EPTQuestion about Tournaments and Blizzard - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
taLbuk
Madagascar1879 Posts
| ||
|
byobong7
United States207 Posts
| ||
|
bOneSeven
Romania685 Posts
On January 16 2012 08:37 y0su wrote: yeah, if you have a good enough reason to make a new thread, you should be able to bump an old thread. Wasn't aware of that thread ^^ Since it was like 2 months old...damn...not even a member back then | ||
|
Broodwurst
Germany1586 Posts
On January 16 2012 08:34 bOneSeven wrote: No because if people couldn't play the game pro - to make a living they wouldn't put such an amazing show => no reason to spectate the show=> no reason sponsors would sponsor an event. So pro players actually create the possibility of making money . The pro player are usefull to the community . Blizzard guys are not usefull, because patching can be done for free by fans. The only real thing Blizzard provides are the servers. And I'd be rather curious how much that costs them. Blizzard made this one thing that makes ANY of this possible - the game itself. Without the game there wouldn't be a show, sponsors or a community to begin with. | ||
|
Waio
Chile82 Posts
| ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On January 16 2012 08:58 Waio wrote: For those of you wondering why this hurts e-sports, look at this this way. It's a tax, taxes deter investment, witch leads to less "over 5000" tournaments, witch in turn leads to less overall money in the scene, witch translates into less players being able to make a living out of it. If you don't get why taxes discourage investments, I suggest a little economics reading. how about a little business reading? investors invest in games companies because they expect/hope for a large return on their investment. blizzard making as much money as possible on their game means a larger ROI. a larger ROI means more investors in the future. more investment means more projects (i.e., games), which is why we have sc:bw, war3, wow, sc2, etc. from blizzard. blizzard's investors being sad makes blizzard sad; random forum posters and/or players being sad makes blizzard . . . oh wait, blizzard doesn't care. oh, and your post is kind of ridiculous. MLG, IPL, GOM, etc. are making tons of money off their tournaments, and they are expanding, not contracting. so, your whole "taxes deter investment" doesnt really hold water, now does it? | ||
|
BrosephBrostar
United States445 Posts
| ||
|
ikona
Poland47 Posts
On January 16 2012 08:58 Waio wrote: For those of you wondering why this hurts e-sports, look at this this way. It's a tax, taxes deter investment, witch leads to less "over 5000" tournaments, witch in turn leads to less overall money in the scene, witch translates into less players being able to make a living out of it. If you don't get why taxes discourage investments, I suggest a little economics reading. Organizing an event just doesnt compare to developing a game. GSL is business venture, they exist to make money ESL is business venture, they exist to make money NASL is business venture, they exist to make money MLG is business venture, they exist to make money Dreamhack is business venture, they exist to make money yet somehow Blizzard is not allowed to make money off other people using their products to get rich (or die trying). its just dumb, please get in touch with reality. | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
| ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
Blizzard of course could make it like ea, and spy your pc, sell the same game with a small update every year anew etc. I mean thats way easier and less risky then making a good game and hope that people will host big tournaments. Just imagine if ea made starcraft, we would have starcraft 12 released soon ! with origin of course | ||
|
skyflyfish
Canada499 Posts
and the big tournament can readjust their prize pool to 5k and give more $$ to winner with "ad" money~ | ||
|
coolcor
520 Posts
On January 16 2012 09:06 dAPhREAk wrote: how about a little business reading? investors invest in games companies because they expect/hope for a large return on their investment. blizzard making as much money as possible on their game means a larger ROI. a larger ROI means more investors in the future. more investment means more projects (i.e., games), which is why we have sc:bw, war3, wow, sc2, etc. from blizzard. blizzard's investors being sad makes blizzard sad; random forum posters and/or players being sad makes blizzard . . . oh wait, blizzard doesn't care. oh, and your post is kind of ridiculous. MLG, IPL, GOM, etc. are making tons of money off their tournaments, and they are expanding, not contracting. so, your whole "taxes deter investment" doesnt really hold water, now does it? Are you sure about that? How do you know? Blizzard doesn't charge them outside of some relatively small license fee. The problem is that these leagues don't make money. No esport league makes money. MLG is MAYBE the only league to make money in 2011, and I'm even dubious about that... but luckily they had $10 million in VC money to play with on the year, and I'm sure they have more long term plans so it doesn't matter if they don't make money this year... GOMTV doesn't seem to have that kind of backing, which means that their league is not being very successful (financially)... hence cutting about 1/2 million from their expenses. Seems like overall, Korea is having a very rough time leveraging SC2's popularity and their players' skill with sponsors the way Western companies / organizations / players are able to do. said by xeris about GOM I bet I'll be more sad then blizzard's investors if the leagues fail. They probably care more about the game selling millions then the expansion selling millions then the map marketplace selling millions of stuff. If they really wanted to maximize profit they should be taxing all the teams, players, casters, streamers, and websites not just tournaments. Are you sure this tax isn't hurting the tournaments (and in the long run blizzard due to no free massive advertising to lots of people)? | ||
|
Moose!
