|
On October 14 2011 05:28 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:24 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:17 Cataphract wrote:On October 14 2011 05:13 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:03 Cataphract wrote:On October 14 2011 03:55 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 03:36 Warblade! wrote:On October 14 2011 02:56 conz wrote:
Taking it away from the what's correct and legal, it's a shame because in a sense MLG and these bigger events are growing SC2 through advertising sc2, surely blizzard makes a ton off the people that watch the big crowds and hours of content then decide to buy or play the game. Doesn't seem fair. What exactly would seem fair to you? For those of you having such an issue with a possible revenue stream for Blizzard off of these tournaments, do you also bombard the forums of the NFL, NBA, MLB, FIFA, etc. complaining whenever they take a cut of revenue from broadcasted content of their respective sports? I think the point everyone is missing here is that the major tournaments themselves are doing quite well. We have MLG_Lee here personally defending Blizzard's right to a cut of the revenue and while he legally can't comment on it, I'm sure it's because he and the MLG are doing quite well regardless of that cut. And I'm sure it's the same for the GSL, IPL, Dreamhack, etc. I find it hilarious that people are trying to villify Blizzard so badly that they're missing the big picture that the eSports scene is EXPLODING right now. EVERYONE involved with the major events are making money - from the organizers to the progamers to the sponsors and yes even Blizzard. As a fan, it blows my mind that people will find any reason to complain about the current tournament and eSports scene when we as fans have more content than ever before and the scene is on the verge of blowing up into the mainstream thanks to these amazing games of SC2, BarCrafts forming as a result and the burgeoning possibilities of having eSports on broadcast television (P.S. thanks Sundance/MLG for working on getting this done!). If Blizzard were screwing things up as badly as the trolls are making them out to be, NONE of this would even be an issue. This would be a forum with 10 people discussing the merits of Supreme Commander or some other RTS as an esports game and how they're the only 10 people with the vision to see how it could maybe succeed as one with tournaments paying out hundreds of dollars to the top players! Time to inject a new opinion... I don't give a fuck what MLG Lee says or thinks. I don't want to indirectly pay Blizzard so they can make up their single-player casual bullshit. I want to pay for esports, and if any percentage of that goes to Blizzard, then the money is getting squandered for whatever Blizzard wants to spend it on (single-player casual bullshit). Theorycrafting right now, but I don't want MLG to be "fine". Fine is bullshit when it can be Good. Blizzard is choking out their IP, scarcity is real and it's inefficient to use our limited funds for what Blizzard wants (single-player casual bullshit). Blizzard isn't screwing up, but they aren't helping. Their patches and balancing is just fixing their original fuck-ups. They don't (or shouldn't) balance for meta-game. So they just need to balance for the original content, which they could've done before they even shipped it out instead of focusing on other things they did (single-player casual bullshit). I'm gonna go out on a limb and say more people bought Starcraft 2 for the singleplayer experience rather than the competitive multiplayer. I have a bunch of people on my realID friends list that own the game. Probably close to 10. 3 of them have ever laddered. 1 of them has watched the GSL. Blizzard probably made more money from people that bought the game for the singleplayer only, than they do on people that only care about multiplayer. I read about people on forums that talk about how they don't even like to play the game on ladder, they prefer to watch it, but I can guarantee that all of them will play the Heart of the Swarm campaign. I think this based on my experiences. And for the record, I like both. How did Blizzard make more money from the single-player when everybody bought both the single-player and multiplayer? Unless you mean if Blizzard only made a multiplayer game? I've heard LoL is just doing horrible with their exclusive multiplayer content. And if they actually spent their time only with multiplayer, things could be so much better and I'd be happy to give Blizzard money for doing something right. No, I am saying that if you polled everyone that bought Stacraft 2, more people would have bought it purely for the singleplayer campaign than to play just multiplayer. You can't compare a F2P game(LoL) to SC2(Full box $60 game). LoL is popular because its free. So, the singleplayer people spent $60.00 and the multiplayer people spent $60.00 + ad revenue from tournaments. It sounds like in the long term that the multiplayer people would be more valuable. And we don't know how many people would've bought it anyway without singleplayer content and just quit. Even then, if only multiplayer people bought the game, it would be better for esports. We would've had SC2 in 2009 (those cinematics take months to make, yay single-player) and with the growth of esports within the last year, I'm not convinced Blizzard wouldn't be better of without single-player content. You don't seem to realize that the community does not get to set the terms on how Blizzard creates a product. Business does not operate out of altruism for esports, not Blizzard, not MLG, not GLS, not even pro players, not anyone. Blizzard created a product that tournament organizers want, are willing to pay for, and can make money off of. End of story.
