|
On February 27 2012 15:20 Alasper wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 10:31 Detrimentally wrote:On February 27 2012 10:29 Almonjin wrote: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. If by inferior product you are referring to the tournament that set the bar for production, then yes. Minus a few minor glitches lasting no more than 10 minutes over 80 hours of content, MLG > GSL > DreamHack > IPL > NASL. MLG>GSL? Good joke. More like GSL>DH>MLG>IPL.
Looks about right to me.
|
On February 27 2012 15:33 xrapture wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 15:32 Frankon wrote:On February 27 2012 15:21 darkscream wrote:
Meh, anyone who went to a barcraft can't talk shit about restreams. You spent your $20 getting drunk instead of paying for the game, so did I. You watched with about 50 people in a private venue, so did I. Someone paid for the video you watched, and someone paid for the video I watched. The only restream I could find that had 1000 people or more, was full commentary in russian. All the pure english restreams were ~100 or less, just like a barcraft would be.
So many people butthurt about esports, but honestly, Its not like those are lost sales - those are people who would never have bought it. A lot of people forget that a large portion of sc2 fans are people with maybe $20 leisure money for a week (that includes fast food, booze, movies, other SC2 leagues, etc).
Good on the people who paid, I hope the event financially was a success. You have failed in looking. One re-stream topped at 4.5k viewers. Still. I feel bad for people who paid for this arena. It looks like they get shafted like the gold members. MLG failed to deliver stable stream for the finals of day 3 (i know its twitch fault) and even couldn't secure the tight pay-wall. Not to mention that it failed at taking down re-streams. Streams from western Europe are impossible to take down.
Nope. the .tv domain is managed by American company (although it belongs to Tuval) and can be taken down by MLG.
Have you heard about operation "Operation Fake Sweep" during super-bowl when US goverment shut down the internet re-streamers by seizing their domains (possible to the fact that Tuval goverment employed a US based company to manage their country domain).
MLG just didn't try (or care)
|
Agree with the GSL>DH>MLG>IPL.
|
On February 27 2012 15:26 StarBrift wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 15:09 mvtaylor wrote:On February 27 2012 15:07 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:02 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:57 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:53 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:47 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:40 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:35 Femari wrote:
People are quick to forget that this is an addition to what MLG already did. They're not taking things you got for free prior to this away, they're adding more and saying "Hey, we're adding more and trying to grow, if you think it's worth the price then buy it, if not then have a good day and tune into the free events."
It was first and foremost an experiment to see if they can monetize the community to some point. I mean wouldn't you guys think it was awesome if all these leagues like MLG, GSL, IPL, IEM, etc were adding more things for you but kept their regular events free? If you can afford it you buy it. I bought a pass for MLG Arena and then I also went to a Barcraft for the finals. I know some people can't afford it but hey if you can and you think it's worth it then why not?
This wasn't ever going to turn every event into a PPV. I don't know why people thought that but this was going to happen at some point. MLG just tried it first. It was an experiment, it was successful, they're trying it again. Who knows it may be $15 next time. But it's not the end of the world. MLG is just trying to make everything self-sufficient. Its not that we think it was set in stone to be PPV always, but that any smart business will do so if it was a big success. If they got much higher numbers than even they expected than don't be surprised to see their Circuit to start being PPV only after a while. Except every tournament realizes if everyone goes PPV it cant be sustained since there isn't that much money the community is willing to spend. Competition would be fierce and only a few would survive. Which is exactly what i said a few pages back. Thats the deal though. If the company sees that it can make money this way than it will try. They may know that not every tournament can do it, but that is perfect for businesses. If they can monopolize or get close to it than they will make the majority of the money from the game. Its good for business but bad for SC2. I realize its stretching, but it is a logical path that this