For a better competition, to help the scene grow and to prevent stagnation.
Let me explain why and please forgive me if I sound rude giving you specific examples. I do this to explain my point and not to diss any player, we all know that they are still among the pro-players elite.
Invitational Pros: invitationals let people see the fan favourites. That's ok. Cons: being a fan favourite doesn't necessarly mean being a high tier player. While it may not necessarly be a bad thing in itself, imo it is when said players are paired against GOOD players. They insta-lose and by doing this they prevent better players to get their deserved recognition by proving themselves in front of the public.
Open Pros: if well done (well organized bo3s, delayed streaming if casted, no observers except for those designated), they let only the more deserving players in. Cons: sometimes a famous pro doesn't manage to get in and sometimes people get to watch an unknown player. As if it was bad. TSL3 and ThorZaIN, anyone? Unless you were a Wc3 fan, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have given him a penny.
Now, a tournament as example. Let's say Shoutcraft, maybe not the best example of the world since the tournament was intended exactly to let the fan-favourites players clash, but I'm sure you'll consider more the point that I want to explain rather than the example in itself. Everything can be extended to Dreamhack, or other tournaments as well! It's just to have some numbers and facts.
Shoutcraft3 (or tournament X, again) features: a solid prizepool, good first prize and everyone gets some money so no one will waste time and efforts. Also a balanced race pool, known casters, stable streaming, it's played live... shit, what else could you wish for?
Well, I'm greedy and say "check the players lineup". I apologize if I sound rude, but back at then didn't you found predictable (if not obvious) that Destiny, TLO and Tyler were about to lose every single match unless paired against each other? By my standards, they aren't bad. At all. But compared to the majority of the professionals?
And that's my point: not all the pro players are equal, but among the mid/low tier ones there are some who keep getting invited in big tournaments regardless of their results. Meanwhile, all the emergent/potentially good players are stuck in the unknown limbo.
It's a vicious circle: A is a good player but he's not invited because he is not famous. Yet, to be famous he should be play in major tournaments. But to play in a big tournament he has to dominate neverending qualification brackets and then risk to be paired against a random IMMvp on the first round, to return into oblivion immediately after. If Thorzain would have lost in TSL3 first round, how many minor tournaments would have he needed to win before being recognized? You know, Satiini doesn't even have a fan club... but check liquipedia!
Open invitationals for big tournaments: 180 players for one single spot. No matter how A is good, he will have to face B, C, D and E who are equally skilled and equally unknown to most of the community. While in the meantime, Y gets a free spot since he is on a famous team that can hype him well, or has a famous streaming channel where he sings and makes funny jokes, etc.
It's not a cohincidence that Y isn't anywhere to be seen in open tournaments final brackets: he struggles to compete against the others.
Do you think that they can't play on the same ground of let's say, Machine or iNcontroL? Is HasuObs unworthy of playing in big events unless he destroys an invitational? And he's already lucky since he's on a famous team, so people get to know him better. IEM Guangzhou: he gets invited thanks to Mana not attending, and he shows he can play against DIMAGA and other top players, he even gets a game out of Puma who should be a TvP specialist. He didn't won, but you can say that he played well. Jinro got invited and didn't even come out of the pool play, for example.
My suggestions:
1) Big events organizers, take a look at the various Zotac, Gosc, Sennheiser cups! There are some skilled people out of there, don't blindly invite the usual people who come just because they are supposed to be the very best. New players can be refreshing and interesting.
1b) Fan favourite players who aren't necessarly top tier can still play in showmatches! I'm sure they will bring you money and viewers in any case, test it!
2) TL users, don't look only at the usual names: seeing Idra ragequitting for the millionth time and watching TLO's beard grow from one tournament to another is great indeed, but these aren't the only good players around. There are people who are giving their best out of there, and will probably quit before surprising you just because they didn't have a chance. Or because that chance was blocked for the seventh time in a row by a 1 out of 250 players qualifier while all the other tournament spots were already occupied by the usual suspects.
3) What about a tournament where the organizer invites, for example, 2 famous players according to their results and makes a qualifier for the remaining 6 spots?
Natural selection allows the strongest to survive and improve, let's see who the fittest are instead of cuddle some old priviledged. The whole sc2 scene will take benefits from this since we will all get more quality games.
I'd like to know your opinions. Especially those of the supposed minor players!
The fans are the ones paying, the customers. If they want to give a chance to now Code B player X and Z or whoever, then that's fine. Showmatches? It feels artificial, "whatever", "matchfix".
If player Y games lead to cheese and boring and low audiance games, then that makes sense that I won't invite him. I think it is easy to understand that logic.
But regardless, the world is huge enough to embrace both tournament styles, you can help paying for the tournaments you think are the best and everyone else will do the same. I will pay for the one that have the players that I like, if they kick Coca and Coca is the only player I love, then I won't pay anymore etc. If boxer is the only player I love and now he is "code B", too bad, I won't watch neither pay! See? You can't ignore your audience...
Edit: we can have a "skill only" tornament, an "invite" only tournament and a "mixed" one. MLG is open, so anyone can register there, no big. GSL is skill only basicly. Which tournament are you talking about then? Some random invitational? Let them be, really.
If I were to guess, I think a big part of the reason for invites still being common is that the tournament organizers strike deals with the players' teams so that the teams cover part of the travel expenses.
It's not exactly as big of a deal as you're making it. MLG Providence had what, 256 Spots? The "Open bracket" is what could be considered a qualifier. The players who were invited into the Championship bracket were not invited on fame, they were invited on the point system.
Edit: As with the guy two spots above me I'd like to know which tournaments you're talking about.. For the life of me I can't think of any big travesty regarding player invites and recent tournaments.
New players are refreshing and interesting. Its even better if their breakthrough is happening in a big tournament (thorzain example).
This means qualifiers are a good thing.. But it would suck if it was only qualifiers for every tournament. Playing in minor tournaments doesent give you the recognition deserved. This is true to some extent... But the variable factor is how hard we look. Saladin in ipl mapmaker tournament made a name for himself and had a huge step forward in becoming well known.
conclusion, its fine the way it is. Mixing qualifier and invitational is ideal, brings fan favorites, potential for another cinderella story. But there are so many tournaments so its not really an issue what technique they use to assemble players. In fact i feel it gives the tournament a niche in that regard also.
On November 25 2011 00:07 SDream wrote: The fans are the ones paying, the customers. If they want to give a chance do now Code B player X and Z or whoever, then that's fine.
If player Y games lead to to cheese and boring and low audiance games, then that makes sense that I won't invite him. I think it is easy to understand that logic.
But regardless, the world is huge enough to embrace both tournaments style, you can help paying for the tournaments you think are the best and everyone else will do the same. I will pay for the one that have the players that I like, if they kick Coca and Coca is the only player I love, then I won't pay anymore etc. If boxer is the only player I love and now he is "code B", too bad, I won't watch neither pay! See? You can't ignore your audience...
Edit: we can have a "skill only" tornament, a "invite" only tournament and a "mix" one. MLG is open, so anyone can register there, no big. GSL is skill only basicly. Which tournament are you talking about then? Some random invitational? Let them be, really.
I agree with the first statement, where I watch a sport to follow a team or player I know. I know his story, I know his struggles, and as a spectator, this gets me entertained.
Something missing from your OP is an actual look at the current tournaments. Does MLG, IPL, Dreamhack, NASL answer your inquiry? If not, what should be changed in those tournaments?
MLG : Has a huge open pool play. Dreamhack Winter : Contains a lot of a newcomers. IPL : Does offline qualifiers. NASL : Does offline qualifiers.
There is room in the SC2 scene for both types of tournaments. Everyone is different some people prefer to see players that they connect with on an emotional level. Some want to see the very tip top competition. Some absolutely love team vs team.
There are so many tournaments that each one has to find it's niche, and if inviting popular pro's to the tourny provides that niche then more power to them.
SC2 is such a young game that anything that gets people to tune in is fine by me, and not every game needs to be on the bleeding edge of skill.
For the unsung heroes of SC2, I think they will all get their shot. If they are good enough people will notice them, and more importantly competitive teams will notice them. I envision a future in SC2 where teams actively scout and sign upcoming talent. Not every NBA fan follows college basketball, but every NBA team has scouts that do. The cream always rises to the top.
I think invitational tourneys are already less dominant than they were. There were somewhat too many of them about 6-12 months ago, especially when IPL1, NASL S1, part of TSL lineup were invitational. What do we have now? IPL4 has qualification tournaments all over the world, NASL lineup gets rotated mostly from open tournaments, Dreamhack Winter while partly based on invitation-based qualifiers, has some slots filled by open qualifications.
You give example of MLG with Incontrol and Machine, but it wasn't the case of invitations (only maximum of 4 koreans per event had an invitation to group stage)
There are still a few invitation-based tournaments, but it's a matter of tournament organisers having or not having a possiblity and qualification to hold a big open tournament. In past, very few organisation could manage that, but these days this is much more common
Not a tournament in particular, but I noticed that most of them have a HIGH difference between qualifiers seed and invitational ones.
MLG is a sort of exception (without talking about the pool system, but I hope that they will fix them next season) since it's a 3 days straight tournament that rewards, more than the actual ability (the koreans seems to be an exception but we are talking about specific individuals already completely trained by the best teams in the world) the physical resistance of a player.
The MLG invitational was already a step of what should be 'the right direction'. At least imo. The ASUS rog not that much. A good tournament of course, but if everyone would do like that we could just keep 15 players in total and let them compete everywhere.
@TidusX.Yuna Maybe my tone is too dramatic, but it was not my intention: I'm not saying that there's a conspiracy in the esports world (no wait, it's ALWAYS a conspiracy), but rather suggesting a method to diversify the player pool and let more people the chance to prove themselves.
I'm not a fan of group stages as opposed to the regular tournament format, but for LANs where people are traveling across the world for only a few days it's somewhat necessary and a better format in that context. People expect these guys to play and have a bit less volatility when it comes down to who makes it in the later stages.
On November 25 2011 00:28 MavivaM wrote: Not a tournament in particular, but I noticed that most of them have a HIGH difference between qualifiers seed and invitational ones.
MLG is a sort of exception (without talking about the pool system, but I hope that they will fix them next season) since it's a 3 days straight tournament that rewards, more than the actual ability (the koreans seems to be an exception but we are talking about specific individuals already completely trained by the best teams in the world) the physical resistance of a player.
The MLG invitational was already a step of what should be 'the right direction'. At least imo. The ASUS rog not that much. A good tournament of course, but if everyone would do like that we could just keep 15 players in total and let them compete everywhere.
What about IPL, NASL, DH?
MLG rewards continuously good ranking and participation. You are taking about physical resistance but are suggesting Zotac, Gosc and Sennheiser. Aren't those tournaments an exact form of physical resistance? It's extremely compact (over the course of one day) where you play an absurd amount of games.
I don't see the problem. Thorzain was unknown before TSL3 and made a name there, that he confirmed afterward Naniwa was not well known before winning MLG Dallas (was is Dallas ?) then going into TSL3 final, he remained one of the best protoss player after that Virtually none was really talking about Stephano before he won IPL3, but he confirmed since then and retain crowd's attention. Elfi beats Nada once ? None cares. Elfi beats other good player again and again (like huk in ASUS RoG), then people are interested in him. Simple.
That's the way it works, sure Naama, Gatored or Nightend are very good players, but were are the consistent results ? Aside from online cups i mean. They've got the attention they deserve, and will get more if they go farther than beating a good player one time.
