|
On February 27 2012 11:19 esotericc wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 11:18 OneOddOrange wrote:On February 27 2012 11:15 MajorityofOne wrote:On February 27 2012 11:09 OneOddOrange wrote:On February 27 2012 11:03 allerion wrote:On February 27 2012 10:58 lachy89 wrote:They flew every player over and paid for full accommodation and food...
So the only way MLG can think of to get good games is to pay people to go to their tournaments? It hurts my head to think that nobody could come up with a better way to get good players to want to go to their tournaments. No it's called helping teams not have too pay for flights, which in term means they have more money for other things which helps esports. When the fuck did so many people devolepe such a huge entitlement complex, the fact is somethings you have too pay for and thats how it works... You do have to pay for some things, but there is a near-infinite amount of free SC2 content available. MLG will never be able to compete with "free". It's like if somebody tried to open a version of Facebook that required you pay a monthly fee. I don't feel entitled to free Starcraft, but I'm not going to pay so long as it exists unless the step up in quality is exceptional. Yeah that's fine if you don't want to pay don't I didn't but don't steal their product... Stealing implies you are taking something from them, if you weren't going to pay in the first place they lose nothing by having you watch the games for free anyway, if people didn't pay because it could be done for free then that is stealing but I doubt this is the case for 95% of people because of how unreliable getting it free seemed to be. http://www.gameproducer.net/images/piracyisnottheft.jpg If you have ever downloaded a song/movie/book you are just as bad as anyone watching a free stream.
I don't pirate either I just don't buy it if I can't afford it and save up till I can get what I want.
|
Stealing implies you are taking something from them, if you weren't going to pay in the first place they lose nothing by having you watch the games for free anyway, if people didn't pay because it could be done for free then that is stealing but I doubt this is the case for 95% of people because of how unreliable getting it free seemed to be.
You are taking something they are offering for a price, and not paying it. How much clearer does a definition of theivery need to be? If you felt it was not worth your money to watch, why was it still worth your time? More importantly, what right do you have to take something for free when honest people have to pay?
Don't try to dress things up with an argument that it's not stealing becuase you weren't going to buy it anyway, becuase you still saw fit to actually consume the content, but just not pay for it.
Imagine using that argument for stealing Cable TV. "I wasn't going to pay for it anyway, so it's okay I used a workaround to get it for free. I'm not stealing anything." It just doesn't pan out well. At the end of the day if you worked around to watch for free you took something that you were not supposed to have.
|
On February 27 2012 11:21 dsousa wrote:
20% of TL's bought it so far.... so if 10% of overall bought it
100k viewers in typical MLG * 10% sell through yields,
10k sales @ $20 = $200,000 in revenue
estimated 10k packages sold
And before the event it was at around 10% or less. My guess is 1. People came directly from the MLG stream back to TL and found this poll and 2. Everyone who watched restreams/used the cookie-thingy voted that they paid for it because of... shame or something.
|
Really people should not be angry at the people who watched MLG for free due to the cookie bug. It was MLGs own damn fault their system didn't work. It does suck for people like me who payed and I certainly hope MLG makes up for this somehow.
But its MLGs fault they didn't lock the door and people could "sneak in" and watch for free.Starcraft isn't some kind of basic necessity though so I don't know why some people act as if it was their right to be able to watch it for free though... especially since as many of you have said there is tons of free content so no need to try to cheat MLgs moronic system
|
lol @ all the suckers who paid while i watched everything in glorious 1080p with adblock
User was banned for this post.
|
On February 27 2012 11:23 battyone wrote:Show nested quote +
Stealing implies you are taking something from them, if you weren't going to pay in the first place they lose nothing by having you watch the games for free anyway, if people didn't pay because it could be done for free then that is stealing but I doubt this is the case for 95% of people because of how unreliable getting it free seemed to be.