could go if the tools are there. If every company is dumb enough to make all their stuff PPV then only the strong deserve to survive. As many others have pointed out, UFC seems to be thriving just great off of PPV. If you can make money doing it, than do it. If MLG made a good profit, they will do it again and it is a slippery slope then. Yes they may lose their viewers, and if so they will go back to the old model. However, if they don't lose too many then it will be PPV always. Basically if they profit enough of of this arena, I don't think they would think twice about trying it with the circuit. You say that UFC is thriving and it may be economically. But it's miniscule in terms of viewership. That model works especially well for them because their product is really targeted at males from 18-40 or something like that. They're not looking to grab kids or laeger quantities of women because they know they can't with that kind of entertainment. Sc2 however does not restrict itself to young adult males. SC2 is utterly 100% mainly watched by young adult males. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=214457 My point was that the product itself does not cater to young men specifically. Young men is the majority of viewers (allthough your argument fall apart when you consider the vast ammount of teen guys that can't pay for PPV) but there is nothing in the actual game that is repellant to women (except maybe booth girls but they aren't abundant). UFC is based on fighting (something that almost only men enjoy watching) and they have such things as bikini babes as part of the entertainment. They have simply conceeded any oppurtunity to grow a female market. Sc2 may not be played by a lot of women but look into a crowd at MLG and I'll wager you'll see atleast 10% women which is good if you consider the enourmous skew of male to female players in the game. What I'm saying is that UFC targets a very specific type of people to buy their product. The sc2 scene is trying to grow and diversify and that also encompasses bringing in more women etc. If they were to add booth babes to every tournament most people would consider that a bad buissness move since they are alienating an untapped potential female fanbase (which has been proven to exist in brood war by the way). Why is it that the same type of limiting of the scene that removes any potential viewership from the lower socio economic buyer is percieved as a non-problem? Lastly TL does not represent the entirety of people that follow MLG or other sc2 events. Most casual viewers do not hang here at all and I would assume many of those are women.
Maybe in Sweden, but not at ALL in the United States. In the states, in general, woman are VERY turned off by video games. And the specific games they are turned off by? World of Warcraft and Starcraft. Arguably the two biggest antifemale games out there (to the majority, I do realize there are a decent # of woman WoW gamers). When girls think of "nerds" they think of WoW and SC, from my personal experience at least. I can't imagine women EVER making up a decent viewer base for SC2. Hell, they don't make a decent viewerbase for the majority of sports on TV (unless they're sitting with a male), why would SC2 be more likely?
Point is, SC2 is not marketable imo to females whatsoever, and it's futile to even try.
|
Watched like 2 seconds with the workaround on day3, but I'll torrent the HQ VoDs and watch the whole tournament later without knowing any results.
GSL>DH>HSC>IPL>MLG
User was banned for this post.
|
On February 27 2012 15:42 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 15:26 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:09 mvtaylor wrote:On February 27 2012 15:07 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:02 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:57 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:53 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:47 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:40 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:35 Femari wrote:
People are quick to forget that this is an addition to what MLG already did. They're not taking things you got for free prior to this away, they're adding more and saying "Hey, we're adding more and trying to grow, if you think it's worth the price then buy it, if not then have a good day and tune into the free events."
It was first and foremost an experiment to see if they can monetize the community to some point. I mean wouldn't you guys think it was awesome if all these leagues like MLG, GSL, IPL, IEM, etc were adding more things for you but kept their regular events free? If you can afford it you buy it. I bought a pass for MLG Arena and then I also went to a Barcraft for the finals. I know some people can't afford it but hey if you can and you think it's worth it then why not?