And yes there might be players who are not much skilled than those ones that do get attention, but that's because they are involved in the community in some other way than just competing. I think that's fair.
you are quite right in essence but your examples are REALLY bad
satiini isnt a great player (+hes a huuge whiner )
hasuobs gets invited to most of the trounaments and sometimes he even has to decline an invitation (for example dreamhack this weekend)
another point that would be a benefit of an open tournament system is that players with less offline tournament can get more experience befor playing the more experienced "BIG NAMES"
Well when I watch pros play those online cups it doesn't seem as stressful as MLG, if not only because you are at home and can rest from one match to another. Unless you are playing against Goody, win and then have another opponent immediately right after. When I read about Thorzain's post about MLG open bracket conditions I felt a different vibe.
IPL rocks.
NASL seems quite conservative about the players, I guess that if it continues for some other seasons I could be proven wrong.
DH should be 45 invites vs 21 qualified if I'm not mistaken. Not that bad, if I see it now.
Well, just look at my OP as a consideration. Thanks for the replies.
Esports is about money, not promoting new players. TLO, Jinro or InControl are getting invites because they bring attention of their huge fan bases. That's also the main reason they even are still parts of their teams. Do you think TL pays TLO or Jinro because they hope for their results? Nope, it's just an insane amount of people who visit this site and support TL because of them. How many fans would abandon TL if they kicked out TLO and Jinro? A lot. And it's not only TL but all foreign pro teams. It's pure bussiness.
I agree with your sentiment, but I also feel it is right that current unknowns should have to prove themselves more than the average player to get noticed and get on a team/invited. Esports is a business, concerned mostly with marketing/viewer counts, and players have to market themselves by showing big results or by being a personality, they can't just expect invites and opportunities to land on them because they have moderate skill alone.
There are a bunch of GSL Terrans who have stayed in Code S or Code A a few seasons, beat some mid tier people in unexciting games, and are probably top ~40 in the world. But they get no recognition and no fans because they haven't done the extraordinary, don't put themselves out there. And thus their teams don't really benefit from having them despite their skill.
I can't disagree with the argumentation here, however on a personal note I feel SC2 is still incredibly volatile and has mechanically better players losing to (much) worse ones on a fairly regular basis. Ultimately I would still rather watch players in whose ability I am confident and whose play I can admire than mediocre players who managed to upset them in a BO3 or even a BO1 qualifier.
I don't want to see queuing, supply blocks, ladder-level macro augmented by badly executed cheesy builds in a televised game, it brings me physical pain and disappointment in everything SC2. I can just ladder for myself instead of watching that. But the truth is, players who play like this can and do still win against better players.
Results are incredibly inconsistent and unreliable in SC2 and with the exception of a very small number of top players are not a clear indicator of a player's skill level. They probably will be in 3 or 4 years once the metagame stabilizes - but they are certainly not now.
Ultimately if you actually PLAY really good, you're bound to get noticed and attract interest both from big teams and tournaments. DongRaeGu was initially considered a monster based on his stream alone (this was before he was on MVP and even got noticed in Code A qualifiers).
On November 25 2011 00:49 MavivaM wrote: Well when I watch pros play those online cups it doesn't seem as stressful as MLG, if not only because you are at home and can rest from one match to another.
Agreed, playing from home is a lot less stressful (a known environment). Although, it still feels to me that MLG mimics the same approach. The only difference is that you're not playing from home, which, in the end, is a trait that differentiate a good player from the better player (being able to play under pressure, not from your cozy place at home).
Yes. I would muuuuch prefer a more meritocratic tournament system. Dreamhack's invite policy (that and it's terrible prize structure) are what really put me off the tournament.
The "random" aspect of SC2 can lead to "good" players (players who have demonstrated they're good in other tournaments) to get knocked out due to flukes. Also, there time and player stamina to take into account.
I dislike your use of the word"meritocracy". Being able to win a fluke BO3 against a better opponent isn't meritocratic. Consistently placing well in tournaments (and thus being invited to invitationals) is meritocratic, so I'd say invitationals are more meritocratic than open tournaments.
On November 25 2011 01:37 Sbrubbles wrote: The "random" aspect of SC2 can lead to "good" players (players who have demonstrated they're good in other tournaments) to get knocked out due to flukes. Also, there time and player stamina to take into account.
I dislike your use of the word"meritocracy". Being able to win a fluke BO3 against a better opponent isn't meritocratic. Consistently placing well in tournaments (and thus being invited to invitationals) is meritocratic, so I'd say invitationals are more meritocratic than open tournaments.
You don't see the worth of someone in a single event, but with his consistency. If consistently placing well in tournaments is due to invitations the system may be flawed.
Example: if in a 16 players tournament 14 players are invited and 2 are there due to qualifiers it's pretty easy for an invited player (let's say Y) to get top 8. And then he just wins another bo3 and gets top4. Y played two opponents and he gets top 4. His results are there, but imo they have not the same worth of the poor player A, who worked his ass with 8 bo3 of qualifier and then get top 16.
When I check tlpd and see a player who gets ton of placements I also look at HOW MANY games he has played. There are players, out of there, who keep getting their invites despite 3-4 placements (not talking about GSL players obv), sometimes.
What if someone is kicked out due to a fluke? If you are solid, it will most likely happen... once every 5 tournaments? Otherwise, maybe you aren't that exceptionally good. If your opponent sucks, after this tournament he won't do anything significant and will be just a one-hit wonder. And those will get naturally filtered with time.
now we are talking.. I will go back and read the OP a bit more in detail.. but someone is starting to hit on the very components of a true 'structure' to SC2 that will grow SC2 and esports. Dream all you want about it being on TV and filling up 30K stadiums..there must be a real structure to esports and that starts with understanding the importance of the different formats and how we 'GROW" it from the BASE UP.. not the top down.
On November 25 2011 01:37 Sbrubbles wrote: The "random" aspect of SC2 can lead to "good" players (players who have demonstrated they're good in other tournaments) to get knocked out due to flukes. Also, there time and player stamina to take into account.
I dislike your use of the word"meritocracy". Being able to win a fluke BO3 against a better opponent isn't meritocratic. Consistently placing well in tournaments (and thus being invited to invitationals) is meritocratic, so I'd say invitationals are more meritocratic than open tournaments.
Ummm, luck and stuff like that aside it is only fair to let new players(fluke or not) to get their chance in the spotloght, to get some brand recognition. And consistency in tournaments? If they are so consistent in tournaments they should be able to get out of the open portion of the tourney (See, all Koreans who made it through the open bracket in the tournament) hell i am not against them being seeded for their consistency. But being invited based on their fanbase is bad.
I mean hell, look at MLG NA global invitational. Of all NA pro players what made Destiny so special that he deserved an invite? His consistent results at MLG? Col Cruncher and Trimaster had better showings in the MLGs they attended. I have nothing against Destiny but I have to object when better players than him don´t get the chance to participate in a lot of tourneys because they are not popular enough.
And no invitationals are not more meritocratic than opens, they are fanservice tournament(which is not bad at all).
I know all the players mentioned in the OP, except Titan... i guess because i sometimes watch the european online leagues. I love open tournaments, but the big con is that you need a lot more admins to organize an open tournament. It's a lot of hassle.
An invitational that blindly invites players (over and over again) without looking around is what i like the least (like the EU invites for MLG invitational (although it was understandable, because those players had MLG experience)). I like the method that tournaments like Dreamhack and Grubbies tournament use better... anyone can apply to the tournament and players that have a track record to back it up will be invited. In EU there are enough smaller online tournaments to get your name out there (if you show good results) and i think the oppertunities to do so in NA is growing steadily as well.
Feel as it stands there is a good balance between open and invitational tourneys. I don't feel that there is a vicious cycle in place. New players still rise to the top and other players fade away. I don't see evidence that as things stand, anything is stagnating.
As long as there are smaller tournaments where new players can prove themselves, the larger tournaments don't really need to have open brackets or can at least have the majority of the players invited. If you want to have a weekend tournament where everyone starts on equal ground and everyone is allowed to play, you will have a 2000 player tournament where the first two days of the tournament will include almost no big name matches and where by day 3 half of the good players have been eliminated by cheese after having to play 11 rounds to reach the finals. It wouldn't be as enjoyable to watch.
It's a shame, but the most popular aren't necessarily the best. If a tournament had the lineup you mentioned from an open bracket, I would frankly not watch it. I really want to see the most popular players, not the best :X
Stareagle at one point in Brood War was one of Italy's best players and repetitive WCG Italy representative.
It might help if you do some brood war history before asking about known and unknown people.
Alot of the unknown people to majority of players today were known in brood war and considering majority didn't play brood war that would be why they are unknown to yourself and others alike.
Invitationals vs open brackets... enter the chinese girl meme 'why dont we have both?'
If you don't like fanbased invites, fine, don't watch stuff like DH invitationals. Good players will get scouted by good teams and get the hype they deserve - the only reason it seems skewed towards NA players is because of the open bracket there, so NA subtop players get more exposure to fans.
Good talent scouts can look past that to lesser known players from EU/KR as well, just look at all the korean 'nonames' that got picked up by foreign teams for example.
Uhh in an ideal world it'd be merit-based, but considering no one's gonna turn on the DH Stream to watch Naama vs Sarens, while 10,000 will watch InControl vs TLO, which do you think DH organizers would rather have?
ALSO: You think teams will send players if they don't have guaranteed spots? How many non-Euro Pros are in the Open Bracket BYOCs for any of the DH tournaments? None? Same reason why someone like Morrow wouldn't bother going to MLG if he has to go through the Open Bracket.
So even if you end up with the best players making it to the Pool Play anyway... you might not, because they won't bother to show up without an invitation.
MLG : Has a huge open pool play. Dreamhack Winter : Contains a lot of a newcomers. IPL : Does offline qualifiers. NASL : Does offline qualifiers.
Dreamhack also has many online qualifiers as well as qualifiers at the event.
Every major tournament has qualifiers where anyone can sign up and play. Your point is completely retarded simply because we consumers ENJOY watching TLO, Destiny, or Tyler.. even if they'res some better players- Its about who we want to watch- so I really don't care if they get invited over some random player.
FT.aCt)Sony United States. November 25 2011 02:58. Posts 348 PM Profile Quote # Stareagle at one point in Brood War was one of Italy's best players and repetitive WCG Italy representative. It might help if you do some brood war history before asking about known and unknown people.
I know who StarEagle is. It's the reason why he is in the OP. But according to his results, Sc2 speaking he counts as emergent and I don't recall about him being invited somewhere.
According to your account info you know BW better than me (no irony) so I'd like to ask you a question: why do you feel that BW has withstood so much the test of the time? Apart from the game mechanics and the game balance (or supposed, according to someone), why do you think that BW keeps lasting? Not for korean viewers, what keeps attracting foreigner fans?
My personal bet is the quality of the games and therefore of the players. Because you can be sure that everyone is a beast, everyone puts his very best into the game and everyone DESERVES anything they get. Then, funny things to make the fans go crazy still happen despite the absolute professionality. Crazy celebrations, even if they managed to tone them down. Rivalries, scandals, hilarious stuff. Nothing different from Sc2. Imo at the end of the day what attracts people is the real worth of a player, and not other tangentially related things.
Don't see why it should be the same in Sc2.
Very nice of you to bm 3 of liquids players there, well played.
Hey slow down, I never said that a guy who managed to compete against koreans in GSL was bad. Even TLO could compete with koreans months ago. And Tyler hasn't always been Tyler, but Nony. But at the current moment... it doesn't look like they are tearing brackets apart. It's quite obvious that they have been in a hard slump, luckily it seems that they are getting through and as soon as they manage to prove me wrong with a major win I'll be glad to eat my words in this own thread and then sign into their fan clubs. Until then, except for Jinro they play in tournaments thanks to invitations and without doing anything significant instead of players who maybe could do better. As said in the OP those are just examples taken from anELITE of players (the professionals) who do that for living.
I also mentioned Incontrol and Machine but this doesn't mean that I diss EG.
