streams and almost every major event, and I can't imagine tasteless or Artosis without being nerdy. I can't imagine day9 without his random bursts of laughter. | ||
|
bigbadgreen
United States142 Posts
As for creating drama. That's what tv is for. Espn has done enough broadcasts and had to fill so much downtime that they will be prepared no matter what. The formula they use is to have a broadcast team in place and then add atleast one expert. I can guarentee that any broadcast team that Espn uses will know the game and be able to talk non stop about it. The reason for this is that the Espn provided casters would be newer and are trying to establish a relationship with Espn so they can advance to the big time stuff. Go ahead and research how much time all of their analysts and commentators do researching the things they broadcast. If you were to throw in somebody like Day 9 with two espn casters I don't think you would be dissapointed. For production value alone this should be done. If you think any SC tournament is on par with the capabilities of Espn you are fooling yourself. The crews setting up and tearing down for Espn events do thousands per year. The logistics of it blow away anything SC has seen. Even if it fails on Espn the experience of seeing how it's done would be invaluable to any SC tournament organizer. Having SC on a mainstream channel also legitimizes it to the general public. This could spur a new generation of foreign gamers. It's a lot easier to convince your parents that you want to explore a gaming career if your chosen game is being shown on something that your parents understand and they can see the potential future in. This not only peaks the interest of a wider gamer audience, it builds upon itself. Why do you think SC is so big in Korea? Because they have the infrastructure in place to support and legitimize it. I just don't see how this is a bad thing to explore. If it succeeds then you'll bring in potential millions in advertising and sponsorship money. If it fails then there are underlying benefits and things will go back to how they are now and potentially be improved. Also with more capable "smart" tvs coming out and more channels to choose from SC could make a comeback to mainstream in the future, even if it were on a smaller channel. | ||
|
bigbadgreen
United States142 Posts
Bowling and pool don't have 55 minute TvT's which would overlap commercial breaks But ESPN already shows soccer which is two 45 minute halfs without commercial as well as their Indy car coverage where they don't break from the race unless it allows, like during a caution. For indy they do a side by side ad and coverage and for soccer they have a small ad next to the score and they commentators usually say something like "brought to you commercial free by XYZ..." | ||
|
SupLilSon
Malaysia4123 Posts
On October 30 2011 20:21 Cyro wrote: "It's a much more enjoyable experience to watch the games on your 40+ inch HD TV while lounging on the couch, instead of on your 18-20' laptop screen. " I disagree. Most TV broadcasters dont support higher resolution stuff (I know sky, pretty much THE uk broadcaster, wont go past 1280x720p) and having that blown up onto a 40" screen gives me headaches. Much more comfortable with a 21" screen running 1920x1200 only 1-2 feet away from you and having a nice comfy chair with wheels etc and a desk to put stuff on, a way to talk to friends and other people about the game etc... You know you can watch TV AND have your laptop open in front of you... | ||
|
Alpino
Brazil4390 Posts
On October 30 2011 18:39 Phyanketto wrote: ESPN is American only. Ok, that's a baseline of 350,000,000 people. Let's say that 60% of people do not watch TV. That's 140,000,000 left over. Let's say that a good 10% of those that do have TV's watch ESPN (hint: it's actually a lot more, as American handegg is one of the biggest media events in the nation, and that is broadcast on ESPN). That number is 14,000,000. Let's say that even 10% of people that watch ESPN in our little hypothetical debate would even give SC2 a chance. That's 1,400,000. Add that in with the demographic we're shooting for (males 13-30) and we'd have a fairly healthy number. That's certainly larger than any MLG stream numbers for SC2 so far. Add that to the fact that people that already watch SC, let's say they're a good 100k, would watch and spread the word, etc. More and more people play video games. Those that were gamers as children are now growing up. There will be more and more gamers in the media industry (perhaps disproportionately so, given the leanings of graphic design, PR, etc) meaning that sooner or later, competitive gaming will end up on TV. LOL @ people thinking ESPN is american only. They have ESPN Brasil here. | ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:01 bigbadgreen wrote: But ESPN already shows soccer which is two 45 minute halfs without commercial as well as their Indy car coverage where they don't break from the race unless it allows, like during a caution. For indy they do a side by side ad and coverage and for soccer they have a small ad next to the score and they commentators usually say something like "brought to you commercial free by XYZ..." Sorry but if you are comparing a video game with a world known sport you are doing something wrong. Same for everyone else here saying stuff like "yea but they have obscure stuff like spelling bee" Ever thought that spelling bee stuff is more known then a game everywhere besides korea? Like it or not but the majority sees starcraft as just another video game so if you indeed want it on tv prepare to take serious hits. | ||