This wasn't ever going to turn every event into a PPV. I don't know why people thought that but this was going to happen at some point. MLG just tried it first. It was an experiment, it was successful, they're trying it again. Who knows it may be $15 next time. But it's not the end of the world. MLG is just trying to make everything self-sufficient. Its not that we think it was set in stone to be PPV always, but that any smart business will do so if it was a big success. If they got much higher numbers than even they expected than don't be surprised to see their Circuit to start being PPV only after a while. Except every tournament realizes if everyone goes PPV it cant be sustained since there isn't that much money the community is willing to spend. Competition would be fierce and only a few would survive. Which is exactly what i said a few pages back. Thats the deal though. If the company sees that it can make money this way than it will try. They may know that not every tournament can do it, but that is perfect for businesses. If they can monopolize or get close to it than they will make the majority of the money from the game. Its good for business but bad for SC2. I realize its stretching, but it is a logical path that this could go if the tools are there. If every company is dumb enough to make all their stuff PPV then only the strong deserve to survive. As many others have pointed out, UFC seems to be thriving just great off of PPV. If you can make money doing it, than do it. If MLG made a good profit, they will do it again and it is a slippery slope then. Yes they may lose their viewers, and if so they will go back to the old model. However, if they don't lose too many then it will be PPV always. Basically if they profit enough of of this arena, I don't think they would think twice about trying it with the circuit. You say that UFC is thriving and it may be economically. But it's miniscule in terms of viewership. That model works especially well for them because their product is really targeted at males from 18-40 or something like that. They're not looking to grab kids or laeger quantities of women because they know they can't with that kind of entertainment. Sc2 however does not restrict itself to young adult males. SC2 is utterly 100% mainly watched by young adult males. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=214457 My point was that the product itself does not cater to young men specifically. Young men is the majority of viewers (allthough your argument fall apart when you consider the vast ammount of teen guys that can't pay for PPV) but there is nothing in the actual game that is repellant to women (except maybe booth girls but they aren't abundant). UFC is based on fighting (something that almost only men enjoy watching) and they have such things as bikini babes as part of the entertainment. They have simply conceeded any oppurtunity to grow a female market. Sc2 may not be played by a lot of women but look into a crowd at MLG and I'll wager you'll see atleast 10% women which is good if you consider the enourmous skew of male to female players in the game. What I'm saying is that UFC targets a very specific type of people to buy their product. The sc2 scene is trying to grow and diversify and that also encompasses bringing in more women etc. If they were to add booth babes to every tournament most people would consider that a bad buissness move since they are alienating an untapped potential female fanbase (which has been proven to exist in brood war by the way). Why is it that the same type of limiting of the scene that removes any potential viewership from the lower socio economic buyer is percieved as a non-problem? Lastly TL does not represent the entirety of people that follow MLG or other sc2 events. Most casual viewers do not hang here at all and I would assume many of those are women. Maybe in Sweden, but not at ALL in the United States. In the states, in general, woman are VERY turned off by video games. And the specific games they are turned off by? World of Warcraft and Starcraft. Arguably the two biggest antifemale games out there (to the majority, I do realize there are a decent # of woman WoW gamers). When girls think of "nerds" they think of WoW and SC, from my personal experience at least. I can't imagine women EVER making up a decent viewer base for SC2. Hell, they don't make a decent viewerbase for the majority of sports on TV (unless they're sitting with a male), why would SC2 be more likely? Point is, SC2 is not marketable imo to females whatsoever, and it's futile to even try.
Did you ever stop to think that you surround yourselves with or trying to appeal to shallow women? I know a bunch of girls that has shown interest in gaming and sc2 has done a better job than most of bringing that to light.
The reason why women don't watch UFC is because it caters to the baser instincts of men only. The reason why not many women like gaming is because they labeled it as nerdy. There is nothing in the content itself that dissuades women from watching. Unless you mean to argue that competition itself is unattractive to women?
|
On February 27 2012 15:42 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 15:26 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:09 mvtaylor wrote:On February 27 2012 15:07 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:02 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:57 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:53 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:47 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:40 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:35 Femari wrote:
People are quick to forget that this is an addition to what MLG already did. They're not taking things you got for free prior to this away, they're adding more and saying "Hey, we're adding more and trying to grow, if you think it's worth the price then buy it, if not then have a good day and tune into the free events."
It was first and foremost an experiment to see if they can monetize the community to some point. I mean wouldn't you guys think it was awesome if all these leagues like MLG, GSL, IPL, IEM, etc were adding more things for you but kept their regular events free? If you can afford it you buy it. I bought a pass for MLG Arena and then I also went to a Barcraft for the finals. I know some people can't afford it but hey if you can and you think it's worth it then why not?