Chill Canada. November 25 2011 02:45. Posts 23009 PM Profile Blog Quote # It's a shame, but the most popular aren't necessarily the best. If a tournament had the lineup you mentioned from an open bracket, I would frankly not watch it. I really want to see the most popular players, not the best :X
BUT WHY DO YOU WANT TO HURT ESPORTS
Jokes aside does it seem I am arrogant or whatever? It's not the point of my thread, don't get why some gets offended. If you want me to stop PM me and I'll tone it down.
Many pros are unlikely to enter competitions if they have to qualify (see the IPL UK qualifiers where despite the offer of free travel to the UK and $20k prize pool, the qualifiers only had very few "good" players). Invites allow the organizers to guarantee at least some level of quality for the set of the players, rather than risk qualifiers going mostly ignored and having to pay travel costs for players who aren't amazing and won't draw any viewers.
I agree with almost everything you posted. I'm tired of seeing famous pros who have been in the low-tier for a long time now keep getting invited over more talented people.
People should only be able to enter tournaments through their own efforts, just have open qualifiers either online or over a long period of time at local areas leading up to a grand final. Popular pros could still get their own time in the spotlight through team leagues, they shouldn't get a free spot just because of EG's massive marketing budget. You could still have invitationals, but that sort of system should be kept out of things like MLG.
Your use of meritocracy is correct in that players like InControl, as much as I love him, really shouldn't be given a free spot at MLG just because he did so well early on in SC2's release.
What tournaments are you talking about? Players have all earned their positions in each league and are rarely invited unless they've proven that they're high tier players, even in cases such as iNcontroL and Machine at MLGs, they earned their spots and were not simply invited.
Take a look at DH going on right now. So many of the players are unknown Europeans, and they've essentially been stomped. Many of these unkowns were given invites as well, it seems.
The problem you're trying to talk about doesn't actually happen.
Taking a look at the players you're using as examples, they aren't even that unkown. HasuObs? NightEnd? Naama? Gatored (who's a recent breakout from being an unknown because he killed a few pros - this is how it should be)? These are all mid-tier pros and their level of popularity properly reflects this.
he wont attend big events because he has some kind of psychological illness. had lots of trouble with that at wc3.
but anyways, i think there should be a much greater chance to get to the top in a short time.
it all comes down to having a good ruling body like kespa. we would just have a small number of tournaments, but they would actually be huge and everyone would watch them (like OSL and MSL in korea). that wont happen though
On November 25 2011 04:45 imperator-xy wrote: i totally agree but you shouldnt count satiini in
he wont attend big events because he has some kind of psychological illness. had lots of trouble with that at wc3.
but anyways, i think there should be a much greater chance to get to the top in a short time.
it all comes down to having a good ruling body like kespa. we would just have a small number of tournaments, but they would actually be huge and everyone would watch them (like OSL and MSL in korea). that wont happen though
Lol wasn't that because of flight travel fear? I could be wrong although. Actually all of the players I mentioned (except for Titan but I feel he's good) aren't completely unknown players, especially if you look at their background: most of them were Wc3 players, some even particularly good like NightEnd plus the only competitive italian BW player beside of Cloud.
It all comes down to a thing you wrote: reaching the top in a short amount of time. Once you are there you can decide to change plans for your life for a good amount of time, see Thorzain and Stephano for example. Otherwise most of them will most likely play for a short amount time, or being less dedicated after a year or such to then disappear. Obv I hope not.
On November 25 2011 04:45 imperator-xy wrote: i totally agree but you shouldnt count satiini in
he wont attend big events because he has some kind of psychological illness. had lots of trouble with that at wc3.
but anyways, i think there should be a much greater chance to get to the top in a short time.
it all comes down to having a good ruling body like kespa. we would just have a small number of tournaments, but they would actually be huge and everyone would watch them (like OSL and MSL in korea). that wont happen though
Lol wasn't that because of flight travel fear? I could be wrong although. Actually all of the players I mentioned (except for Titan but I feel he's good) aren't completely unknown players, especially if you look at their background: most of them were Wc3 players, some even particularly good like NightEnd plus the only competitive italian BW player beside of Cloud.
It all comes down to a thing you wrote: reaching the top in a short amount of time. Once you are there you can decide to change plans for your life for a good amount of time, see Thorzain and Stephano for example. Otherwise most of them will most likely play for a short amount time, or being less dedicated after a year or such to then disappear. Obv I hope not.
ye satiini has flight travel fear i think, but he has some more problems. once mTw even bought him a ticket for a ferry boat but he didnt attend. i guess he is scared of big crowds as well.
but your right. if you once reach the top you will stay there and get invited to every tournament. for example TLO and WhiteRa are nice guys, but i dont think they are still on the same level as top foreigners or even koreans.
maybe there are other players who deserve to get their spots, but who knows
Don't bash players that have a lot of fans if you want to be taken seriously. And sincerely the guys that are REALLY good will get the recognition. Gatored is already being noted, Beastyqt for instance is already being noted, the system is fine, and you're creating a conflict where there is little to none. Other guys you mentioned just aren't that impressive, and I DO know them and they ARE good, but not THAT better to the point that is unfair and ridiculous that the more famous players are invited. (Orly is really good though).
This is similar to what's happened with poker. When the game exploded years ago, TV producers were more interested in creating human drama with characters they could recognize. It's more important to have household names than it is to have the best players. Many of the "top pros" (TV pros) aren't even close to as good as the best online players, but they absolutely make for more interesting television. Luckily in SC2, from what I can gather, most of the "TV pros" are pretty close to the best, with some exceptions of course.
Do you think that they can't play on the same ground of let's say, Machine or iNcontroL? Is HasuObs unworthy of playing in big events unless he destroys an invitational? And he's already lucky since he's on a famous team, so people get to know him better. IEM Guangzhou: he gets invited thanks to Mana not attending, and he shows he can play against DIMAGA and other top players, he even gets a game out of Puma who should be a TvP specialist. He didn't won, but you can say that he played well. Jinro got invited and didn't even come out of the pool play, for example.
First off, I would not call either Naama or Nightend "no names". Naama won a Dreamhack, for crying out loud. Nightend has been invited into several tournaments including Homestory, Assembly, and NASL. Same with Satiini, to a lesser extent.
I think it's worth pointing out that Gatored was the ONLY new player to make a name for himself in the last 2 MLGs (Trimaster was 3 MLGs ago). Of course "lower tier" pros such as Incontrol and Axslav can falter to no-name GMs who burst on the scene. But the thing is, it just doesn't happen that often. It doesn't matter if its MLG, Dreamhack, or even GSL Code A qualifiers. SC2 is increasingly becoming a professionalized competition where amateurs don't stand a chance against pros in a BO3.
I definitely think Titan has the possibility of becoming a breakout new low-tier pro, just like Trimaster and Gatored. I don't know the other players you mentioned, but it's probably the same thing with them. But we're not going to see a Trimaster break out and *win* a major tournament, we're going to see one of them break out of the open bracket and place somewhat decently.
Honestly, I wished the SC2 scene worked like this. All LAN tournaments are invite only, with only a couple open qualifier spots per tournament. Then all online tournaments are open only. That way the online tournament scene could kinda be the "minor league" to the LAN's "major league". I think LAN tournaments are much easier to run when you have a set number of players (and matches) you know you need to take care of. The more players you add to the tournament, the more likely it is that someone is going to play a 1 hour 30 min BO3 and throw the entire broadcast off-schedule.
That isn't a big deal for online tournaments, but it certainly is a huge deal for live events.
I have questions regarding tournament format and probably around the terminology as well. And also my own interest in hosting a tourney.
I were to host a mini-tourney...just run by myself and the necessary people(would that be an invitational, then?), and let's say I wanted the following format(prize pool of 3k which comes directly from my own pocket):
- bo3 for X players - "last boss" who must be defeated - else he takes a chunk of the prize pool (eg. IdrA)
I'm just making an example. I know full well that the amount of money for my tourney might not even be worth IdrA's time. Maybe some other well-known player would be interested in being the "last boss".
But I'm also fearful of backlash, such as:
- if all the money is coming directly from my wallet, I can do whatever the hell I want - but we all know that, this is not true at all. Other people's feelings must be considered or I will suffer the consequences. Anytime real money is involved, the last thing i want is someone finding out where I live, and threatening my family over a sc2 tourney. - you've inviting A, B, and C. so why are you punishing others by not inviting them? - why can't you host the tourney in a time-frame that's pleasing to everyone - what gives you the right to host a tourney? you're just a nobody, leave it to the people who know what they're doing
Just need to put this out there. I want to do this, but it almost feels less risky to keep the prize money low, which also makes the exposure low too. I want this type of format, but I would hate to be shouted down by haters who feel I have no right to do what i want to do.
On November 25 2011 01:37 Sbrubbles wrote: The "random" aspect of SC2 can lead to "good" players (players who have demonstrated they're good in other tournaments) to get knocked out due to flukes. Also, there time and player stamina to take into account.
I dislike your use of the word"meritocracy". Being able to win a fluke BO3 against a better opponent isn't meritocratic. Consistently placing well in tournaments (and thus being invited to invitationals) is meritocratic, so I'd say invitationals are more meritocratic than open tournaments.
But that isn't why people get invited to invitationals is it, pretty clear it's not.
I've been saying since the start more opens.. why not? I don't even like the MLG format placing some people with hardly any games to play compared to open. Just give seeded people the advantage in the bracket by not having to place against other seeds. Seriously if these guys are the best why shouldn't they be able to beat random people in series. It's as if in the World Cup they just put seeds into the round of 16.
If the game is too random that a better player cannot reliably beat someone inferior in a bo3, to be honest it's broken and needs to be fixed. Otherwise it will be even worse in the future, it's already getting very random as it is. In BW a top player would simply not drop a series, even a short bo3 one, against the lower level pros. In SC2 even amateurs can take games off pro's at the moment. And it's certainly not from skills they are doing so.
Gatored seems like a pretty good player btw. If some certain overhyped popular players had some of those wins idiots would be falling over themselves to praise it.
On November 25 2011 05:44 D_K_night wrote: I have questions regarding tournament format and probably around the terminology as well. And also my own interest in hosting a tourney.
I were to host a mini-tourney...just run by myself and the necessary people(would that be an invitational, then?), and let's say I wanted the following format(prize pool of 3k which comes directly from my own pocket):
- bo3 for X players - "last boss" who must be defeated - else he takes a chunk of the prize pool (eg. IdrA)
I'm just making an example. I know full well that the amount of money for my tourney might not even be worth IdrA's time. Maybe some other well-known player would be interested in being the "last boss".
But I'm also fearful of backlash, such as:
- if all the money is coming directly from my wallet, I can do whatever the hell I want - but we all know that, this is not true at all. Other people's feelings must be considered or I will suffer the consequences. Anytime real money is involved, the last thing i want is someone finding out where I live, and threatening my family over a sc2 tourney. - you've inviting A, B, and C. so why are you punishing others by not inviting them? - why can't you host the tourney in a time-frame that's pleasing to everyone - what gives you the right to host a tourney? you're just a nobody, leave it to the people who know what they're doing
Just need to put this out there. I want to do this, but it almost feels less risky to keep the prize money low, which also makes the exposure low too. I want this type of format, but I would hate to be shouted down by haters who feel I have no right to do what i want to do.
Why would you want to run a tournament where you are almost certainly just giving money to an arbitrary player for one series? sure it's your money but those guys do get enough chances
On November 25 2011 02:45 Chill wrote: It's a shame, but the most popular aren't necessarily the best. If a tournament had the lineup you mentioned from an open bracket, I would frankly not watch it. I really want to see the most popular players, not the best :X
On November 25 2011 04:31 Shrewmy wrote: People should only be able to enter tournaments through their own efforts, just have open qualifiers either online or over a long period of time at local areas leading up to a grand final. Popular pros could still get their own time in the spotlight through team leagues, they shouldn't get a free spot just because of EG's massive marketing budget. You could still have invitationals, but that sort of system should be kept out of things like MLG.