Well that's hardly a good discussion.
Why be a realist when being on a forum, doesn't seems conducive.
|
On October 12 2011 20:11 roymarthyup wrote:
This thought crossed my mind recently. MLG orlando is coming up soon and i was thinking. How much of the proffits of MLG actually go to blizzard?
I mean it seems unfair. If blizzard wants to make their own tournament they can, but they automatically get part of the profits of every other tournament instead of that money going to the players?
A tournament needs to survive, so if blizzard is taking a cut of the profits that really is taking a cut of what the players should be getting. The tournament isnt going to risk itself when it comes to money, its going to just reduce what it gives to the players in order to survive as long as blizzard is taking a cut.
I know its blizzards game. But in this environment what would be stopping a competitor from maybe making a better or equal game and then letting any tournament use that game free of charge with the thought that game sales would be enough to fund the company and you wouldnt need to take a cut from all the tournaments.
Then esports would switch to that game because 1) its better, or maybe its equal and 2) the tournaments no longer need to pay a large part of their money to the company. This way tournaments for that game could keep more money for themselves and give more money to the players.
Why are you assuming that blizzard does take money from tournaments when you don't even know or even have the slightest source that they do?
what is this thread, I don't even.
|
On October 14 2011 05:30 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:26 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:17 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:05 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 03:55 Hnnngg wrote:
Time to inject a new opinion... I don't give a fuck what MLG Lee says or thinks. I don't want to indirectly pay Blizzard so they can make up their single-player casual bullshit. I want to pay for esports, and if any percentage of that goes to Blizzard, then the money is getting squandered for whatever Blizzard wants to spend it on (single-player casual bullshit).
Theorycrafting right now, but I don't want MLG to be "fine". Fine is bullshit when it can be Good. Blizzard is choking out their IP, scarcity is real and it's inefficient to use our limited funds for what Blizzard wants (single-player casual bullshit).
Blizzard isn't screwing up, but they aren't helping. Their patches and balancing is just fixing their original fuck-ups. They don't (or shouldn't) balance for meta-game. So they just need to balance for the original content, which they could've done before they even shipped it out instead of focusing on other things they did (single-player casual bullshit).
Plenty of other non-Blizzard epsorts for you to pay for then. Also, you're idea of consistently more and more tournaments and content being "choking out their IP" seems pretty off to me. Yeah, because of a fucked-up company I should just abandon a genre within esports. Blizzard isn't making tournaments, Blizzcon is a joke. They are strangling grass-roots tournaments by forcing a 5k limit, you can't argue that the 5k limit helps anyone but Blizzard. And Blizzard taking money (i.e. choking) from MLG/ESL/etc. means that money is not given to MLG/ESL/etc. So, we can either give our money for more MLG/ESL/etc. or we can give it to Blizzard for more single-player! Oh wait, they're going to make the next two games no matter how much money we give them, we're giving them money for SC3. Too bad they're going to waste that money again on single-player casual bullshit. I'm not sure what your point is, there other other RTS games besides Blizzard games, they might not be esports because they suck. But you can either not pay tournaments at all or you can pay them and they are going to pay Blizzard. They don't have a problem with it like you do. Starcraft 2 has allowed them to make money, period. The expense of paying Blizzard is irrelevant when Blizzard has provided an entirely new area for profit that works. Basically I'm under the threat of an ultimatum, good esports infrastructure from Blizzard! We don't know who has a problem with what, because there is an NDA. I wonder why... MLG/ESL/etc would also make money without SC2, SC2 isn't keeping esports alive, and esports would be fine without it. Which is why I cannot fathom why you don't realize that Blizzard deal *works* for MLG and pretty much everyone else who matters. If it wasn't profitable, they wouldn't use it, they aren't forced into paying for SC2, they choose to. That simple.