You are taking something they are offering for a price, and not paying it. How much clearer does a definition of theivery need to be? If you felt it was not worth your money to watch, why was it still worth your time? More importantly, what right do you have to take something for free when honest people have to pay? Don't try to dress things up with an argument that it's not stealing becuase you weren't going to buy it anyway, becuase you still saw fit to actually consume the content, but just not pay for it. Imagine using that argument for stealing Cable TV. "I wasn't going to pay for it anyway, so it's okay I used a workaround to get it for free. I'm not stealing anything." It just doesn't pan out well. At the end of the day if you worked around to watch for free you took something that you were not supposed to have.
They are literally broadcasting a signal that you are simply reading. That's not stealing.
MLG is not enforcing well enough who them deliver their product to. You cannot throw food at people, and then complain if they eat it. Turning off cookies, or having them already turned off, is not a barrier large enough for anything to be considered theft.
As for restreams, the re-streamer is committing a crime, but the viewer is simply watching a free stream from a valid url.
Perhaps the ISP are committing a crime, but the consumer is protected :D
SAFE!
|
On February 27 2012 10:29 Almonjin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 10:26 Detrimentally wrote:
Fuck all of the people that worked around the paywall. You're a corporate shill, and its you that is killing esports by swallowing an inferior product and paying for it.
Nope. If you paid for it and watch it, you are supporting one model of esports, and you are not a "corporate shill." You are someone who is saying that you are willing to pay money to for content you like -- content that is not possible without a large investment. MLG may be the biggest "corporate" entity in E-Sports, but that is still pretty small (almost grassroots in comparison to mainstream media). If you paid, and you believe you got your money's worth, you have a right to be mad at the people who unethically got the same product for free. And you can have plenty of integrity.
If you don't pay and don't watch it, but you watched assembly, or you told MLG why you weren't paying, you are supporting another model of esports and you also can have integrity.
If you didn't pay and watched it for free, you aren't supporting anything. You are an entitled, selfish, childish little worm.
I didn't pay and I didn't watch and I told MLG that they were charging too much. But I applaud everyone who did pay and watch and enjoyed it. Good for them -- they helped pay for a tournament that had almost all of the world's top players gathered in one building outside of S. Korea.
It's not "Pay" vs "Not Pay" -- It's "Are there enough people out there willing to pay $20 to watch a weekend of SC2 to allow MLG to profit?" I don't think there are -- I think ultimately this model loses out to the "freemium" model. But MLG took a big gamble, invested a ton of money to put on what I hear was a great tournament, and people want to trash MLG for it's "greed." It's ridiculous.
The money to grow the sport has to come from somewhere. If "freemium" is actually a viable model, it will beat out "pay per view." OR, both products will appeal to separate consumers -- that would also be great. MLG crunched the numbers and did not feel like they were going to profit on this specific event if they used the "freemium" model. Instead of saying, "You know what, we can keep doing the same things and hope it works out," MLG said, "How about we try to put on a weekend tournament with over a hundred of the highest tier players in the world, and see of people are willing to pay for it." It's not greed, it's investment and innovation.
tl;dr -- pay for MLG: Good. don't pay, don't watch, tell MLG why: Good. Don't pay, watch: Bad. Don't pay, flame on people who do pay: Dumb.
|
In all honesty, first day I looked for restreams, found one but didn't wanted to pay because it started at midnight. So I watched the first free hour, then watched a restream for another hour, then went to bed.
I found the stream interface very nice and the tournament itself pretty good too, so I was decided to pay.
Yesterday I opened the stream (started at 7pm), expecting to have the paywall activate after one hour and to pay, but it never activated and I watched most of it before going to bed.
Today I was again willing to pay, but it lagged so much that even 240p was unwatchable (it was the same problem nasl had during season one, perfect stream during interviews or off game content, then one frozen image every 30 seconds), so I followed the LR thread, listening like it was a radio show.