Your use of meritocracy is correct in that players like InControl, as much as I love him, really shouldn't be given a free spot at MLG just because he did so well early on in SC2's release.
You realise that MLG has no invitational element other than the Korean invites right?
What happens to this argument if you take Starcraft out of the picture?
I'm not asking because I can claim to know; I'm sincerely asking... and I think there's an argument to be made for peoples' emotional investment into games MAKING the games better even if the play itself is actually technically garbage.
As an example, would you rather watch your big, tough older brother kickbox someone you didn't particularly like in high school, or would you rather watch an -actual- technical master kickboxer fight another master kickboxer? Are you going to watch the fight for the thrill of the fight and your emotional connection to the players involved, or are you going to watch for the technical mastery and brilliant tactical kickboxing that's going on?
Take a series that recently finished in DreamHack a few hours ago (Don't worry, no spoilers :D) of Sheth vs ToD. I think you'd struggle to find someone who'd claim that those games weren't very entertaining, high tension and high excitement games. Was it because both players were macroing flawlessly and making brilliant, clean decisions? Hell no. If you've watched the games, it wouldn't take much over a diamond player to point out obvious mistakes made extra apparent when given the birds-eye view of a spectator. The games were entertaining because Sheth is hugely famous and expected to succeed / be good, but MrBitter right off the bat took a bold step and vouched for ToD as an equally skilled player. The match was entertaining not because either player never exceeded 400 minerals and both always had great army positioning, but it was entertaining because we as the spectators have a vested interest in seeing our preferred players succeed. Change the names of both players to Millenium.RainbowPrincess and Liquid'SecondLine and re-watch the replay from that perspective. Do you think that would be as exciting as the game with known people actually was?
On November 25 2011 05:44 D_K_night wrote: But I'm also fearful of backlash, such as:
- if all the money is coming directly from my wallet, I can do whatever the hell I want - but we all know that, this is not true at all. Other people's feelings must be considered or I will suffer the consequences. Anytime real money is involved, the last thing i want is someone finding out where I live, and threatening my family over a sc2 tourney. - you've inviting A, B, and C. so why are you punishing others by not inviting them? - why can't you host the tourney in a time-frame that's pleasing to everyone - what gives you the right to host a tourney? you're just a nobody, leave it to the people who know what they're doing
Just need to put this out there. I want to do this, but it almost feels less risky to keep the prize money low, which also makes the exposure low too. I want this type of format, but I would hate to be shouted down by haters who feel I have no right to do what i want to do.
I've been thinking a lot about this, although as a dreamer... i'm not rich enough. I believe most of the things you've mentioned won't get you a huge backlash. There will always be people bitching about stuff, but the majority will only welcome you spending your time, energy and money on a scene they love. The players you invite might affect the number of people that will watch your tournament, but there are enough tournaments at this point for people not to get mad about it and just move on to something else. There are plenty of tournaments that don't fit with peoples time frames. If people are passionate enough and you create an attractive tournement, they'll make time to watch it (and watching VODs can be done 24/7). If you chose an awkward time frame, you'll get less viewers.
What is important is being able to execute your tournament properly (this cost money/time). If people don't get what they expect, they will get their pitchforks (especially if they've paid money for it). If the players have a hard time contacting admins, if the production or casting quality is lower then people expect, etc there will be backlash. Expectations depend on stuff like the invited players, prize pool, promotion, etc. Don't expect too be able to create a succesful tournement with a lot of appeal just by yourself... there are just to many other tournements out there. That said, i'd imagine there are plenty of people that want to volunteer.
On November 25 2011 05:44 D_K_night wrote: I have questions regarding tournament format and probably around the terminology as well. And also my own interest in hosting a tourney.
I were to host a mini-tourney...just run by myself and the necessary people(would that be an invitational, then?), and let's say I wanted the following format(prize pool of 3k which comes directly from my own pocket):
- bo3 for X players - "last boss" who must be defeated - else he takes a chunk of the prize pool (eg. IdrA)
I'm just making an example. I know full well that the amount of money for my tourney might not even be worth IdrA's time. Maybe some other well-known player would be interested in being the "last boss".
But I'm also fearful of backlash, such as:
- if all the money is coming directly from my wallet, I can do whatever the hell I want - but we all know that, this is not true at all. Other people's feelings must be considered or I will suffer the consequences. Anytime real money is involved, the last thing i want is someone finding out where I live, and threatening my family over a sc2 tourney. - you've inviting A, B, and C. so why are you punishing others by not inviting them? - why can't you host the tourney in a time-frame that's pleasing to everyone - what gives you the right to host a tourney? you're just a nobody, leave it to the people who know what they're doing
Just need to put this out there. I want to do this, but it almost feels less risky to keep the prize money low, which also makes the exposure low too. I want this type of format, but I would hate to be shouted down by haters who feel I have no right to do what i want to do.
I have no idea how to respond to this, is your impression of the community so bad?
If you made this thread a few days ago you would've lumped Haypro in that group. Really, just two transcendent series (Nestea + Mvp) is the difference between inclusion and exclusion in your subjective list of who is good and deserving and who is bad and not. I do not think that is fair.
The bottom line is there are ways for players to become noticed. I can give many examples of this. The ones you listed simply haven't broken out yet. I agree it is difficult, but definitely possible. Naniwa is an example, so is Thorzain, so is Stephano. The players you listed... they do not have a major tournament win between any of them. That is the harsh reality, and honestly there is no way to objectively evaluate their skill level versus the "slumping" players you list except by results. And those results haven't come for those guys yet, so they haven't broken out.
You might argue that TLO or Tyler or Machine or Incontrol (leaving Jinro out of this) haven't won major tournaments either, or have results from a long time ago. This is true, but these guys are members of the two teams (Liquid and EG) who do the best job of sending their players and promoting them even when the results might not be there. These players are relevant and traveling to every major event because of their popularity and because of their team. This is because of various reasons, but their teams clearly believe the results will eventually come. Hayder is a good example of this. It takes time, and in some cases, recovery from other issues.
I feel the examples of players you give that aren't noticed enough isn't very good. These guys don't deserve to be invited because they are not SO much better that their level translates to a better experience for fans. Invite tournaments are 100% justified in not inviting them. As for open tournaments, they just haven't gotten it done. If Gatored won IEM NY, he's a breakout for sure. He already turned a lot of heads by beating TOP 3-0... opportunities are there.
I also feel the examples of players you gave who are slumping are very few. There simply aren't many players like you described, who consistently have bad results and yet continue to go everywhere. In fact I would argue Tyler isn't in that list anymore since DH didn't invite him and he goes through open at MLG.
So ultimately, I don't think this problem you describe exists. If it does, it's only a very small issue with just a few players. The big important tournaments don't invite from the tier of mid/low players who are fan favorites anymore. They invite MC and Nestea and Mvp. They have open brackets. There are opportunities for players to break out, just the ones you want to break out haven't gotten it done yet, or don't have the resources to get them there.
As for smaller events, let them do what they wish. They do it for survival. Would you rather ASUS invite the players in your list, get no viewers, and never run another event? As many have said, maybe TLO wouldn't beat NightEnd. But the play level is close enough on stream that it's not worth inviting NE over TLO. The harsh reality is that it's difficult to get noticed but still possible, and until the difference in play level between Titan or Gatored and TLO is the difference between Leenock and TLO, only then will they get noticed. But then they would get noticed anyway, so it's kind of pointless.
tldr: problem doesn't really exist in the way you describe it, if the "better" players were truly better they'd be noticed
On November 25 2011 04:31 Shrewmy wrote: People should only be able to enter tournaments through their own efforts, just have open qualifiers either online or over a long period of time at local areas leading up to a grand final. Popular pros could still get their own time in the spotlight through team leagues, they shouldn't get a free spot just because of EG's massive marketing budget. You could still have invitationals, but that sort of system should be kept out of things like MLG.
Your use of meritocracy is correct in that players like InControl, as much as I love him, really shouldn't be given a free spot at MLG just because he did so well early on in SC2's release.
You realise that MLG has no invitational element other than the Korean invites right?
Actually, you're wrong twice.
First of all, all pool players are essentially invites to the next MLG.
Secondly, MLG has run an invite-only online tournament. The finals of that were actually played at the last MLG. Naniwa vs Nestea, you may have heard of that match? =P
On November 25 2011 04:31 Shrewmy wrote: People should only be able to enter tournaments through their own efforts, just have open qualifiers either online or over a long period of time at local areas leading up to a grand final. Popular pros could still get their own time in the spotlight through team leagues, they shouldn't get a free spot just because of EG's massive marketing budget. You could still have invitationals, but that sort of system should be kept out of things like MLG.
Your use of meritocracy is correct in that players like InControl, as much as I love him, really shouldn't be given a free spot at MLG just because he did so well early on in SC2's release.
You realise that MLG has no invitational element other than the Korean invites right?
Actually, you're wrong twice.
First of all, all pool players are essentially invites to the next MLG.
Secondly, MLG has run an invite-only online tournament. The finals of that were actually played at the last MLG. Naniwa vs Nestea, you may have heard of that match? =P
not really
the pool players were invited based on previous performances
the problem with mlg format is that it was designed around halo, where every pro team will show up for every single event
because starcraft is an international event, there were many players who'd get high finishes and never come back
inc is frequently cited as a sign of the format being broken, but it wasn't because the format was broken in and of itself, it's because he took 3rd place at the first event of the year, which was enough to guarantee him a seed for a long time. if every single korean pro who got seeded attended every event, inc would have dropped out of pool play very quickly
the problem is less a matter of point decay, but rather the seeding structure being too top heavy, in a scene where players must be very selective about the events they attend
I see the issue with MLG more as a problem of players not being able to afford going to every open bracket. Do we really think that the mouz guys couldn't make groups if they all were sent to every MLG? Some of them would. Hasu, Thorzain, Mana, etc totally would make it into groups. They don't because their team doesn't send them. Part of this is MLG's fault because of the format, but part of it is just how competition is. It has costs, and not everyone can afford them.
There are good, understandable reasons why Liquid can send TLO and Tyler and EG can send Incontrol every time, and why those other guys never go. SC2 has never been about absolute skill level at a given point in time. If you want some guy who is 4/10 over some way more popular guy who is 3/10 on a better team, that just isn't going to happen, ever. And I would argue it should never be the way you want. Personality is important and drives a lot of interest and fans to our game. For 90% of players it's mostly about pure skill level, for a very few (the ones you listed) it's about having more fans than their skill "deserves". But saying a player "deserves" more stream viewers or fans is ridiculous as a concept. Fans are fans because they are fans. They are fans for many reasons.
Thus it's not really a problem. I'd say it's great that some players can not have the best results yet still remain "relevant." If we didn't, we'd be robbing the fans and viewers of a lot of great experiences.
It's extremely detrimental to the scene when relatively crappy players like TLO, Incontrol, and Tyler, who happen to belong to influential teams with good sponsorship who are able to promote them. Then what happens? The mediocre players become popular because they're heavily promoted, get invited to more tournaments, giving more attention to their teams, getting more sponsorships, and the cycle continues . . . ensuring that a handful of bad players on influential teams keep on popping up in invitationals or get seeded deep in MLG . . . Spots at high stakes tournaments are extremely valuable and it's a shame that they're wasted on players who are less than capable.
This seems prevalent especially in the foreign scene. Koreans leagues are a lot less forgiving. Even if you were once a champion, if you can't keep up, you quickly get phased out of GSL, ensuring that the absolute best players at any given time are the most active.
On November 25 2011 05:44 D_K_night wrote: I have questions regarding tournament format and probably around the terminology as well. And also my own interest in hosting a tourney.