Except they don't deserve to pay for it. We're not talking about legal issues, that discussion is pointless. The discussion should be whether or not Blizzard morally deserves the money, given how much work they put into SC2.
|
On October 14 2011 05:32 Hnnngg wrote:
Why be a realist when being on a forum, doesn't seems conducive.
Good point.
What I want to know is why didn't SC2 come with the ability to travel the galaxy FOR REAL and see the real zerg, terran, and protoss? Blizzard has enough money that they could have made it happen, they are just fucking greedy so lets boycott them.
Who's with me?
|
|
|
Do they do this to all blizzard games? (WoW, WC3, etc)
|
On October 14 2011 05:17 Hnnngg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:10 Cataphract wrote:On October 14 2011 05:03 gatorling wrote:
If Blizzard gets too greedy. The market will punish them, there are plenty of other games out there that would love to be THE e-sport game.
There are plenty of games that WANT to be the e-sport game, but there is only one that I want to watch, Starcraft 2. And I think Blizzard has every right to get a share of money from tournaments. Man, the guy above me REALLY hates the single-player campaign. I would still bet that Blizzard made more money from people that only played that or enjoyed both SP and MP over those that only play MP. Being a WoW PvP player, you are always on the backburner to PvE. I see the same thing happening with SC2, except SC2 has already started with so much potential from the laurels of BW whereas WoW had a community to force it to have some semblance of competition. SC2 multiplayer is being throttled by the single-player, and Blizzard wants money from the tournaments. I'm not talking about balancing, I'm talking about time, energy, and money. The majority of the content of the original SC2 box is single-player. But because of great companies like MLG, we can have content outside of that original box. Blizzard only gave us box content, working years and years on it. But they didn't work for years on multiplayer, or balancing, or anything esports related. I don't understand why people think Blizzard is responsible for anything but single-player when talking about content.
Wait, MP is being throttled by SP? I get how that happened in WoW, but explain how that's happening in SC2?
First, the entire beta period was testing what part of the game? The same part of the game they spent time balancing and creating maps and a ladder system for.. MP (how well they've done isn't relevant).
Everything they've done since release has also been MP related:
*Balance patches (we're on 1.4 now) were ALL for MP (if you play any SP, all the original stats are still there).
*All of the maps that blizzard created and have added to the ladder are for MP (sure you can use them vs AI also).
*Master League and then GM being added.
*updates to the observer overlays
etc..
|
It's really bullshit that they do this. Blizzard talks about eSports but aside from making the game itself what are they literally doing to help eSports? I can name tons of things which they've done which are negative effect towards competitive play, yet honestly nothing outside of the game itself which is positive. You could say the GSL, but i'd say 1. We don't know their extent of their financial help, 2. it seems to be intended to be a FOR profit venture despite it being completely free promotion for Blizzards game, and 3. the whole setup of the GSL and giving exclusivity to Gretech doesn't help eSports in the first place, it helps Blizzard. Again.
They are seriously choking the scene in it's growth period. It's ridiculous really i don't know why more people are not questioning it... this is the richest game developer in the world we are talking about right? And they are penny pinching and basically harming their own game in the long run for short term gains.