Germany6 Posts
You have to agree that it was them who created the game itself, but it's not them who create the content that makes it so exiting to watch a tourney. Hate me for saying this, but i don't think they own legitimate rights to claim money because of copyrights or making the game in the first place. A few examples and just examples: would anybody aprove of, if Microsoft claims money from a writer who wrote his/her script in Word? Or would you like it if your favorite musician would have to pay money for every song he/she sold, after reaching 5000 or even 500.000 USD, to the company who developed the program he/she recorded in? Should Blizzard pay money to the company who developed the graphics tool that's used to create the models and textures for the game? I don't think so! Because they all bought legitimate copys of the respecting program and own therefore the right to create revenue with it. You should think of it that way: Would 50k people watch a stream of two a.i. extreme fighting it out over 7 hours? That way Blizzard would, in my opinion, own the rights to claim money from the stream, because their program creates the content. But who really cares about that topic? Blizzard can and will easily shut down any attempt to break the rules (You've been kicked and banned from the server!) Because it is them who make the rules . Lets be honest ... the only cause that there is no LAN-mode is, so that blizzard can monopalize on that. Is that good for e -sports? No. Can we change something about that? No. PS I don't even know if the text above is productive, not outdated or at least makes any sense! :D PPS I hope my english is not to bad. If it is: Sorry! | ||
|
m4inbrain
1505 Posts
I don't think so! Because they all bought legitimate copys of the respecting program and own therefore the right to create revenue with it. Thats where you are wrong, sir. Completely wrong. You dont have any rights to create revenue with Starcraft 2. You should read the End User License Agreement, before clicking "yes, i agree". Im actually a bit shocked that so many people think because they own "a" license, they can do whatever they want to. Did you even read "what" license you paid for? Be honest? | ||
|
Exigaet
Canada355 Posts
In 2011 approximately $2.6 million USD (source is somewhere on TL.net, but can't find the thread) was given away in prizes..a good portion of this came from tournaments with prize pools under $5000. In 2011, Blizzard would have profited a maximum of $250,000-$375,000 off of tournaments. | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
On January 16 2012 10:01 m4inbrain wrote: Thats where you are wrong, sir. Completely wrong. You dont have any rights to create revenue with Starcraft 2. You should read the End User License Agreement, before clicking "yes, i agree". Im actually a bit shocked that so many people think because they own "a" license, they can do whatever they want to. Did you even read "what" license you paid for? Be honest? This is a problem that essentially exists with no other medium, though. When I buy a USB drive, it's my USB drive. I don't buy a license to use the USB drive. Likewise, when I buy a copy of Sc2, I should be buying the data as-is for my own purposes (provided they are not illegal and I don't present the game as my own creation; I should be able to resell it, if I so wish) because I own the disc it is coded into. This notion that I can own the physical medium of a product without owning the "idea," and that this "idea" entitles the publisher to all sorts of extended rights is just one giant middle finger to the consumer. Blizzard can make an agreement that says I merely own a license to their program, but I'm pretty sure that, at least from an intuitive point of view, I actually do own my Sc2 CD. At best, Blizzard owns Battlenet and can govern my use of it. That said, as far as Blizzard is required to do anything, an MLG is equivalent to playing customs with your friends. It requires no additional effort from Blizzard, uses functions that are already built into the game which was already purchased. They have no grounds on which to demand more, much in the same way that the makers of frisbees don't charge me if I buy one of their frisbees and then host an ultimate frisbee tournament. Know why? Because I already bought the frisbee; I don't need to pay twice so I can use it publicly. If it really had anything to do with maintaining the game, I might buy it, but it doesn't. Suppose Blizzard takes 10%. Then as per the guy above me, that's what, 300k? Chump change. That's about 5000 sales. When's the last time you heard of a game selling 5000 in a year and being successful? Exactly, because it's nothing. This has everything to do with Blizzard maintaining the power to basically blacklist any tournament it has a spat with. | ||