I were to host a mini-tourney...just run by myself and the necessary people(would that be an invitational, then?), and let's say I wanted the following format(prize pool of 3k which comes directly from my own pocket):
- bo3 for X players - "last boss" who must be defeated - else he takes a chunk of the prize pool (eg. IdrA)
I'm just making an example. I know full well that the amount of money for my tourney might not even be worth IdrA's time. Maybe some other well-known player would be interested in being the "last boss".
But I'm also fearful of backlash, such as:
- if all the money is coming directly from my wallet, I can do whatever the hell I want - but we all know that, this is not true at all. Other people's feelings must be considered or I will suffer the consequences. Anytime real money is involved, the last thing i want is someone finding out where I live, and threatening my family over a sc2 tourney. - you've inviting A, B, and C. so why are you punishing others by not inviting them? - why can't you host the tourney in a time-frame that's pleasing to everyone - what gives you the right to host a tourney? you're just a nobody, leave it to the people who know what they're doing
Just need to put this out there. I want to do this, but it almost feels less risky to keep the prize money low, which also makes the exposure low too. I want this type of format, but I would hate to be shouted down by haters who feel I have no right to do what i want to do.
I have no idea how to respond to this, is your impression of the community so bad?
Something has already happened - I don't want to go into specifics and will not name any names.
But my criticism of an event was met with such seething anger that my real name was revealed on these very forums and it was made very clear to me that I'm just a nobody and "not a member of this community" despite me having paid for the event and quite frankly I listed all the ways that would have made the event even better.
This soured me so much that I completely stayed away from SC2 entirely for a few months and quite frankly sickened me that someone would go above and expose me, find out where I live, etc.
On November 25 2011 06:28 Hot_Bid wrote: If you made this thread a few days ago you would've lumped Haypro in that group.
And somehow one 2-1 win against NesTea negates all that? He's STILL in that group. You said the other players haven't won tournaments... but neither have half of the players who always get invited either.
He makes a very valid point about the scene. We are definitely holding back talent with "top" team dominance, too many invite tournaments and brackets that are overly favourable to seeded players (such as MLG).
On November 25 2011 06:28 Hot_Bid wrote: If you made this thread a few days ago you would've lumped Haypro in that group. Really, just two transcendent series (Nestea + Mvp) is the difference between inclusion and exclusion in your subjective list of who is good and deserving and who is bad and not. I do not think that is fair.
The bottom line is there are ways for players to become noticed. I can give many examples of this. The ones you listed simply haven't broken out yet. I agree it is difficult, but definitely possible. Naniwa is an example, so is Thorzain, so is Stephano. The players you listed... they do not have a major tournament win between any of them. That is the harsh reality, and honestly there is no way to objectively evaluate their skill level versus the "slumping" players you list except by results. And those results haven't come for those guys yet, so they haven't broken out.
You might argue that TLO or Tyler or Machine or Incontrol (leaving Jinro out of this) haven't won major tournaments either, or have results from a long time ago. This is true, but these guys are members of the two teams (Liquid and EG) who do the best job of sending their players and promoting them even when the results might not be there. These players are relevant and traveling to every major event because of their popularity and because of their team. This is because of various reasons, but their teams clearly believe the results will eventually come. Hayder is a good example of this. It takes time, and in some cases, recovery from other issues.
I feel the examples of players you give that aren't noticed enough isn't very good. These guys don't deserve to be invited because they are not SO much better that their level translates to a better experience for fans. Invite tournaments are 100% justified in not inviting them. As for open tournaments, they just haven't gotten it done. If Gatored won IEM NY, he's a breakout for sure. He already turned a lot of heads by beating TOP 3-0... opportunities are there.
I also feel the examples of players you gave who are slumping are very few. There simply aren't many players like you described, who consistently have bad results and yet continue to go everywhere. In fact I would argue Tyler isn't in that list anymore since DH didn't invite him and he goes through open at MLG.
So ultimately, I don't think this problem you describe exists. If it does, it's only a very small issue with just a few players. The big important tournaments don't invite from the tier of mid/low players who are fan favorites anymore. They invite MC and Nestea and Mvp. They have open brackets. There are opportunities for players to break out, just the ones you want to break out haven't gotten it done yet, or don't have the resources to get them there.
As for smaller events, let them do what they wish. They do it for survival. Would you rather ASUS invite the players in your list, get no viewers, and never run another event? As many have said, maybe TLO wouldn't beat NightEnd. But the play level is close enough on stream that it's not worth inviting NE over TLO. The harsh reality is that it's difficult to get noticed but still possible, and until the difference in play level between Titan or Gatored and TLO is the difference between Leenock and TLO, only then will they get noticed. But then they would get noticed anyway, so it's kind of pointless.
tldr: problem doesn't really exist in the way you describe it, if the "better" players were truly better they'd be noticed
Hot_Bid, I have a question regarding a past post "Elephant in the Room" that you created.
If you made this thread a few days ago you would've lumped Haypro in that group. Really, just two transcendent series (Nestea + Mvp) is the difference between inclusion and exclusion in your subjective list of who is good and deserving and who is bad and not. I do not think that is fair.
The bottom line is there are ways for players to become noticed. I can give many examples of this. The ones you listed simply haven't broken out yet. I agree it is difficult, but definitely possible. Naniwa is an example, so is Thorzain, so is Stephano. The players you listed... they do not have a major tournament win between any of them. That is the harsh reality, and honestly there is no way to objectively evaluate their skill level versus the "slumping" players you list except by results. And those results haven't come for those guys yet, so they haven't broken out.
You might argue that TLO or Tyler or Machine or Incontrol (leaving Jinro out of this) haven't won major tournaments either, or have results from a long time ago. This is true, but these guys are members of the two teams (Liquid and EG) who do the best job of sending their players and promoting them even when the results might not be there. These players are relevant and traveling to every major event because of their popularity and because of their team. This is because of various reasons, but their teams clearly believe the results will eventually come. Hayder is a good example of this. It takes time, and in some cases, recovery from other issues.
I feel the examples of players you give that aren't noticed enough isn't very good. These guys don't deserve to be invited because they are not SO much better that their level translates to a better experience for fans. Invite tournaments are 100% justified in not inviting them. As for open tournaments, they just haven't gotten it done. If Gatored won IEM NY, he's a breakout for sure. He already turned a lot of heads by beating TOP 3-0... opportunities are there.
I also feel the examples of players you gave who are slumping are very few. There simply aren't many players like you described, who consistently have bad results and yet continue to go everywhere. In fact I would argue Tyler isn't in that list anymore since DH didn't invite him and he goes through open at MLG.
So ultimately, I don't think this problem you describe exists. If it does, it's only a very small issue with just a few players. The big important tournaments don't invite from the tier of mid/low players who are fan favorites anymore. They invite MC and Nestea and Mvp. They have open brackets. There are opportunities for players to break out, just the ones you want to break out haven't gotten it done yet, or don't have the resources to get them there.
As for smaller events, let them do what they wish. They do it for survival. Would you rather ASUS invite the players in your list, get no viewers, and never run another event? As many have said, maybe TLO wouldn't beat NightEnd. But the play level is close enough on stream that it's not worth inviting NE over TLO. The harsh reality is that it's difficult to get noticed but still possible, and until the difference in play level between Titan or Gatored and TLO is the difference between Leenock and TLO, only then will they get noticed. But then they would get noticed anyway, so it's kind of pointless.
tldr: problem doesn't really exist in the way you describe it, if the "better" players were truly better they'd be noticed
Thanks for taking the time to write a developed answer, you provide an interesting PoV since you are from one of the teams.
Afaik, Gatored has most likely about 6 months to break out if http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=287598 is correct. After, he may consider doing something else or drop in quality while there are players who "struggle" since right after the Beta.
What I don't like it's that everything he did until now, except for personal gratification, passion, a little amount of money and our viewing pleasure (because his games were awesome) hasn't really payed. And since we talk about a career... Mlg? Went far, all of his own. Beating strong opponents, convincingly. Iem? Same.
But will he be in another event without having to rely all on his own once again despite his strong performances? What if, instead of being on GosuGamers he would have been on Team Mavivam, one of the most prestigious sc2 teams with millions of fans everywhere? I'm not sure about what would have happened. I swear that I'm not Gatored's mother.
Life isn't fair and Sc2 pro level is a business strictly speaking, I get it. But it makes me rage that if a player wants to get a damned invite he has to win at least 20000$ straight on. 7 first places in minor tournaments aren't worth of real considerations.
An example to spark some rage since touching popular players apparently seems forbidden? Results speaking, I don't see a lot of difference between Goody and WhiteRa. Both have beaten koreans, both have their own trademark playstyle and both aren't exactly "bulletproof" in tournaments. One however keep collecting invites, the other will eventually get one if his colleague cannot partecipate.
I don't want to bash tournaments or force them to change. Eliminating invitationals it's impossible for various reasons (you can't force top koreans to qualify while in different timezones/GSL training etc), and sadly Idra seems needed everywhere to get some viewers. But what about widening the open tournaments' spots? Let's say about 50/50.
It's not like I want to forbid tournaments to these famous players. It's not like they cannot earn their spot, otherwise why are they playing professionally. Would it ruin the experience for everyone to see an Osho vs Genius instead of Machine vs Genius? Titan has already proven that he can compete against Huk, for tell you one...
But again, a single victory can't prove someone's worth. + Show Spoiler +
The same applies for Haypro: I never joined the banjo fantrain and all that jazz
However unless Titan will WIN (because a third place won't be enough) Dreamhack he will get ignored by main events.
Mine can be a small issue regarding few exceptions, but dammit if they are evident. Of course those players' teams keep believing in them like it should be and even more. It's heartwarming, I'm not joking. Not many business companies have that much of dedication to their employees.
But I think that if those players are in a struggle and they ARE, deep inside, champions, they will get back in shape regardless of their invites. In the meantime someone new can come and show who they are.
tldr is widen the open seeds in tournaments and let some people prove their worth, it can't be anything but positive. It won't work in a single tournament, but on the long run we will reap good players.
Thanks for the answers, despite my actual opinions is awesome to see a team do so much for its players. MLG pools are even another thing, but I hope they will fix them next season so it should be that ridiculous situation anymore.
Oh, and what about this: "King from the Shadows" tournament! 16 minor players selected according to their tlpd profile, equal race pool and good maps. In all honesty, would you watch it?
What if it was a mix between famous teams' minor players and lesser known players with good tlpd results, instead?
I completely agree with you, i often get pretty mad when i see the invites for some tourneys, shoutcraft 3 is a good example . But on the other hand, i understand that tournament organizer invite have to get the people that the fans want to watch the most, so they have more viewers on their streams, which results in them getting more money etc. So yea, its meh but its not so easy to find a good way inbetween i guess.
there is a hilariously pathetic reaction by a lot of "fans" of this game in this thread
Random Fan: We want to watch Destiny, Incontrol and Tyler cause we know who they are, so we won't tune in otherwise
The problem with this thinking is that none of these players are any good by comparison, someone mentioned ostojiy getting an invite to blizzcon and doing nothing, sure that's true, but he obliterated Destiny at MLG, he's a top GM, has shown commitment and can't get signed to a top team, yet Destiny gets signed cause he's obnoxious on his stream and gamers seem to like that, so he gets 5000 viewers a night
Personality is important, no doubt about it but when it comes down to it, if you want this game to grow and be popular(on a scale outside what we currently have) you need to teach the good players to be personalities, and not have the personalities become the main players, cause otherwise we'll never be able to match Korea
On November 25 2011 06:28 Hot_Bid wrote: If you made this thread a few days ago you would've lumped Haypro in that group. Really, just two transcendent series (Nestea + Mvp) is the difference between inclusion and exclusion in your subjective list of who is good and deserving and who is bad and not. I do not think that is fair.