Edit: not to mention fairly poor response to hacks; if you're going to force people to use your shitty bnet 2 and force people to have money tournaments on there then at least make some effort for security. I wouldn't be surprised if there's been more cheating going on than what it seems, simply because it's so easy to hide.
|
On October 14 2011 05:33 Hnnngg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:30 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:26 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:17 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:05 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 03:55 Hnnngg wrote:
Time to inject a new opinion... I don't give a fuck what MLG Lee says or thinks. I don't want to indirectly pay Blizzard so they can make up their single-player casual bullshit. I want to pay for esports, and if any percentage of that goes to Blizzard, then the money is getting squandered for whatever Blizzard wants to spend it on (single-player casual bullshit).
Theorycrafting right now, but I don't want MLG to be "fine". Fine is bullshit when it can be Good. Blizzard is choking out their IP, scarcity is real and it's inefficient to use our limited funds for what Blizzard wants (single-player casual bullshit).
Blizzard isn't screwing up, but they aren't helping. Their patches and balancing is just fixing their original fuck-ups. They don't (or shouldn't) balance for meta-game. So they just need to balance for the original content, which they could've done before they even shipped it out instead of focusing on other things they did (single-player casual bullshit).
Plenty of other non-Blizzard epsorts for you to pay for then. Also, you're idea of consistently more and more tournaments and content being "choking out their IP" seems pretty off to me. Yeah, because of a fucked-up company I should just abandon a genre within esports. Blizzard isn't making tournaments, Blizzcon is a joke. They are strangling grass-roots tournaments by forcing a 5k limit, you can't argue that the 5k limit helps anyone but Blizzard. And Blizzard taking money (i.e. choking) from MLG/ESL/etc. means that money is not given to MLG/ESL/etc. So, we can either give our money for more MLG/ESL/etc. or we can give it to Blizzard for more single-player! Oh wait, they're going to make the next two games no matter how much money we give them, we're giving them money for SC3. Too bad they're going to waste that money again on single-player casual bullshit. I'm not sure what your point is, there other other RTS games besides Blizzard games, they might not be esports because they suck. But you can either not pay tournaments at all or you can pay them and they are going to pay Blizzard. They don't have a problem with it like you do. Starcraft 2 has allowed them to make money, period. The expense of paying Blizzard is irrelevant when Blizzard has provided an entirely new area for profit that works. Basically I'm under the threat of an ultimatum, good esports infrastructure from Blizzard! We don't know who has a problem with what, because there is an NDA. I wonder why... MLG/ESL/etc would also make money without SC2, SC2 isn't keeping esports alive, and esports would be fine without it. Which is why I cannot fathom why you don't realize that Blizzard deal *works* for MLG and pretty much everyone else who matters. If it wasn't profitable, they wouldn't use it, they aren't forced into paying for SC2, they choose to. That simple. Except they don't deserve to pay for it. We're not talking about legal issues, that discussion is pointless. The discussion should be whether or not Blizzard morally deserves the money, given how much work they put into SC2.
It's well within their moral right to charge for it. You are free to disagree, that is how morals are. There is no standard, just popular opinion.
|
On October 14 2011 05:34 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:32 Hnnngg wrote:
Why be a realist when being on a forum, doesn't seems conducive.
Good point. What I want to know is why didn't SC2 come with the ability to travel the galaxy FOR REAL and see the real zerg, terran, and protoss? Blizzard has enough money that they could have made it happen, they are just fucking greedy so lets boycott them. Who's with me?
Because that's not possible. Idealism != impossible.
Things could be better. They aren't because of Blizzard. Fuck them for making things worse.
|
On October 14 2011 05:10 Hnnngg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:03 gatorling wrote:
I don't want to indirectly pay Blizzard so they can make up their single-player casual bullshit. I want to pay for esports, and if any percentage of that goes to Blizzard, then the money is getting squandered...
