EPTNaNiwa speaks out on CompLexity / Quantic move - Page 37
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
khanan
47 Posts
| ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
On December 12 2011 05:21 Paladia wrote: Taking one single factor into consideration isn't enough. There are several and Stephano is just one of them. Naniwa being asked to do something which he absolutely hates (streaming) instead of what he wants to do (practice). He has even said that he will never stream again. Naniwa leaving, Stephano leaving. Their current line-up is obviously 100% a result of management and their current line-up is filled with the exposure-type player. There is nothing wrong with that, it could be CoL's niche, getting these kinds of players and I am absolutely fine with that. The problem arises when you try to aquire players that are only focused on results and the game itself and then try to get them to put time into exposure instead of doing what they do best (play and focus on tournaments). Naniwa did not leave, he had his contract sold. As stated previously by both CoL and QXG CoL was looking to get rid of naniwa before he talked to QXG or anything, it definitely was not naniwa forcing them to let him go like naiwa fans seem to have spun the story to be. Stephano was signed to 2 teams because he re-signed with milannium after signing with CoL. Obviously only one team could keep him, and CoL chose to let milannium keep him because they didn't want a player that would be shady ad easily confused and guilted like stephano was. | ||
|
Krogan
Sweden375 Posts
| ||
|
Tektos
Australia1321 Posts
Col sold Naniwa's contract, what is the big deal? | ||
|
EienShinwa
United States655 Posts
| ||
|
aderum
Sweden1459 Posts
On December 12 2011 07:21 Tektos wrote: My goodness the SC2 community loves drama. Col sold Naniwa's contract, what is the big deal? Yeah how stupid we discuss things on a forum made to discuss. If you think its a stupid thread, dont read it. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7028 Posts
On December 12 2011 07:30 EienShinwa wrote: I think this thread derailed into two sides; People on moral high horses saying Naniwa's personality sucks and shitting all over his face vs Naniwa leghumpers trying to defend Naniwa's internets. Ah, good thing we have you, our divinely appointed moral superior to rule fairly over these nations and safeguard our values and traditions. Newsflash, sometimes people are bad at debating and it makes them seem like they're reflexively defending one side. It's easy then to see tribal warfare and fancy yourself above this sort of thing, but it's hardly worth mentioning and is condescending to people in this thread. | ||
|
Hydroxyl
206 Posts
On December 12 2011 07:21 Tektos wrote: My goodness the SC2 community loves drama. Col sold Naniwa's contract, what is the big deal? Due to the way Complexity's contracts are written, he had no choice wether he agreed or not, and in what team he would end in. It would be only pure luck that he ended in a team he agreed himself to be in. That's the a real deal: do we want esport to have the players have their word in what team and environnement they work? What if Sase wasn't in QxG, or that QxG had not a partnership with Startale, but would end up buying Naniwa's contract nonetheless? Do contracts like the ones of Complexity have to leave all the rights to the structure and none to the players? Is it bright for the future of esport, or even what we want it to be? | ||
|
Hundisilm
Estonia99 Posts
On December 12 2011 05:09 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: I don't think the Stephano, or the Naniwa situation are indicators of coL letting these players slip. The situation with each player seems to indicate nothing of the sort. They could have kept Naniwa so not keeping him was a decision they definitely didn't let him slip out of their hands. Naniwa has left many teams and I wouldn't accuse all of them of bad management. Stephano was signed to two teams. Unless you know more than I do (doubtful) I don't see the relevance of him in this topic regarding the coL management. Complexity has unsigned three high profile players in the year 2011 after a very short time on the team (let's stick to SC2 only for the time being). They have all reasonably valid (from the information available) explanations and they are quite distictly different situations, but it seems to stick out a bit at the moment. In my opinion it would be a bit unfair to assume something specifically negative about them based on this (mistreatment of players or something of the sort), but wouldn't you agree it seems to indicate that they are doing something differently from other teams for these situations to occur so frequently with them? My best guess would be that their recruiting methods might be somewhat flawed. | ||
|
NEXUS6
United States413 Posts
| ||
|
RyanRushia
United States2748 Posts
edit: that being said, i obviously wish johan the best of luck, see you soon my friend | ||
|
Ercster
United States603 Posts
On December 12 2011 05:26 Paladia wrote: If it happens once, for sure. However, Complexity has been unable to keep any of the results-oriented players. Lets say you for example, couldn't come to agreement with your currently signed top players Ret, Sheth and Hero and thus they all left on a bad footing with lots of drama, public bashing back and forth, legal threats on twitter and so on. Would you not see that as a failure on TL's part? If Ret demanded a 200k salary, and TL said no, so Ret left, that would make it a failure on TL's part? Please stop posting. Nothing you have said has had any basic thought or logic put into it. | ||
|
Tektos
Australia1321 Posts