The bottom line is there are ways for players to become noticed. I can give many examples of this. The ones you listed simply haven't broken out yet. I agree it is difficult, but definitely possible. Naniwa is an example, so is Thorzain, so is Stephano. The players you listed... they do not have a major tournament win between any of them. That is the harsh reality, and honestly there is no way to objectively evaluate their skill level versus the "slumping" players you list except by results. And those results haven't come for those guys yet, so they haven't broken out.
You might argue that TLO or Tyler or Machine or Incontrol (leaving Jinro out of this) haven't won major tournaments either, or have results from a long time ago. This is true, but these guys are members of the two teams (Liquid and EG) who do the best job of sending their players and promoting them even when the results might not be there. These players are relevant and traveling to every major event because of their popularity and because of their team. This is because of various reasons, but their teams clearly believe the results will eventually come. Hayder is a good example of this. It takes time, and in some cases, recovery from other issues.
I feel the examples of players you give that aren't noticed enough isn't very good. These guys don't deserve to be invited because they are not SO much better that their level translates to a better experience for fans. Invite tournaments are 100% justified in not inviting them. As for open tournaments, they just haven't gotten it done. If Gatored won IEM NY, he's a breakout for sure. He already turned a lot of heads by beating TOP 3-0... opportunities are there.
I also feel the examples of players you gave who are slumping are very few. There simply aren't many players like you described, who consistently have bad results and yet continue to go everywhere. In fact I would argue Tyler isn't in that list anymore since DH didn't invite him and he goes through open at MLG.
So ultimately, I don't think this problem you describe exists. If it does, it's only a very small issue with just a few players. The big important tournaments don't invite from the tier of mid/low players who are fan favorites anymore. They invite MC and Nestea and Mvp. They have open brackets. There are opportunities for players to break out, just the ones you want to break out haven't gotten it done yet, or don't have the resources to get them there.
As for smaller events, let them do what they wish. They do it for survival. Would you rather ASUS invite the players in your list, get no viewers, and never run another event? As many have said, maybe TLO wouldn't beat NightEnd. But the play level is close enough on stream that it's not worth inviting NE over TLO. The harsh reality is that it's difficult to get noticed but still possible, and until the difference in play level between Titan or Gatored and TLO is the difference between Leenock and TLO, only then will they get noticed. But then they would get noticed anyway, so it's kind of pointless.
tldr: problem doesn't really exist in the way you describe it, if the "better" players were truly better they'd be noticed
Hot_Bid, I have a question regarding a past post "Elephant in the Room" that you created.
Thank you for your input Hotbid, it's nice to see an educated opinion being expressed in a reasonable manner on this site. Those LR threads are ruin my faith in this community sometimes and a well thought out forum discussion helps bring it back =P
Invitationals are more like exhibition matches, not necessarily a tournament. Though I agree tournaments > invitationals. I think that invitationals often make for more fun matches.
Also note, that tournaments are a lot bigger, and that people who hold invitational probably don't have the number or infrastructure to hold the tournament.
FT.aCt)Sony United States. November 25 2011 02:58. Posts 348 PM Profile Quote # Stareagle at one point in Brood War was one of Italy's best players and repetitive WCG Italy representative. It might help if you do some brood war history before asking about known and unknown people.
I know who StarEagle is. It's the reason why he is in the OP. But according to his results, Sc2 speaking he counts as emergent and I don't recall about him being invited somewhere.
According to your account info you know BW better than me (no irony) so I'd like to ask you a question: why do you feel that BW has withstood so much the test of the time? Apart from the game mechanics and the game balance (or supposed, according to someone), why do you think that BW keeps lasting? Not for korean viewers, what keeps attracting foreigner fans?
My personal bet is the quality of the games and therefore of the players. Because you can be sure that everyone is a beast, everyone puts his very best into the game and everyone DESERVES anything they get. Then, funny things to make the fans go crazy still happen despite the absolute professionality. Crazy celebrations, even if they managed to tone them down. Rivalries, scandals, hilarious stuff. Nothing different from Sc2. Imo at the end of the day what attracts people is the real worth of a player, and not other tangentially related things.
Very nice of you to bm 3 of liquids players there, well played.
Hey slow down, I never said that a guy who managed to compete against koreans in GSL was bad. Even TLO could compete with koreans months ago. And Tyler hasn't always been Tyler, but Nony. But at the current moment... it doesn't look like they are tearing brackets apart. It's quite obvious that they have been in a hard slump, luckily it seems that they are getting through and as soon as they manage to prove me wrong with a major win I'll be glad to eat my words in this own thread and then sign into their fan clubs. Until then, except for Jinro they play in tournaments thanks to invitations and without doing anything significant instead of players who maybe could do better. As said in the OP those are just examples taken from anELITE of players (the professionals) who do that for living.
I also mentioned Incontrol and Machine but this doesn't mean that I diss EG.
Chill Canada. November 25 2011 02:45. Posts 23009 PM Profile Blog Quote # It's a shame, but the most popular aren't necessarily the best. If a tournament had the lineup you mentioned from an open bracket, I would frankly not watch it. I really want to see the most popular players, not the best :X
BUT WHY DO YOU WANT TO HURT ESPORTS
Jokes aside does it seem I am arrogant or whatever? It's not the point of my thread, don't get why some gets offended. If you want me to stop PM me and I'll tone it down.
To me personally, Brood War has excelled and stood for so long not only because of the game quality. Sure the game came out in the 90's and still to this day is played. The game itself underwent so many different phases of growth. Every new year that came, new aspects came as well.
Brood War and Starcraft 2 are nowhere alike in gameplay aspects. Sure there are units that are the same. Sure the concept is the same. But lets face it. Starcraft 2 is so dumbed down. Its basically Warcraft 3 with macro. That is basically the main reason.
And again, majority of Starcraft 2 players didn't play Brood War but most of all don't even research anything about Brood War and the players that played. I've seen countless games of random nobodies talk trash in a game and act like a failboat elitist all because SC2 is so dumbed down.
On November 25 2011 08:52 Coramoor wrote: there is a hilariously pathetic reaction by a lot of "fans" of this game in this thread
Random Fan: We want to watch Destiny, Incontrol and Tyler cause we know who they are, so we won't tune in otherwise
The problem with this thinking is that none of these players are any good by comparison, someone mentioned ostojiy getting an invite to blizzcon and doing nothing, sure that's true, but he obliterated Destiny at MLG, he's a top GM, has shown commitment and can't get signed to a top team, yet Destiny gets signed cause he's obnoxious on his stream and gamers seem to like that, so he gets 5000 viewers a night
Personality is important, no doubt about it but when it comes down to it, if you want this game to grow and be popular(on a scale outside what we currently have) you need to teach the good players to be personalities, and not have the personalities become the main players, cause otherwise we'll npever be able to match Korea
Edit: spelling fail
Pathetic? That seems a little inflammatory. People will be fans of players for whatever reason they want, and you can bet very often it has nothing to do with skill.
Why hate on people who want to be entertained by a personality? Contrary at least to your beliefs, personalities aren't skills we pick up along the way. Maybe these players should get themselves out there more and build a fan base as clearly this was no big obstacle for Destiny waaay before he was a part of a "top team."
Also, addressing the hate on Tyler, Inc, and Destiny, do you honestly consider them awful compared to players like Ostojiy? Do some research and try not to sound so ignorant and you might see that player comparison and canvass comparison is more than a single MLG result and your own opinion on how someone acts.
Btw: Ostojiy never has even played Destiny? Did you make that up?
On November 25 2011 08:52 Coramoor wrote: there is a hilariously pathetic reaction by a lot of "fans" of this game in this thread
Random Fan: We want to watch Destiny, Incontrol and Tyler cause we know who they are, so we won't tune in otherwise
The problem with this thinking is that none of these players are any good by comparison, someone mentioned ostojiy getting an invite to blizzcon and doing nothing, sure that's true, but he obliterated Destiny at MLG, he's a top GM, has shown commitment and can't get signed to a top team, yet Destiny gets signed cause he's obnoxious on his stream and gamers seem to like that, so he gets 5000 viewers a night
Personality is important, no doubt about it but when it comes down to it, if you want this game to grow and be popular(on a scale outside what we currently have) you need to teach the good players to be personalities, and not have the personalities become the main players, cause otherwise we'll npever be able to match Korea
Edit: spelling fail
Btw: Ostojiy never has even played Destiny? Did you make that up?
He beat him this MLG, look it up on Liquipedia.
I think, more tournaments should put more focus on qualifiers instead of invites, if players are so good that they would earn an invite, they should qualify anyway. If they don't, well, more attention to up-and-coming players. You just need to market qualifiers better, make people understand that the qualifiers deserve to be there and show them how their favorites got beaten by those exact guys. How are rather unknown talents supposed to gain fans if you don't give them much of a platform? You shouldn't send out pity invites, but opening more spots in tournaments for qualifiers would be a step in the right direction.
Right now, the tournament structures and the top-heavy prizepools don't allow nearly enough players to sustain themselves and the prevalent invitational format gets too much money to too few players.
One thing that strikes me about this, going back to Sundances interview where he talked about some players being more marketable than others. So the truth is, its not about who is necessarily the best, but who is the most popular. Popular players will be bring in more viewers.
A second observation would that we don't necessarily NEED the best players to be in every tournament. In fact, I would argue that in the US, most professional sports don't have the best players. They are just the ones that followed the correct path to get there. I am sure those of us who played sports in high school can remember an outstanding athlete who either didn't even finish high school or didn't get the grades to go to college. The biggest different between ESports and real sports is that right now anyone can prove their worth on the 'field'. So just like the best basketball player in the world might be playing pickup ball somewhere with his buddies, we have the same thing starting to occure in ESports. Players like the ones mentioned above are the ones who followed the right path, where as some of the upcoming players simply aren't. The question is, how will the ESports community handle it. Do we really need only the most talented players, or the ones who are going to be the most marketable?
On November 25 2011 04:31 Shrewmy wrote: People should only be able to enter tournaments through their own efforts, just have open qualifiers either online or over a long period of time at local areas leading up to a grand final. Popular pros could still get their own time in the spotlight through team leagues, they shouldn't get a free spot just because of EG's massive marketing budget. You could still have invitationals, but that sort of system should be kept out of things like MLG.
Your use of meritocracy is correct in that players like InControl, as much as I love him, really shouldn't be given a free spot at MLG just because he did so well early on in SC2's release.
You realise that MLG has no invitational element other than the Korean invites right?
Actually, you're wrong twice.
First of all, all pool players are essentially invites to the next MLG.
Secondly, MLG has run an invite-only online tournament. The finals of that were actually played at the last MLG. Naniwa vs Nestea, you may have heard of that match? =P
Actually no. Pool players are more akin to being Seeded which does reward consistency(We can argue all about the points format but overall the idea is totally fine)
Overall I think the ratio of opens to invite tournaments should be more in favour of opens. Invitationals are fine but for a healthy competitive scene we need more chances for unknowns to make a name for themeselves.
I just want to mention one of what i thought was the worst example of this; that 8 person female tournament with the 10k prize, i forget the acronym. How could the invites possibly be decided? If there's never been this scale of event before who's to say new participants wouldn't show up and enter. Wouldn't that be the point of an event like this in the first place... otherwise, what is it?
Really at the end of it a 10k tournament came and went (same prize pool as TSL2 which is funny to think, how big of a deal we took it) without much exposure interest or anything.
On November 25 2011 00:50 CDR wrote: Esports is about money, not promoting new players. TLO, Jinro or InControl are getting invites because they bring attention of their huge fan bases. That's also the main reason they even are still parts of their teams. Do you think TL pays TLO or Jinro because they hope for their results? Nope, it's just an insane amount of people who visit this site and support TL because of them. How many fans would abandon TL if they kicked out TLO and Jinro? A lot. And it's not only TL but all foreign pro teams. It's pure bussiness.