This wasn't ever going to turn every event into a PPV. I don't know why people thought that but this was going to happen at some point. MLG just tried it first. It was an experiment, it was successful, they're trying it again. Who knows it may be $15 next time. But it's not the end of the world. MLG is just trying to make everything self-sufficient. Its not that we think it was set in stone to be PPV always, but that any smart business will do so if it was a big success. If they got much higher numbers than even they expected than don't be surprised to see their Circuit to start being PPV only after a while. Except every tournament realizes if everyone goes PPV it cant be sustained since there isn't that much money the community is willing to spend. Competition would be fierce and only a few would survive. Which is exactly what i said a few pages back. Thats the deal though. If the company sees that it can make money this way than it will try. They may know that not every tournament can do it, but that is perfect for businesses. If they can monopolize or get close to it than they will make the majority of the money from the game. Its good for business but bad for SC2. I realize its stretching, but it is a logical path that this could go if the tools are there. If every company is dumb enough to make all their stuff PPV then only the strong deserve to survive. As many others have pointed out, UFC seems to be thriving just great off of PPV. If you can make money doing it, than do it. If MLG made a good profit, they will do it again and it is a slippery slope then. Yes they may lose their viewers, and if so they will go back to the old model. However, if they don't lose too many then it will be PPV always. Basically if they profit enough of of this arena, I don't think they would think twice about trying it with the circuit. You say that UFC is thriving and it may be economically. But it's miniscule in terms of viewership. That model works especially well for them because their product is really targeted at males from 18-40 or something like that. They're not looking to grab kids or laeger quantities of women because they know they can't with that kind of entertainment. Sc2 however does not restrict itself to young adult males. SC2 is utterly 100% mainly watched by young adult males. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=214457 My point was that the product itself does not cater to young men specifically. Young men is the majority of viewers (allthough your argument fall apart when you consider the vast ammount of teen guys that can't pay for PPV) but there is nothing in the actual game that is repellant to women (except maybe booth girls but they aren't abundant). UFC is based on fighting (something that almost only men enjoy watching) and they have such things as bikini babes as part of the entertainment. They have simply conceeded any oppurtunity to grow a female market. Sc2 may not be played by a lot of women but look into a crowd at MLG and I'll wager you'll see atleast 10% women which is good if you consider the enourmous skew of male to female players in the game. What I'm saying is that UFC targets a very specific type of people to buy their product. The sc2 scene is trying to grow and diversify and that also encompasses bringing in more women etc. If they were to add booth babes to every tournament most people would consider that a bad buissness move since they are alienating an untapped potential female fanbase (which has been proven to exist in brood war by the way). Why is it that the same type of limiting of the scene that removes any potential viewership from the lower socio economic buyer is percieved as a non-problem? Lastly TL does not represent the entirety of people that follow MLG or other sc2 events. Most casual viewers do not hang here at all and I would assume many of those are women. Maybe in Sweden, but not at ALL in the United States. In the states, in general, woman are VERY turned off by video games. And the specific games they are turned off by? World of Warcraft and Starcraft. Arguably the two biggest antifemale games out there (to the majority, I do realize there are a decent # of woman WoW gamers). When girls think of "nerds" they think of WoW and SC, from my personal experience at least. I can't imagine women EVER making up a decent viewer base for SC2. Hell, they don't make a decent viewerbase for the majority of sports on TV (unless they're sitting with a male), why would SC2 be more likely? Point is, SC2 is not marketable imo to females whatsoever, and it's futile to even try.
About 30% of the crowd at the barcraft I went to was female.
Yep they couldn't STAND being around NERDs and watching NERD games being played by NERDs. I don't know what kind of community you live in but it's not uncommon for women so be gamers...
|
Given the fact that they chose to not even provide a free low-quality stream, I felt like they did not deserve my money. If there were a free stream, I would have considered paying the $20 to watch in higher quality.
|
No Barcraft around here, not friends that watch sc2, no creditcard any sort of acount........God bless the restim 
|
can't believe people were foolish enough to pay just watch a resteam it's 2012 people. Thanks Sweden
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On February 27 2012 15:20 Alasper wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 10:31 Detrimentally wrote:On February 27 2012 10:29 Almonjin wrote: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. If by inferior product you are referring to the tournament that set the bar for production, then yes. Minus a few minor glitches lasting no more than 10 minutes over 80 hours of content, MLG > GSL > DreamHack > IPL > NASL. MLG>GSL? Good joke. More like GSL>DH>MLG>IPL.