Easy solution. Stop watching events with a 5k prize pool and E-mail sponsors telling them that you will not buy their products for sponsoring e-sport events where the game creator takes a portion of the ad revenues. I'm surprised how many people are out there who want to legitimize one stream of profit (retail sales of a $60 game) but demonize the other (profiting from the game as a spectator sport). I get the distinct feeling that people want Blizzard to promote and grow e-sports out of altruism and warm-fuzzy feelings and that growing e-sports because it will grow profits is inherently an awful evil thing. If Blizzard gets too greedy. The market will punish them, there are plenty of other games out there that would love to be THE e-sport game. One number I would like to see is how many of those dollars made from events will be re-invested into the game. There is no THE esport game. Don't even try. The market is going to do shit within measurable time, oh well. Blizzard doesn't put in enough effort to earn anything other than the $60.00 I gave them. That's kind of the point. They are on the bottom of the list of people who deserve my money based on how much "work" they have put into esports. They put their work into single-player casual bullshit and sprinkled in their bnet0.2 and "balance" (ask AJ how Blizzard balances their shit), and I paid $60.00 for that. I'll give them more money when they earn it.
Well, I much prefer this Blizzard to the old Blizzard, which let Bnet get overrun with bugs, maphacks, trainers, item dupes, and (perhaps?) rampant imbalance.
I mean, I dunno if you ever tried to play Diablo 1 on Battle.net, but wowwww. You had to have a cheater program to even play. And of course everybody on BW battle.net ladder for a while was a map-hacker. You actually had to use an alternate ladder.
|
On October 14 2011 05:36 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:33 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:30 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:26 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:17 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:05 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 03:55 Hnnngg wrote:
Time to inject a new opinion... I don't give a fuck what MLG Lee says or thinks. I don't want to indirectly pay Blizzard so they can make up their single-player casual bullshit. I want to pay for esports, and if any percentage of that goes to Blizzard, then the money is getting squandered for whatever Blizzard wants to spend it on (single-player casual bullshit).
Theorycrafting right now, but I don't want MLG to be "fine". Fine is bullshit when it can be Good. Blizzard is choking out their IP, scarcity is real and it's inefficient to use our limited funds for what Blizzard wants (single-player casual bullshit).
Blizzard isn't screwing up, but they aren't helping. Their patches and balancing is just fixing their original fuck-ups. They don't (or shouldn't) balance for meta-game. So they just need to balance for the original content, which they could've done before they even shipped it out instead of focusing on other things they did (single-player casual bullshit).
Plenty of other non-Blizzard epsorts for you to pay for then. Also, you're idea of consistently more and more tournaments and content being "choking out their IP" seems pretty off to me. Yeah, because of a fucked-up company I should just abandon a genre within esports. Blizzard isn't making tournaments, Blizzcon is a joke. They are strangling grass-roots tournaments by forcing a 5k limit, you can't argue that the 5k limit helps anyone but Blizzard. And Blizzard taking money (i.e. choking) from MLG/ESL/etc. means that money is not given to MLG/ESL/etc. So, we can either give our money for more MLG/ESL/etc. or we can give it to Blizzard for more single-player! Oh wait, they're going to make the next two games no matter how much money we give them, we're giving them money for SC3. Too bad they're going to waste that money again on single-player casual bullshit. I'm not sure what your point is, there other other RTS games besides Blizzard games, they might not be esports because they suck. But you can either not pay tournaments at all or you can pay them and they are going to pay Blizzard. They don't have a problem with it like you do. Starcraft 2 has allowed them to make money, period. The expense of paying Blizzard is irrelevant when Blizzard has provided an entirely new area for profit that works. Basically I'm under the threat of an ultimatum, good esports infrastructure from Blizzard! We don't know who has a problem with what, because there is an NDA. I wonder why... MLG/ESL/etc would also make money without SC2, SC2 isn't keeping esports alive, and esports would be fine without it. Which is why I cannot fathom why you don't realize that Blizzard deal *works* for MLG and pretty much everyone else who matters. If it wasn't profitable, they wouldn't use it, they aren't forced into paying for SC2, they choose to. That simple. Except they don't deserve to pay for it. We're not talking about legal issues, that discussion is pointless. The discussion should be whether or not Blizzard morally deserves the money, given how much work they put into SC2. It's well within their moral right to charge for it. You are free to disagree, that is how morals are. There is no standard, just popular opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_absolutism
|
On October 14 2011 05:36 infinity2k9 wrote:Blizzard talks about eSports but aside from making the game itself what are they literally doing to help eSports?