This is the reason the Teams should be featured and the players shouldn't really matter as much. Players come and go but Team Liquid will outlast them all. IMO the teams should be the valuable assets within esports, not the players.
With this the competition could be shifted from massive 1v1 96 hour marathon tournaments that are the MLG events, into a more consistent and regular format of team league competitions much like Eg Masters Cup. It would take a lot of strain off the organizers, players, casters and everyone involved. This is basically the same design as the the Pro League and it works to get people watching. IPL and NASL are getting close with consistent streaming, but I still don't know who most of the guys in the qualifying tournaments are unless I recognize their team tag. Production costs could be drastically reduced and everyone involved could play/manage/cast/etc with normal consistency. MLG and IPL etc are much fun, I understand, but perhaps these tournaments could be the culmination of a more normal team league.
Also this format is how all sports are, the teams brand themselves and create loyal fan bases that end up paying for the content/merch etc for years and years. How would the NFL work out if they couldn't replace a quarterback or if their star running back got injured? It should not be about the individual players, it should be about the teams.
One other effect of having a more team orientated format would be the talent pool could be more varied without having a major effect on results. Eg. iNcontrol not having results really hurts his ego and makes EG look bad overall, but if it were a team league iNcontrol could focus on becoming a specialist, say PvT, where they could play him circumstantially and he could narrow down his focus for practice. The moderating effect on the talent pool would bring the lower players up, and the higher level players down but in the end the quality of the competition would go up because there would be far less landslide 2-0 series with obviously dominate players. Or the lower players could get cut because they are effecting the team's results, which seems like the proper thing a team would do.
I got really excited when Ret and Huk joined Team Liquid. At the time Team Liquid was, IMO, the best foreign team or at least working in that direction, if the team play was actually a format that was played rather than the 1v1 tournaments. But since the competition has never focused on the team aspect of the structures within the industry the team more or less fell off and the focus to dominate was lost.
Right now I think EG and Complexity are playing to win, but they are still focused and put their resources towards 1v1 results. In my head I had imagined EG vs Team Liquid slug fests and rivalry that lasted for years. But what do we have? We have a handful of winners and all others get swept aside and their work does not become a successful accomplishment.
The team aspect also adds an extra dimension of gaming, "which goalie is going to start?", "who is going to take down this guy?" Instead of "wow, this player was knocked out in the first round..." This type of layer can do alot to add to the commentating and stories being generated from the games being played. Instead of narrowly focusing on an individuals skills to win a single game or BO3, the story could go to a players ability in particular match ups, ACE's, who are they going to bring out next....blah blah. It adds color to the game without changing the game at all.
I think it would pay for esports to look to established sporting structures for guidance.
On November 25 2011 08:52 Coramoor wrote: there is a hilariously pathetic reaction by a lot of "fans" of this game in this thread
Random Fan: We want to watch Destiny, Incontrol and Tyler cause we know who they are, so we won't tune in otherwise
The problem with this thinking is that none of these players are any good by comparison, someone mentioned ostojiy getting an invite to blizzcon and doing nothing, sure that's true, but he obliterated Destiny at MLG, he's a top GM, has shown commitment and can't get signed to a top team, yet Destiny gets signed cause he's obnoxious on his stream and gamers seem to like that, so he gets 5000 viewers a night
Personality is important, no doubt about it but when it comes down to it, if you want this game to grow and be popular(on a scale outside what we currently have) you need to teach the good players to be personalities, and not have the personalities become the main players, cause otherwise we'll npever be able to match Korea
Edit: spelling fail
Btw: Ostojiy never has even played Destiny? Did you make that up?
He beat him this MLG, look it up on Liquipedia.
Ah I see now, linked his TLPD profile and it said he had never even played Destiny my mistake. However, my point to the poster I quoted still stands that such a position regarding those players, especially with the Ostojiy example (he only played one more match after Destiny and was 2-0ed by DDE), is pretty extreme
I think a real problem for these live events even with online qualifiers are travel stipends. look at the IEM, there were several qualified players who canceled their participation since they or their team couldn't afford the trip (transcontinental flights are not cheap). take stephano (ye, i know you hear this name to often), if he hadn't won the online qualifier with all a full stipend, i'm pretty sure his team wouldn't have sent him. i also think that most of the current tournaments are way to top-heavy considering the prizepool. IPL did the right thing with still $1k for the ranks 17-32. i don't think that a prize pool like MLG's with $120k spread only in the top 8 is helping for new blood. as already stated the rich teams with a decent history like EG, TL, fnatic, dignitas, mouz etc can afford to attend these tournaments even if they don't get a qualifacion seed with a travel stipend whereas some not so wealthy teams can't afford these live events at all when they don't win a online qualification + stipend.
The game is too volatile to concentrate on those top players dominating in quarterly/monthly marathon tournaments. So many resources go into putting the spot light on these guys(Idra, Huk, Naniwa for example) and realistically any player can work their way to the top of a single tournament on a good day(Leenock). Where was Leenock's spot light? How could you ever predict or narrate such an outcome? Having a playing field that is possible to analyse is important and it becomes very difficult for viewers to become emotionally attached if results are unpredictable. Right now, who is going to win Dreamhack? Anyone, that's who. Right now I sit through many marathon tournaments that I have no emotional attachment to with the result of either being very excited and happy(Huk winning Orlando) to not even bothering watching the finals because I don't really care for the finalists(Naniwa/Leenock)
As a side note, we all know that the preferred winner of MLG Providence would have been Naniwa, right? Because so much effort, drama and story was going on at the time that Leenock winning was essentially letting the air out of a balloon slowly rather than letting it pop(Naniwa winning). The balloon popping would have been fantastic for the foreign SC2 scene, fantastic for the Swedish community etc but this chance was missed and it is because of the format of the competition. Why have a Final National Championship tournament where this type of thing could even happen? You don't see the league's last place team win the Stanley Cup(not saying Leenock is a bad player, just saying he came from the bottom).
The downside of open tournaments, that no one has mentioned yet that I've seen, is fatigue.
A player who has to play through a bunch of shitty players on his way through an open bracket is going to be tired. Even if you have a 1% chance of losing to those shitty players, you still tire fighting your way through them and risking elimination at every turn, and as tense as the games may be for that reason, that doesn't make them good games, and by the time you get to the stage where the good players are facing off, they are often fatigued and making mistakes they would not normally make, which reduces the quality of the subsequent games for the spectators. We see this happen at MLGs - runs like Leenock where they blitz the open bracket then blitz the winner's bracket too are anomalies, not the norm.
Invitational tournaments are an effort to avoid this - players are fully rested for all their matches and play much better overall.
Each method has their ups and downs, and I would prefer to see a mix of tournaments rather than exclusively invitationals, or excusively open tournaments.
Sundance and Carmac have explained this much better than most people here. Checkout the TL interviews with both of them. Pretty much sc2 is too young atm to no be driven by celebrity players. But they are aware of the problems that doing business that way has. We already know that atm sc2 is a popular game to watch but in playerbase its actually decreasing and leagues know that what keeps this esport alive is not the number of celebritys and fans of players that a game has but the playerbase and upcoming players. The current predicament is how to reward and encourage amateurs into getting to pro level. Invite tourneys arent the way and every big tournament and league knows it. If new talent doesnt come out after the game has settled then we will see the game slowly die like quake and we arent going to see another dynasty of starcraft and a stable esports game in the west. But atm theres still 2 more expansions and alot of hype so we can worry about things like that later. IEM switched to qualifications this year and mlg is working on recognising korean pro status as well as sorting out their own competitions. DH has a few open spots but they are more of an organisation that celebrates gaming culture than a gaming league.
On November 25 2011 11:04 infinity2k9 wrote: I just want to mention one of what i thought was the worst example of this; that 8 person female tournament with the 10k prize, i forget the acronym. How could the invites possibly be decided? If there's never been this scale of event before who's to say new participants wouldn't show up and enter. Wouldn't that be the point of an event like this in the first place... otherwise, what is it?
Really at the end of it a 10k tournament came and went (same prize pool as TSL2 which is funny to think, how big of a deal we took it) without much exposure interest or anything.
If there were no interest there wouldn't have been a 10k prize pool. If someone is willing to pay for such a prize pool for whatever format, who are you to say that's a bad idea? If no one is watching then it just won't happen again. No one is willing to shell out money into a black hole.
I agree with the overall idea of the meritocratic system, but for now, I think there are just a ton of tourneys, all fighting for attention, plus there are really only a hand full of top tier players. This is why invites became big, to get attention. I think as time goes on more and more of the scrubs will be weeded out and pure merit systems will emerge as the dominant form.
I disagree with about everything thats in the OP. Imo with invations its much more likely to get better players than with opens, because in sc2 the better player dosnt always win (especially 5 series in a row). Also the huge time and work that is requiered to orgnaize a open, could be used for more important things like production value.
Also the OP acts like its the tournament organizers job to let new players have a chance to shine. It is not. Their job is to get viewers so their sponsors get happy.
Besides, only ignorant americans didnt think thorzain had a good chance to win TSL3.
On November 25 2011 16:44 Sea_Food wrote: Besides, only ignorant americans didnt think thorzain had a good chance to win TSL3.
Thats just not true.
Thorzain played in like no online tourney and had like 0 exposure before TSL. Either you were a "fan" because of his WC3 past, a player that got beaten by him on ladder or you had not that much of a chacne to know him.
The central issue is fatigue. Once you know you are good, you still can't prove it all the time any time 24/7. You need to rest, and choose your fights wisely. If the very top players always had to go through the lower tiers to re-prove themselves, the sheer exhaustion would not allow them to play their best when they reach the final stages. Meritocracy is just a word, depends exactly what one means by it. The top players have proven their merit already, that's why they have advantages. No one has appeared out of nowhere at the top, everyone has fought tooth and nail their way to there.
there are very few tournaments that are entirely invitational and those that are are generally 8 or so man short tournaments that are intended to be a showcase of sorts. mlg, the biggest foreigner circuit at the moment, is open to anyone that wants in. joe schmoe from nebraska that nobody has ever heard of could end up in code s, the "major leagues" of sc2, in 3 days. ipl has extensive open qualifiers. the major european circuits all have qualifiers of many varieties. gsl has limited open qualifiers. NONE of the major sc2 tourneys atm are restricted to arbitrary invatations save blizzcon, their system being completely unknown to anyone. the players that are currently being given spots/seeds to major tourneys are earning them through previous results for the most part. complaining that your favorite player that took 3rd in some no name european cup isnt getting seeded in mlg is dumb. the current system IS a meritocracy.
On November 25 2011 06:39 Hot_Bid wrote:For 90% of players it's mostly about pure skill level, for a very few (the ones you listed) it's about having more fans than their skill "deserves". But saying a player "deserves" more stream viewers or fans is ridiculous as a concept. Fans are fans because they are fans. They are fans for many reasons.
Thus it's not really a problem. I'd say it's great that some players can not have the best results yet still remain "relevant." If we didn't, we'd be robbing the fans and viewers of a lot of great experiences.
but one thing about that is that unknown very skilled guy would have so many more fans if he had the chance to get it. the fan favorites will only be fan favorites as long as media and invites lets them
On November 25 2011 06:39 Hot_Bid wrote:For 90% of players it's mostly about pure skill level, for a very few (the ones you listed) it's about having more fans than their skill "deserves". But saying a player "deserves" more stream viewers or fans is ridiculous as a concept. Fans are fans because they are fans. They are fans for many reasons.
Thus it's not really a problem. I'd say it's great that some players can not have the best results yet still remain "relevant." If we didn't, we'd be robbing the fans and viewers of a lot of great experiences.
but one thing about that is that unknown very skilled guy would have so many more fans if he had the chance to get it. the fan favorites will only be fan favorites as long as media and invites lets them
I disagree.