•Stream wise: DH>GSL>IPL>NASL>MLG
•Production wise (gimmicks, fillers, etc): GSL/MLG>DH>IPL>NASL
•Content wise (Player pools, Quality of games, etc): GSL>MLG>IPL/DH/NASL; IMO, this MLG is the second most stacked foreign tournament in terms of players lineup skill wise (first goes to Providence), plus we have the storyline of Foreigner vs Korean.
|
Didn't pay and didn't watch it. Instead I saw Assembly Winter which showed me a Stephano in fantastic shape. And I also watched some random LoL/random sc2 streams from time to time.
|
Certainly paid for and enjoyed the tournament. The best produced tournament outside the GSL by far. Those who watched restreams should feel remorse for not showing their appreciation for how good of a product it was.
|
On February 27 2012 15:48 DoomBacon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 15:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On February 27 2012 15:26 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:09 mvtaylor wrote:On February 27 2012 15:07 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:02 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:57 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:53 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:47 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:40 Ghost.573 wrote:
[quote]
Its not that we think it was set in stone to be PPV always, but that any smart business will do so if it was a big success. If they got much higher numbers than even they expected than don't be surprised to see their Circuit to start being PPV only after a while. Except every tournament realizes if everyone goes PPV it cant be sustained since there isn't that much money the community is willing to spend. Competition would be fierce and only a few would survive. Which is exactly what i said a few pages back. Thats the deal though. If the company sees that it can make money this way than it will try. They may know that not every tournament can do it, but that is perfect for businesses. If they can monopolize or get close to it than they will make the majority of the money from the game. Its good for business but bad for SC2. I realize its stretching, but it is a logical path that this could go if the tools are there. If every company is dumb enough to make all their stuff PPV then only the strong deserve to survive. As many others have pointed out, UFC seems to be thriving just great off of PPV. If you can make money doing it, than do it. If MLG made a good profit, they will do it again and it is a slippery slope then. Yes they may lose their viewers, and if so they will go back to the old model. However, if they don't lose too many then it will be PPV always. Basically if they profit enough of of this arena, I don't think they would think twice about trying it with the circuit. You say that UFC is thriving and it may be economically. But it's miniscule in terms of viewership. That model works especially well for them because their product is really targeted at males from 18-40 or something like that. They're not looking to grab kids or laeger quantities of women because they know they can't with that kind of entertainment. Sc2 however does not restrict itself to young adult males. SC2 is utterly 100% mainly watched by young adult males. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=214457 My point was that the product itself does not cater to young men specifically. Young men is the majority of viewers (allthough your argument fall apart when you consider the vast ammount of teen guys that can't pay for PPV) but there is nothing in the actual game that is repellant to women (except maybe booth girls but they aren't abundant). UFC is based on fighting (something that almost only men enjoy watching) and they have such things as bikini babes as part of the entertainment. They have simply conceeded any oppurtunity to grow a female market. Sc2 may not be played by a lot of women but look into a crowd at MLG and I'll wager you'll see atleast 10% women which is good if you consider the enourmous skew of male to female players in the game. What I'm saying is that UFC targets a very specific type of people to buy their product. The sc2 scene is trying to grow and diversify and that also encompasses bringing in more women etc. If they were to add booth babes to every tournament most people would consider that a bad buissness move since they are alienating an untapped potential female fanbase (which has been proven to exist in brood war by the way). Why is it that the same type of limiting of the scene that removes any potential viewership from the lower socio economic buyer is percieved as a non-problem? Lastly TL does not represent the entirety of people that follow MLG or other sc2 events. Most casual viewers do not hang here at all and I would assume many of those are women. Maybe in Sweden, but not at ALL in the United States. In the states, in general, woman are VERY turned off by video games. And the specific games they are turned off by? World of Warcraft and Starcraft. Arguably the two biggest antifemale games out there (to the majority, I do realize there are a decent # of woman WoW gamers). When girls think of "nerds" they think of WoW and SC, from my personal experience at least. I can't imagine women EVER making up a decent viewer base for SC2. Hell, they don't make a decent viewerbase for the majority of sports on TV (unless they're sitting with a male), why would SC2 be more likely? Point is, SC2 is not marketable imo to females whatsoever, and it's futile to even try. About 30% of the crowd at the barcraft I went to was female. Yep they couldn't STAND being around NERDs and watching NERD games being played by NERDs. I don't know what kind of community you live in but it's not uncommon for women so be gamers...