On December 12 2011 07:37 aderum wrote: Yeah how stupid we discuss things on a forum made to discuss. If you think its a stupid thread, dont read it. I never once called it stupid, stop putting words in my mouth. This makes me think you're stupid for not being able to understand the 2 simple lines of text which I originally wrote. Blown out of proportion is how I would describe it. On December 12 2011 08:05 Hydroxyl wrote: Due to the way Complexity's contracts are written, he had no choice wether he agreed or not, and in what team he would end in. It would be only pure luck that he ended in a team he agreed himself to be in. That's the a real deal: do we want esport to have the players have their word in what team and environnement they work? What if Sase wasn't in QxG, or that QxG had not a partnership with Startale, but would end up buying Naniwa's contract nonetheless? Do contracts like the ones of Complexity have to leave all the rights to the structure and none to the players? Is it bright for the future of esport, or even what we want it to be? And Naniwa signed that contract when joining Complexity. If he was unhappy with how things were handled regarding the selling of his contract he should have reviewed all the details before signing. I don't understand the issue? Don't sign a legal agreement unless you: 1) Agree with every clause. 2) Are willing to concede on the issues where they're not in agreement with what you want. (i.e. benefits outweigh every single possible disadvantage). Either way, Complexity have done everything properly and it has blown up into a much bigger drama than it should have been. They didn't want the player anymore so they sold his contract. Happens all the time in other sports. If this is not how people want things turning out to be like in esports, then it is the player's responsibilities to take contracts a lot more seriously than they have been so far. READ WHAT YOU ARE SIGNING. | ||
|
LuckoftheIrish
United States4791 Posts
On December 12 2011 08:05 Hydroxyl wrote: Due to the way Complexity's contracts are written, If you have concrete and specific knowledge about the way coL handles contract negotiates or the specific language they put in their contracts, please share it. Otherwise, everything you wrote after this is a bit meaningless. | ||
|
Hydroxyl
206 Posts
On December 12 2011 08:59 Tektos wrote: And Naniwa signed that contract when joining Complexity. If he was unhappy with how things were handled regarding the selling of his contract he should have reviewed all the details before signing. I don't understand the issue? Don't sign a legal agreement unless you: 1) Agree with every clause. 2) Are willing to concede on the issues where they're not in agreement with what you want. (i.e. benefits outweigh every single possible disadvantage). Either way, Complexity have done everything properly and it has blown up into a much bigger drama than it should have been. They didn't want the player anymore so they sold his contract. Happens all the time in other sports. If this is not how people want things turning out to be like in esports, then it is the player's responsibilities to take contracts a lot more seriously than they have been so far. READ WHAT YOU ARE SIGNING. You advocate players to read what they are signing but you didn't read what you are replying to? I am not talking about what is being done at the moment either in sports either in esports, it is precisely what I'm putting in the dock here. I am talking of what should be done, what is normative and what we should aspire to. Child labour is still standard in some countries, would you answer the same "deal with it" and put the responsability of the deal on the worker's shoulders in this social situations? This is why some men stepped in and wrote for instance human rights, and that we have civilization's progress, because it is understood that customs aren't norms. It is also hypocritical to say that there shouldn't be norms and progress made by the structures themselves on the darwinist hypothesis that progamers will make it evolve in this way by not signing it, because it is basically saying that the relation between structures and players should go there but only if structures are being carried on players' backs. On December 12 2011 09:07 LuckoftheIrish wrote: If you have concrete and specific knowledge about the way coL handles contract negotiates or the specific language they put in their contracts, please share it. Otherwise, everything you wrote after this is a bit meaningless. Basically you don't have any concrete and specific knowledge about the way coL handles contract negociates or the specific language they put in their contracts, you're implying for some obscure reason that others can't, and you conclude that their explanations are meaningless. Why, if you lack this knowledge, would you take someone's argumentation on the matter as doubtful, since you admitted having no expertise about it? Why would you dismiss it rather than reading it and educate yourself? | ||
|
Bladeorade
United States1898 Posts
haha | ||
|
diophan
United States1018 Posts
On December 12 2011 10:43 Hydroxyl wrote: Why, if you lack this knowledge, would you take someone's argumentation on the matter as doubtful, since you admitted having no expertise about it? Why would you dismiss it rather than reading it and educate yourself? Presumably because random people posting in threads don't have insider knowledge of the contracts of progamers. Do you honestly believe everyone on the internet? | ||
|
LuckoftheIrish
United States4791 Posts
On December 12 2011 10:43 Hydroxyl wrote: Basically you don't have any concrete and specific knowledge about the way coL handles contract negociates or the specific language they put in their contracts, you're implying for some obscure reason that others can't, and you conclude that their explanations are meaningless. Why, if you lack this knowledge, would you take someone's argumentation on the matter as doubtful, since you admitted having no expertise about it? Why would you dismiss it rather than reading it and educate yourself? If you have information share it. Otherwise, reading what you say isn't education. You can say your ass is made of ice cream but that don't make you a hot fudge sundae. | ||
|
Xxavi
United States1248 Posts
It doesn't seem that Naniwa gave a shit to single him out in public by naming him, yet apparently, Catz cannot be public about Naniwa on his part. I am saddened by the fact that majority of the people are either blind or retarded. | ||
|
Xxavi
United States1248 Posts
On December 12 2011 05:12 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: I truly, truly cannot understand how you can speak of massive failure without knowing the ins and outs. There are so many details to situations like this that could either spin this into a situation of bad management, or a situation of good management. The idea that as long as a good player does not stay with a team this is a sign of bad management is incredibly flawed. Don't reason with Paladia. I think SirScoots wanted badly for fanboys to appear, and you are trying to reason with one of them  | ||
| ||