If someone is unknown and so skilled that they should be more "known" then their skill will shine through somehow. There are many examples of players like this, there are enough open tournaments and non big events to make this happen and get noticed. Its the second part, the personality/story/extra appeal that TLO and Tyler and Incontrol have that a lot of others are lacking in, and that is largely because of effort. These guys put in so much effort while other players don't. Just look at sheer stream hours (plus a whole bunch of other stuff).
If someone is unknown and their personality / story is great in addition to their skill and they are still unknown... well then that is entirely their fault. How many pros are doing vlogs like Tyler did? How many organize showmatches themselves? How many make funny videos or do shows or take the initiatives to market themselves? Very few.
I think the problem lies more with players and teams, not the audience. I hate to keep bringing back up Liquid and EG but both these teams and their players do so more than other teams and players in terms of marketing themselves and PR, and even Liquid and EG can do a much better job, they are by no means perfect at it.
I would argue that mouz, your team, has amazingly skilled players but does not do nearly enough to promote them. I don't think its just management's fault either. Players don't like doing shit other than playing, but sometimes they gotta realize that all the other shit is what gets you invites and fans and popularity. Unless your are Nestea or MVP you have to do lots of other stuff.
I think a Hybrid tournament is best. Those players whose names we know, they are known because they have proven themselves before. If you have both invites and qualifiers, then the proven names won't have to be competing against a lot of players in tournaments/qualifiers that only send a few or only 1st qualifying, and the field will have more chance to show new players more easily. The players who do make it through qualifiers then have a chance to further prove their names against the known names they face. Some form of compromise is probably the way to go.
On November 25 2011 12:51 Rabbet wrote: The game is too volatile to concentrate on those top players dominating in quarterly/monthly marathon tournaments. So many resources go into putting the spot light on these guys(Idra, Huk, Naniwa for example) and realistically any player can work their way to the top of a single tournament on a good day(Leenock). Where was Leenock's spot light? How could you ever predict or narrate such an outcome? Having a playing field that is possible to analyse is important and it becomes very difficult for viewers to become emotionally attached if results are unpredictable. Right now, who is going to win Dreamhack? Anyone, that's who. Right now I sit through many marathon tournaments that I have no emotional attachment to with the result of either being very excited and happy(Huk winning Orlando) to not even bothering watching the finals because I don't really care for the finalists(Naniwa/Leenock)
As a side note, we all know that the preferred winner of MLG Providence would have been Naniwa, right? Because so much effort, drama and story was going on at the time that Leenock winning was essentially letting the air out of a balloon slowly rather than letting it pop(Naniwa winning). The balloon popping would have been fantastic for the foreign SC2 scene, fantastic for the Swedish community etc but this chance was missed and it is because of the format of the competition. Why have a Final National Championship tournament where this type of thing could even happen? You don't see the league's last place team win the Stanley Cup(not saying Leenock is a bad player, just saying he came from the bottom).
I saw alot of people who were really happy for Leenock. Just because you didn't watch the final because you didn't care for the players doesn't mean that a huge amount of people don't just want the best player to win. I'm from sweden and i couldn't care less if Naniwa won or not, Leenock was better and that's what counts.
No good deed goes unpunished. If a small organisation tries to do a little tournament, but is not able to hold a big open qualification... will the comunity be thankful for another tournament? No, they will RAGE ABOUT INVITES.
Seriously, would it be better if TotalBiscuit didn't spend his own money to host ShoutCraft? Would it be better if ASUS didn't sponsor any tournament? Why is it RAGEWORTHY how people spend their own damn money?
I am repeating myself from page 1, but the problem doesn't exist. All of the biggest SC2 leagues have open qualifiers -- MLG, IPL, Dreamhack, IEM, NASL, GSL, WCG. If someone wants to dabble into hosting smaller events, it's their desicion what format to use.
We're in the middle of Dreamhack Winter, and look how many unknown people are there. Even better -- they had a chance to play at least 3 series before being eliminated!
On November 26 2011 04:15 Alexj wrote: No good deed goes unpunished. If a small organisation tries to do a little tournament, but is not able to hold a big open qualification... will the comunity be thankful for another tournament? No, they will RAGE ABOUT INVITES.
Seriously, would it be better if TotalBiscuit didn't spend his own money to host ShoutCraft? Would it be better if ASUS didn't sponsor any tournament? Why is it RAGEWORTHY how people spend their own damn money?
I am repeating myself from page 1, but the problem doesn't exist. All of the biggest SC2 leagues have open qualifiers -- MLG, IPL, Dreamhack, IEM, NASL, GSL, WCG. If someone wants to dabble into hosting smaller events, it's their desicion what format to use.
We're in the middle of Dreamhack Winter, and look how many unknown people are there. Even better -- they had a chance to play at least 3 series before being eliminated!
I am just talking, I already recognised that Shoutcraft had a fuckton of goodies, I never told that ASUS shouldn't do anymore tournaments and never "punished" an event with my really important opinion. I just gave my suggestion and people can comment, like you already did before. The problem doesn't exists? Fine, no need to be angry: it's not like my post is going to change the whole Sc2 history. But if it can provide some considerations, why not? No need to use sarcasm
And since we all like DH, at the current moment it looks like some 'unknowns' are still doing perfectly fine, instead of other famous players who were eliminated between yesterday and today. Look what Naama, Happy, Seiplo and Titan did until now. Or what Cloud did despite not coming out of his pool, if you consider him a mid tier player.
Guess you are reading my posts like they are mindless bashing, while they are not.
I think a Hybrid tournament is best. Those players whose names we know, they are known because they have proven themselves before. If you have both invites and qualifiers, then the proven names won't have to be competing against a lot of players in tournaments/qualifiers that only send a few or only 1st qualifying, and the field will have more chance to show new players more easily. The players who do make it through qualifiers then have a chance to further prove their names against the known names they face. Some form of compromise is probably the way to go.
Now THIS would be perfect imo.
Edit so I don't have to post another time: it's not that if we widen the open seeds we necessarly cut famous players out. I hope it is clear.
On November 26 2011 06:30 ThePlayer33 wrote: yeah i think there should be a little more opens and a little less invites. invite koreans is fine though since they cant play in qualifiets
You could have qualifiers for Koreans on the Korean server for foreign events. How likely is it that some Korean ladder monster will get an invite to a foreign tournament if he can't go through a qualifier? Heck even for the lesser known or favoured gsl players it's unlikely they'll get an invite.
Definitely. Even MSL and OSL didn't have such insane seeding like most SC2 off-line events. GSL is going in the right direction with opening up Code S. MLG is revamping their system too, although they haven't announced the details.
IPL is doing a bunch of open qualifiers, and their tournament should be amazing in IPL4.
But invitationals are fun to watch too. Dreamhack is a great example of really top pros being invited for some guaranteed awesome games.
On January 11 2012 21:46 atmuh wrote: can gomtv stop inviting players into code s now please
i guarantee if no one told you a foreigner was playing, you'd think it was just korean vs korean. unless youre a pro gamer, i cant imagine anyone knowing the difference
On January 11 2012 21:46 atmuh wrote: can gomtv stop inviting players into code s now please
i guarantee if no one told you a foreigner was playing, you'd think it was just korean vs korean. unless youre a pro gamer, i cant imagine anyone knowing the difference
its not very hard man.. THERE is an obvious skill gap between Koreans and Foreigners, especially since GSL is PREPARATION based. Foreigners, while already lacking mechanically, are not afforded the luxury of an entire Korean pro-team formulating strats for them. Also...part of the fun of watching GSL is getting to the see the emotion of the players. Pretty sure if i looked into a booth i can tell a Foreigner from a Korean.
On November 25 2011 06:39 Hot_Bid wrote:For 90% of players it's mostly about pure skill level, for a very few (the ones you listed) it's about having more fans than their skill "deserves". But saying a player "deserves" more stream viewers or fans is ridiculous as a concept. Fans are fans because they are fans. They are fans for many reasons.
Thus it's not really a problem. I'd say it's great that some players can not have the best results yet still remain "relevant." If we didn't, we'd be robbing the fans and viewers of a lot of great experiences.
but one thing about that is that unknown very skilled guy would have so many more fans if he had the chance to get it. the fan favorites will only be fan favorites as long as media and invites lets them
If someone is unknown and so skilled that they should be more "known" then their skill will shine through somehow. There are many examples of players like this, there are enough open tournaments and non big events to make this happen and get noticed. Its the second part, the personality/story/extra appeal that TLO and Tyler and Incontrol have that a lot of others are lacking in, and that is largely because of effort. These guys put in so much effort while other players don't. Just look at sheer stream hours (plus a whole bunch of other stuff).
If someone is unknown and their personality / story is great in addition to their skill and they are still unknown... well then that is entirely their fault. How many pros are doing vlogs like Tyler did? How many organize showmatches themselves? How many make funny videos or do shows or take the initiatives to market themselves? Very few.
I think the problem lies more with players and teams, not the audience. I hate to keep bringing back up Liquid and EG but both these teams and their players do so more than other teams and players in terms of marketing themselves and PR, and even Liquid and EG can do a much better job, they are by no means perfect at it.
I would argue that mouz, your team, has amazingly skilled players but does not do nearly enough to promote them. I don't think its just management's fault either. Players don't like doing shit other than playing, but sometimes they gotta realize that all the other shit is what gets you invites and fans and popularity. Unless your are Nestea or MVP you have to do lots of other stuff.
I agree with what i think is MorroW's sentiment, I would like to see merit win out over mediocrity. But you're 100% right in that it's up to the players teams etc to get the name out there. - edit: spoilering due to strong off topicness of wall of text - + Show Spoiler +
I'm reminded of a story from one of the Kiyosaki books (forgot which one, probably rich dad poor dad) where he was being interviewed by a talented journalist / writer who took offense to the idea that he was successful because he was a Best SELLING Author and that she should approach her efforts to become financially successful with the same mindset She held up all her journalistic integrity or whatever as being MORE important than learning how to sell yourself.
Whether they know it or not, subconsciously at least the players with the biggest fanbases in SC2 know how to sell themselves. Whether its conducting themselves like stars. Whether its being BM jerks. Whether its being out there loud mouths always talking shit and getting in the headlines for the wrong reasons, the guys with the fanbases put themselves out there so that fans can then choose to be fans.
Too many players aren't giving fans the opportunity to be fans. There's so much missed opportunity out there its painful to see. It frustrates me greatly!! A lot of the time it feels like the players aren't trying. Whether that's by choice or because they don't know what to do to get a bigger fanbase, it's blatantly obvious that there's something lacking there for a lot of playeres.
And maybe that's just inevitable. I'm on a real big "shit irrelevant sports analogy" kick ever since the probe rush. But look at any major sports team. A lot of players just aren't ones you can gravitate to as a fan. Lots of good players everywhere, but many give boring interviews and don't encourage fans or journalists to seek them out and latch onto them. I feel SC2 might not be any different.
On January 11 2012 21:46 atmuh wrote: can gomtv stop inviting players into code s now please
i guarantee if no one told you a foreigner was playing, you'd think it was just korean vs korean. unless youre a pro gamer, i cant imagine anyone knowing the difference
its not very hard man.. THERE is an obvious skill gap between Koreans and Foreigners, especially since GSL is PREPARATION based. Foreigners, while already lacking mechanically, are not afforded the luxury of an entire Korean pro-team formulating strats for them. Also...part of the fun of watching GSL is getting to the see the emotion of the players. Pretty sure if i looked into a booth i can tell a Foreigner from a Korean.
oh is that what he was saying yeah man if you honestly unironically believe that koreans and other dudes are on the same level youve got a bit of a problem
EPT
ThorZaIN, anyone? Unless you were a Wc3 fan, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have given him a penny.
Destiny, 
Tyler were about to lose every single match unless paired against each other?
)