Overall good stuff, I'll pay next time I think.
|
Initially I felt like many others that the 20$ price was too high for a tournament. Basically had it been 10$ I would had bought it instantly though. But I ended up paying anyway because my weekend plans got canceled and I felt bored and lonely and thought that filling my evenings with MLG would cheer me up.
And boy am I happy that I did, in retrospect after seeing all of the production improvements that have been made I now feel that the 20$ price was actually worth it. The multi screen interface, the ease with which to switch between different streams and the ability to see far more games than in previous MLG's along with the fact that it was easier to keep track of which games were on or which were about to be on.
All in all I would say that 20$ would had been to expensive for previous MLG's with that production but for this it was worth it. I will definitely buy again next time.
|
On February 27 2012 11:23 battyone wrote:Show nested quote +
Stealing implies you are taking something from them, if you weren't going to pay in the first place they lose nothing by having you watch the games for free anyway, if people didn't pay because it could be done for free then that is stealing but I doubt this is the case for 95% of people because of how unreliable getting it free seemed to be.
You are taking something they are offering for a price, and not paying it. How much clearer does a definition of theivery need to be? If you felt it was not worth your money to watch, why was it still worth your time? More importantly, what right do you have to take something for free when honest people have to pay? Don't try to dress things up with an argument that it's not stealing becuase you weren't going to buy it anyway, becuase you still saw fit to actually consume the content, but just not pay for it. Imagine using that argument for stealing Cable TV. "I wasn't going to pay for it anyway, so it's okay I used a workaround to get it for free. I'm not stealing anything." It just doesn't pan out well. At the end of the day if you worked around to watch for free you took something that you were not supposed to have.
I wanted to watch it and felt it was worth my time but I didn't want to support the pay model and felt 20$ was too high, I wasn't going to watch but I heard it was buggy and free on reddit, went there, got free streams, decided to stay and watch.
Not my fault twitch didn't account for no script and adblock, two common place browser add ons.
They are literally broadcasting a signal that you are simply reading. That's not stealing.
MLG is not enforcing well enough who them deliver their product to. You cannot throw food at people, and then complain if they eat it.
Exactly what this man just said.
|
Watched through restream oo
|
Being from Australia with the time zone difference I don't feel it is worth the money.
I will not pay MLG to watch their games when I miss out on Championship Sunday considering for me it is "Championship Monday Morning!" and I'm at work.
If I was from the US I might feel differently.
|
On February 27 2012 11:25 dsousa wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 11:23 battyone wrote:
Stealing implies you are taking something from them, if you weren't going to pay in the first place they lose nothing by having you watch the games for free anyway, if people didn't pay because it could be done for free then that is stealing but I doubt this is the case for 95% of people because of how unreliable getting it free seemed to be.
You are taking something they are offering for a price, and not paying it. How much clearer does a definition of theivery need to be? If you felt it was not worth your money to watch, why was it still worth your time? More importantly, what right do you have to take something for free when honest people have to pay? Don't try to dress things up with an argument that it's not stealing becuase you weren't going to buy it anyway, becuase you still saw fit to actually consume the content, but just not pay for it. Imagine using that argument for stealing Cable TV. "I wasn't going to pay for it anyway, so it's okay I used a workaround to get it for free. I'm not stealing anything." It just doesn't pan out well. At the end of the day if you worked around to watch for free you took something that you were not supposed to have. They are literally broadcasting a signal that you are simply reading. That's not stealing. MLG is not enforcing well enough who them deliver their product to. You cannot throw food at people, and then complain if they eat it.
piracy is stealing, so is watching restreams. Heck even I download movies/songs/etc and I know its stealing, but don't try to justify yourself into thinking its not.
|
On February 27 2012 11:25 ZMTFoxdiE wrote:
lol @ all the suckers who paid while i watched everything in glorious 1080p with adblock
suckers? i happily paid my $20, not only did I think it was worth it, but I am happy to support MLG because I want to see more of these Arenas.
|
It was great, I'd definitely pay $20 (I paid 15) to see a 3 day tournament like this again.
|
On February 27 2012 11:27 jmbthirteen wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 11:25 ZMTFoxdiE wrote:
lol @ all the suckers who paid while i watched everything in glorious 1080p with adblock suckers? i happily paid my $20, not only did I think it was worth it, but I am happy to support MLG because I want to see more of these Arenas.