|
Riskr
Germany403 Posts
| ||
|
AntiSleep
Canada91 Posts
| ||
|
cilinder007
Slovenia7251 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:49 Riskr wrote: sounds like blasphemy but i would rather have an NBA season on ESPN yea I would like an NBA season too | ||
|
Candadar
2049 Posts
If you do this on TV, it has one shot. ONE shot. If it crashes and burns, especially on something like ESPN, that's it. It's done for, FOREVER. Almost no one will give it another shot again. It will never get another shot on TV, unless something absolutely miraculous happens. I would not want to make that chance just yet. | ||
|
DeadBull
421 Posts
| ||
|
keyStorm
Canada316 Posts
| ||
|
xlava
United States676 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:54 Candadar wrote: I saw a post earlier in this thread that I liked. Shame I can't find it. If you do this on TV, it has one shot. ONE shot. If it crashes and burns, especially on something like ESPN, that's it. It's done for, FOREVER. Almost no one will give it another shot again. It will never get another shot on TV, unless something absolutely miraculous happens. I would not want to make that chance just yet. This is completely accurate. Sundance better know what he's doing. I would love SC2 on TV, but we better do it right. The fate of esports' future lies in Sundance's hands. GL. | ||
|
basballguy
United States35 Posts
On October 30 2011 18:39 Phyanketto wrote: ESPN is American only. Ok, that's a baseline of 350,000,000 people. Let's say that 60% of people do not watch TV. That's 140,000,000 left over. Let's say that a good 10% of those that do have TV's watch ESPN (hint: it's actually a lot more, as American handegg is one of the biggest media events in the nation, and that is broadcast on ESPN). hrmmm...i guess the same way people stereotype video gamers the same can be done for other things. ESPN is a worldwide brand.... http://intltv.espn.com/on_air/tv_listings ESPN Brazil ESPN Israel ESPN Middle East etc etc Soccernet (europe) ESPN Deportes | ||
|
basballguy
United States35 Posts
| ||
|
RumTalk
Jamaica135 Posts
On October 31 2011 02:08 basballguy wrote: additionally, wouldn't be easier to integrate this with that video game channel..G4 or whatever...is that still around? Only gamers watch g4 really, also none of their shows that i have seen even cover esports | ||
|
VashTS
United States1675 Posts
| ||
|
VashTS
United States1675 Posts
On October 31 2011 02:30 RumTalk wrote: Only gamers watch g4 really, also none of their shows that i have seen even cover esports No, but AotS has covered SC2 a couple of times (including events) as far as I know. Dunno if they broadcast anything over TV, but I'm sure their site live-streamed it. They need more gamer stuff, less reruns of Cops/Cheaters. Giving them a bad rep. =( | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On October 31 2011 02:08 basballguy wrote: additionally, wouldn't be easier to integrate this with that video game channel..G4 or whatever...is that still around? G4 has 3 game shows they show at primetime and have Ninja Warrior, a couple of random Japanese shows, and reruns of Cops and Cheaters for the other 20 hours of the day. It's a joke network that's quality has slipped consistently since they started phasing out the interesting shows left over from the TechTV merger. I doubt they'd ever cover e-sports despite their anemic ratings anyway. | ||
|
Tula
Austria1544 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:54 Candadar wrote: I saw a post earlier in this thread that I liked. Shame I can't find it. If you do this on TV, it has one shot. ONE shot. If it crashes and burns, especially on something like ESPN, that's it. It's done for, FOREVER. Almost no one will give it another shot again. It will never get another shot on TV, unless something absolutely miraculous happens. I would not want to make that chance just yet. That's only half true. A while ago (as in around 1990) a german station had a video game show with decent esports focus. In the end it petered off because the audience wasn't regular enough (and the station it aired on got axed) and now we are talking about esports on TV again. True to some extent if ESPN fails it is unlikely that a major brand or station will pick it up in the forseeable future, but at some point in the future they might consider it again. To be honest there are many ways in which esports COULD be done perfectly fine on TV, but i wonder if we truly need it. To some extent the entire generation which is the target audience is very used to the internet already, many new TVs can easily display internet streams (at least in Europe the newest generation can). I think with some targeted advertising on ESPN you could reach similar crowds and audiences with the current streams. If MLG wanted they could easily host a daily show of 90 minutes with 2 commercial breaks where they repeat or recast replays from the last MLG or other tournaments (if they can get the rights to cast those) on their stream. | ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV European League
PiGosaur Monday
OSC
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Online Event
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
Online Event
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