|
YipCraft
United States216 Posts
| ||
|
mrRoflpwn
United States2618 Posts
On January 16 2012 08:39 taLbuk wrote: the ignorance in this thread is astounding, i wish i could find the link to the sundance interview where he was asked about this and said himself that blizzard's liscencing is reasonable. haha I know. I hate to say it but as the community grows larger it is more and more frustrating to read these threads with uninformed comments on BOTH Teamliquid and Reddit... ah well as long as I can enjoy SC2 people can be as ignorant as they want. But for the OP.. this has been discussed to death- stop beating a dead horse by opening a new thread and just use the search function. Also its blizzards game- they have EVERY right to protect their intellectual property. after all- tournaments are making money from sc2, why should they not have to pay the developer who created the game in the first place. | ||
|
m4inbrain
1505 Posts
Mate, you have these "problems" with all kinds of mediums. Its a copywright-issue, nothing more. Btw, to prove you wrong: Look up a german tuning-company called "Brabus", and why they are not allowed to sell their (former) Mercedes as a Mercedes, but have to rename them. See the parallels? They bought a (lets say) a Mercdes SL500, but they have to sell them as Brabus SL. Why do they need to rename them? | ||
|
imjorman
United States580 Posts
On January 16 2012 10:08 Shiori wrote: This is a problem that essentially exists with no other medium, though. When I buy a USB drive, it's my USB drive. I don't buy a license to use the USB drive. Likewise, when I buy a copy of Sc2, I should be buying the data as-is for my own purposes (provided they are not illegal and I don't present the game as my own creation; I should be able to resell it, if I so wish) because I own the disc it is coded into. This notion that I can own the physical medium of a product without owning the "idea," and that this "idea" entitles the publisher to all sorts of extended rights is just one giant middle finger to the consumer. Blizzard can make an agreement that says I merely own a license to their program, but I'm pretty sure that, at least from an intuitive point of view, I actually do own my Sc2 CD. At best, Blizzard owns Battlenet and can govern my use of it. That said, as far as Blizzard is required to do anything, an MLG is equivalent to playing customs with your friends. It requires no additional effort from Blizzard, uses functions that are already built into the game which was already purchased. They have no grounds on which to demand more, much in the same way that the makers of frisbees don't charge me if I buy one of their frisbees and then host an ultimate frisbee tournament. Know why? Because I already bought the frisbee; I don't need to pay twice so I can use it publicly. If it really had anything to do with maintaining the game, I might buy it, but it doesn't. Suppose Blizzard takes 10%. Then as per the guy above me, that's what, 300k? Chump change. That's about 5000 sales. When's the last time you heard of a game selling 5000 in a year and being successful? Exactly, because it's nothing. This has everything to do with Blizzard maintaining the power to basically blacklist any tournament it has a spat with. I disagree with you on a lot of different levels here. Just because you "feel" entitled to be able to make money off of SC2 doesn't mean you actually are. The difference between Starcraft and the frisbee analogy you used was that when you purchased the frisbee you didn't agree to the condition that your frisbee usage was only for noncommercial uses. When you accepted the EULA, you agreed to it. If you don't like that, your more than allowed to return the game to the store and get your money back. | ||
| ||