Exactly, so many poor kids who don't understand that if we don't pay, MLG dies. Hell, it could very well die anyway.
I'm pretty sure the majority of the SC2 community is smart enough to figure out how to watch it for free if they wanted to....
|
On February 27 2012 11:18 OneOddOrange wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 11:15 MajorityofOne wrote:On February 27 2012 11:09 OneOddOrange wrote:On February 27 2012 11:03 allerion wrote:On February 27 2012 10:58 lachy89 wrote:They flew every player over and paid for full accommodation and food...
So the only way MLG can think of to get good games is to pay people to go to their tournaments? It hurts my head to think that nobody could come up with a better way to get good players to want to go to their tournaments. No it's called helping teams not have too pay for flights, which in term means they have more money for other things which helps esports. When the fuck did so many people devolepe such a huge entitlement complex, the fact is somethings you have too pay for and thats how it works... You do have to pay for some things, but there is a near-infinite amount of free SC2 content available. MLG will never be able to compete with "free". It's like if somebody tried to open a version of Facebook that required you pay a monthly fee. I don't feel entitled to free Starcraft, but I'm not going to pay so long as it exists unless the step up in quality is exceptional. Yeah that's fine if you don't want to pay don't I didn't but don't steal their product...
Learn what stealing is and then come back. Because for the majority of cases they are not stealing by any form of real definition of the term, at all.
|
On February 27 2012 11:20 FeyFey wrote:
I wonder if mlg didn't tested their blocker ... the standard setup on alot of browser skipped their blocker. But its scary how many people found it okay to steal just because of that, but karma will repay them anyway.
Just hope mlg is more careful next time. Its not good to upset paying customers and you have to give them free cookies if you mess up.
It is a crime, sure, but it isn't actually theft. Nothing is being taken from MLG as an organization, and economics will tell us that most of the illegal viewers were not going to pay regardless.
To the complainers -> The majority of individuals did not feel the content warranted a $20 price. Whether they chose to ignore the event or use a restream is irrelevant, they weren't going to pay and MLG isn't going to ever get their money.
The problem is with this as a business model, MLG is charging $20 for an event which does not offer a large prize pool and which is, for all intents and purposes, of lower quality as compared to the GSL.
All expenses paid for participants is an admirable goal, but it also needs to be a sustainable one. If MLG can't generate this without absurdly expensive PPV costs, or ad revenue, then they need to rethink their business model.
The issue is first and foremost with viewers. They need more than 80,000 viewers on a free stream to turn a profit, they need more than 8,000 PPV customers who will shrink as time goes on.
Trying to extort $20 per event from a relatively poor demographic is not the solution.
|
On February 27 2012 11:25 ZMTFoxdiE wrote:
lol @ all the suckers who paid while i watched everything in glorious 1080p with adblock
Enjoy being a parasite.
|
I paid up the $20.. Not because I wanted to support MLG, or that "SAVE TEH ESPORTS!" bullshit. I paid up because the line up was sick, and I couldn't face not seeing it. (And I'm not the type of person to watch a pirated restream.)
Overall I was happy with my purchase, I got to see great games, decent casters and my main man MKP win. The stream drop and lag in the final was shitty, but not shitty enough to dull the experience.
As for future PPVs.... I'll pay up depending on how infrequent they are, how much they cost and which players are at them. If we get only a few a year, that is alright.
As for my opinion on the PPV model? I'm not a fan at all. It's not a model that sits well with me, it doesn't promote growth of viewership and can actually turn fans away.
End of the day I'm a fan, if there are good games to watch, I'll freakin' watch them... Legitimately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