Where is it common for women to be gamers? Because it's damn sure not here on TL.net. Nor is it anywhere I've been. Went to high school in a place predominately white/wealthy, and now go to college in one of the most Asian universities out there (UCI). Neither has any substantial gaming population. Neither has girls significantly into gaming, from what I've seen at the clubs/facebook groups/barcrafts/MLG Anaheim attended.
Would anyone here actually bring up Starcraft if hitting on a woman at a bar, or bring it up on a first date? Guys will generally brag about being on the men's swimming team, but I've never once in my life heard of a guy bragging to a girl he just met about being super good at Starcraft. An exception might be a progamer. But if you're just "really good" aka high masters/GM status but nothing more, please, even I'd personally laugh at a guy doing that.
Well, that's the kind of community I live in. Not sure where the hell you are.
Your seemingly random capitalization of the word "nerds" is also retarded.
On February 27 2012 15:48 StarBrift wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 15:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On February 27 2012 15:26 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:09 mvtaylor wrote:On February 27 2012 15:07 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:02 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:57 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:53 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:47 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:40 Ghost.573 wrote:
[quote]
Its not that we think it was set in stone to be PPV always, but that any smart business will do so if it was a big success. If they got much higher numbers than even they expected than don't be surprised to see their Circuit to start being PPV only after a while. Except every tournament realizes if everyone goes PPV it cant be sustained since there isn't that much money the community is willing to spend. Competition would be fierce and only a few would survive. Which is exactly what i said a few pages back. Thats the deal though. If the company sees that it can make money this way than it will try. They may know that not every tournament can do it, but that is perfect for businesses. If they can monopolize or get close to it than they will make the majority of the money from the game. Its good for business but bad for SC2. I realize its stretching, but it is a logical path that this could go if the tools are there. If every company is dumb enough to make all their stuff PPV then only the strong deserve to survive. As many others have pointed out, UFC seems to be thriving just great off of PPV. If you can make money doing it, than do it. If MLG made a good profit, they will do it again and it is a slippery slope then. Yes they may lose their viewers, and if so they will go back to the old model. However, if they don't lose too many then it will be PPV always. Basically if they profit enough of of this arena, I don't think they would think twice about trying it with the circuit. You say that UFC is thriving and it may be economically. But it's miniscule in terms of viewership. That model works especially well for them because their product is really targeted at males from 18-40 or something like that. They're not looking to grab kids or laeger quantities of women because they know they can't with that kind of entertainment. Sc2 however does not restrict itself to young adult males. SC2 is utterly 100% mainly watched by young adult males. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=214457 My point was that the product itself does not cater to young men specifically. Young men is the majority of viewers (allthough your argument fall apart when you consider the vast ammount of teen guys that can't pay for PPV) but there is nothing in the actual game that is repellant to women (except maybe booth girls but they aren't abundant). UFC is based on fighting (something that almost only men enjoy watching) and they have such things as bikini babes as part of the entertainment. They have simply conceeded any oppurtunity to grow a female market. Sc2 may not be played by a lot of women but look into a crowd at MLG and I'll wager you'll see atleast 10% women which is good if you consider the enourmous skew of male to female players in the game. What I'm saying is that UFC targets a very specific type of people to buy their product. The sc2 scene is trying to grow and diversify and that also encompasses bringing in more women etc. If they were to add booth babes to every tournament most people would consider that a bad buissness move since they are alienating an untapped potential female fanbase (which has been proven to exist in brood war by the way). Why is it that the same type of limiting of the scene that removes any potential viewership from the lower socio economic buyer is percieved as a non-problem? Lastly TL does not represent the entirety of people that follow MLG or other sc2 events. Most casual viewers do not hang here at all and I would assume many of those are women. Maybe in Sweden, but not at ALL in the United States. In the states, in general, woman are VERY turned off by video games. And the specific games they are turned off by? World of Warcraft and Starcraft. Arguably the two biggest antifemale games out there (to the majority, I do realize there are a decent # of woman WoW gamers). When girls think of "nerds" they think of WoW and SC, from my personal experience at least. I can't imagine women EVER making up a decent viewer base for SC2. Hell, they don't make a decent viewerbase for the majority of sports on TV (unless they're sitting with a male), why would SC2 be more likely? Point is, SC2 is not marketable imo to females whatsoever, and it's futile to even try. Did you ever stop to think that you surround yourselves with or trying to appeal to shallow women? I know a bunch of girls that has shown interest in gaming and sc2 has done a better job than most of bringing that to light. The reason why women don't watch UFC is because it caters to the baser instincts of men only. The reason why not many women like gaming is because they labeled it as nerdy. There is nothing in the content itself that dissuades women from watching. Unless you mean to argue that competition itself is unattractive to women?