Not sure if serious, but this is hilarious. 
|
On October 14 2011 05:29 Klondikebar wrote:
Wait...wait...are you really mikey lowell? Like, the awesome one?
*sigh* I have read your articles entirely too much.
<3
On October 14 2011 05:29 Klondikebar wrote:
BTW, private company provides service for said revenue. A voluntary transaction that makes both parties better off otherwise they wouldn't do it.
The government just points a gun at your head and says gimmie.
I chose my words very carefully to make the point about growth. All this talk about "growing e-sports", and nobody seems to care that Blizzard is placing a one-hundred-percent tax on advertising revenue above a threshold. I'm ignoring whether the government would be entitled to it.
|
On October 14 2011 05:36 FryktSkyene wrote:
Do they do this to all blizzard games? (WoW, WC3, etc)
WoW isn't balanced enough to be a sport but WC3 had LAN so no, they probably had issues collecting their revenue shares. Why do you think LAN disappeared? It wasn't because of piracy.
|
On October 14 2011 05:36 DusTerr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:17 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:10 Cataphract wrote:On October 14 2011 05:03 gatorling wrote:
If Blizzard gets too greedy. The market will punish them, there are plenty of other games out there that would love to be THE e-sport game.
There are plenty of games that WANT to be the e-sport game, but there is only one that I want to watch, Starcraft 2. And I think Blizzard has every right to get a share of money from tournaments. Man, the guy above me REALLY hates the single-player campaign. I would still bet that Blizzard made more money from people that only played that or enjoyed both SP and MP over those that only play MP. Being a WoW PvP player, you are always on the backburner to PvE. I see the same thing happening with SC2, except SC2 has already started with so much potential from the laurels of BW whereas WoW had a community to force it to have some semblance of competition. SC2 multiplayer is being throttled by the single-player, and Blizzard wants money from the tournaments. I'm not talking about balancing, I'm talking about time, energy, and money. The majority of the content of the original SC2 box is single-player. But because of great companies like MLG, we can have content outside of that original box. Blizzard only gave us box content, working years and years on it. But they didn't work for years on multiplayer, or balancing, or anything esports related. I don't understand why people think Blizzard is responsible for anything but single-player when talking about content. Wait, MP is being throttled by SP? I get how that happened in WoW, but explain how that's happening in SC2? First, the entire beta period was testing what part of the game? The same part of the game they spent time balancing and creating maps and a ladder system for.. MP (how well they've done isn't relevant). Everything they've done since release has also been MP related: *Balance patches (we're on 1.4 now) were ALL for MP (if you play any SP, all the original stats are still there). *All of the maps that blizzard created and have added to the ladder are for MP (sure you can use them vs AI also). *Master League and then GM being added. *updates to the observer overlays etc..
They have to throttle it. They don't have unlimited time and manpower, so they have to split the time between SP and MP. All the bulletpoints could've been with the box if they spent their time with MP instead of SP.
|
On October 14 2011 05:37 Hnnngg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:34 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:32 Hnnngg wrote:
Why be a realist when being on a forum, doesn't seems conducive.
Good point. What I want to know is why didn't SC2 come with the ability to travel the galaxy FOR REAL and see the real zerg, terran, and protoss? Blizzard has enough money that they could have made it happen, they are just fucking greedy so lets boycott them. Who's with me? Because that's not possible. Idealism != impossible. Things could be better. They aren't because of Blizzard. Fuck them for making things worse.
You wanting Blizzard to make an esport for free is as idealistic as it gets.
|
On October 14 2011 05:36 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:33 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:30 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:26 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:17 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:05 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 03:55 Hnnngg wrote:
Time to inject a new opinion... I don't give a fuck what MLG Lee says or thinks. I don't want to indirectly pay Blizzard so they can make up their single-player casual bullshit. I want to pay for esports, and if any percentage of that goes to Blizzard, then the money is getting squandered for whatever Blizzard wants to spend it on (single-player casual bullshit).
Theorycrafting right now, but I don't want MLG to be "fine". Fine is bullshit when it can be Good. Blizzard is choking out their IP, scarcity is real and it's inefficient to use our limited funds for what Blizzard wants (single-player casual bullshit).
Blizzard isn't screwing up, but they aren't helping. Their patches and balancing is just fixing their original fuck-ups. They don't (or shouldn't) balance for meta-game. So they just need to balance for the original content, which they could've done before they even shipped it out instead of focusing on other things they did (single-player casual bullshit).
Plenty of other non-Blizzard epsorts for you to pay for then. Also, you're idea of consistently more and more tournaments and content being "choking out their IP" seems pretty off to me. Yeah, because of a fucked-up company I should just abandon a genre within esports. Blizzard isn't making tournaments, Blizzcon is a joke. They are strangling grass-roots tournaments by forcing a 5k limit, you can't argue that the 5k limit helps anyone but Blizzard. And Blizzard taking money (i.e. choking) from MLG/ESL/etc. means that money is not given to MLG/ESL/etc. So, we can either give our money for more MLG/ESL/etc. or we can give it to Blizzard for more single-player! Oh wait, they're going to make the next two games no matter how much money we give them, we're giving them money for SC3. Too bad they're going to waste that money again on single-player casual bullshit. I'm not sure what your point is, there other other RTS games besides Blizzard games, they might not be esports because they suck. But you can either not pay tournaments at all or you can pay them and they are going to pay Blizzard. They don't have a problem with it like you do. Starcraft 2 has allowed them to make money, period. The expense of paying Blizzard is irrelevant when Blizzard has provided an entirely new area for profit that works. Basically I'm under the threat of an ultimatum, good esports infrastructure from Blizzard! We don't know who has a problem with what, because there is an NDA. I wonder why... MLG/ESL/etc would also make money without SC2, SC2 isn't keeping esports alive, and esports would be fine without it. Which is why I cannot fathom why you don't realize that Blizzard deal *works* for MLG and pretty much everyone else who matters. If it wasn't profitable, they wouldn't use it, they aren't forced into paying for SC2, they choose to. That simple. Except they don't deserve to pay for it. We're not talking about legal issues, that discussion is pointless. The discussion should be whether or not Blizzard morally deserves the money, given how much work they put into SC2. It's well within their moral right to charge for it. You are free to disagree, that is how morals are. There is no standard, just popular opinion.
Who cares what their moral right is frankly? It boils down to, does this actually help eSports: no. Does Blizzard even need this very very tiny income source? no. In the long run it seriously likely hurts them. They should just totally stay out of eSports... they are a game developer, but now they are taking a different role that really does NOT help any competitive game, and i don't believe any developer should take that level of control (and no others even do). They have the whole scene in a stranglehold from the start.
On October 14 2011 05:38 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:36 infinity2k9 wrote:Blizzard talks about eSports but aside from making the game itself what are they literally doing to help eSports? Not sure if serious, but this is hilarious.
They make a game because they are game developers. It's a multiplayer game so they should ensure it's balanced regardless of eSports to keep people playing. You could say they went into the game specially with eSports in mind, but uh... what is the evidence of that despite them simply saying it's the case? We don't need to applaud them for making a game, everyone paid for it right didn't they, and It sold EXTREMELY well for a PC game these days too. It's a financial success for them. Good for them, but how about now give the competitive scene a break, not least because it will be likely better for them anyway.
|
On October 14 2011 05:37 Hnnngg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:34 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:32 Hnnngg wrote:
Why be a realist when being on a forum, doesn't seems conducive.
Good point. What I want to know is why didn't SC2 come with the ability to travel the galaxy FOR REAL and see the real zerg, terran, and protoss? Blizzard has enough money that they could have made it happen, they are just fucking greedy so lets boycott them. Who's with me? Because that's not possible. Idealism != impossible. Things could be better. They aren't because of Blizzard. Fuck them for making things worse.
not making things better != making things worse...
|
On October 14 2011 05:41 infinity2k9 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 05:36 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:33 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:30 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:26 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:17 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 05:05 Hnnngg wrote:On October 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On October 14 2011 03:55 Hnnngg wrote:
Time to inject a new opinion... I don't give a fuck what MLG Lee says or thinks. I don't want to indirectly pay Blizzard so they can make up their single-player casual bullshit. I want to pay for esports, and if any percentage of that goes to Blizzard, then the money is getting squandered for whatever Blizzard wants to spend it on (single-player casual bullshit).
Theorycrafting right now, but I don't want MLG to be "fine". Fine is bullshit when it can be Good. Blizzard is choking out their IP, scarcity is real and it's inefficient to use our limited funds for what Blizzard wants (single-player casual bullshit).
Blizzard isn't screwing up, but they aren't helping. Their patches and balancing is just fixing their original fuck-ups. They don't (or shouldn't) balance for meta-game. So they just need to balance for the original content, which they could've done before they even shipped it out instead of focusing on other things they did (single-player casual bullshit).
Plenty of other non-Blizzard epsorts for you to pay for then. Also, you're idea of consistently more and more tournaments and content being "choking out their IP" seems pretty off to me. Yeah, because of a fucked-up company I should just abandon a genre within esports. Blizzard isn't making tournaments, Blizzcon is a joke. They are strangling grass-roots tournaments by forcing a 5k limit, you can't argue that the 5k limit helps anyone but Blizzard. And Blizzard taking money (i.e. choking) from MLG/ESL/etc. means that money is not given to MLG/ESL/etc. So, we can either give our money for more MLG/ESL/etc. or we can give it to Blizzard for more single-player! Oh wait, they're going to make the next two games no matter how much money we give them, we're giving them money for SC3. Too bad they're going to waste that money again on single-player casual bullshit. I'm not sure what your point is, there other other RTS games besides Blizzard games, they might not be esports because they suck. But you can either not pay tournaments at all or you can pay them and they are going to pay Blizzard. They don't have a problem with it like you do. Starcraft 2 has allowed them to make money, period. The expense of paying Blizzard is irrelevant when Blizzard has provided an entirely new area for profit that works. Basically I'm under the threat of an ultimatum, good esports infrastructure from Blizzard! We don't know who has a problem with what, because there is an NDA. I wonder why... MLG/ESL/etc would also make money without SC2, SC2 isn't keeping esports alive, and esports would be fine without it. Which is why I cannot fathom why you don't realize that Blizzard deal *works* for MLG and pretty much everyone else who matters. If it wasn't profitable, they wouldn't use it, they aren't forced into paying for SC2, they choose to. That simple. Except they don't deserve to pay for it. We're not talking about legal issues, that discussion is pointless. The discussion should be whether or not Blizzard morally deserves the money, given how much work they put into SC2. It's well within their moral right to charge for it. You are free to disagree, that is how morals are. There is no standard, just popular opinion. Who cares what their moral right is frankly? It boils down to, does this actually help eSports: no. Does Blizzard even need this very very tiny income source? no. In the long run it seriously likely hurts them. They should just totally stay out of eSports... they are a game developer, but now they are taking a different role that really does NOT help any competitive game, and i don't believe any developer should take that level of control (and no others even do). They have the whole scene in a stranglehold from the start.
So you're actually going to argue that Starcraft 2 hasn't helped esports?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