Women generally are shallow yes. Pity is, I am too to an extent. Who doesn't want a pretty woman? Of course, looks aren't everything. But they're something. At local gaming communities, generally only the really trollish ones actually show up and play T_T. And even then, it's an absolute minimal amount. And no, my standards aren't super high by any means....  .
Regardless, besides saying that in general, competition DOES seem less attractive to women than men, we've had years upon years to witness that women are not into video games NOR generally that interested in Sci Fi/Fantasy, at least when compared to their male counterparts. If by some means we were going to introduce gaming to women, it sure as hell shouldn't be through a super complex, intricate game like SC2 that involves tons of different units, tons of different maps, and a game based on friggin' war and killing the other side. If you could ask me, you'd have to introduce girls to gaming through games like Zelda or Oblivion, but what do I know, by ex gf only played The Sims... sparingly.
|
its to bad I couldn't watch the stream, however the live update thread on the main page of TL kept it pretty exciting once i got cut off from the free time offered by mlg. On a side note it was a shame there was no live audience at this mlg.
To be perfectly honest the temptation to watch it almost made me go to a re-stream. But e-sports must grow! I'll have to scrap together some cash for the next one.
|
With no free stream I think they are just being greedy and do not deserve my 20, watched 1 or 2 games (worked without the privacy thing for me oddly enough, and no it wasnt the free games) and tbh with the amount of lags and shit I'm glad I did not pay.
|
On February 27 2012 15:39 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 15:33 xrapture wrote:On February 27 2012 15:32 Frankon wrote:On February 27 2012 15:21 darkscream wrote:
Meh, anyone who went to a barcraft can't talk shit about restreams. You spent your $20 getting drunk instead of paying for the game, so did I. You watched with about 50 people in a private venue, so did I. Someone paid for the video you watched, and someone paid for the video I watched. The only restream I could find that had 1000 people or more, was full commentary in russian. All the pure english restreams were ~100 or less, just like a barcraft would be.
So many people butthurt about esports, but honestly, Its not like those are lost sales - those are people who would never have bought it. A lot of people forget that a large portion of sc2 fans are people with maybe $20 leisure money for a week (that includes fast food, booze, movies, other SC2 leagues, etc).
Good on the people who paid, I hope the event financially was a success. You have failed in looking. One re-stream topped at 4.5k viewers. Still. I feel bad for people who paid for this arena. It looks like they get shafted like the gold members. MLG failed to deliver stable stream for the finals of day 3 (i know its twitch fault) and even couldn't secure the tight pay-wall. Not to mention that it failed at taking down re-streams. Streams from western Europe are impossible to take down. Nope. the .tv domain is managed by American company (although it belongs to Tuval) and can be taken down by MLG. Have you heard about operation "Operation Fake Sweep" during super-bowl when US goverment shut down the internet re-streamers by seizing their domains (possible to the fact that Tuval goverment employed a US based company to manage their country domain). MLG just didn't try (or care)
what about a particular .ru site that had over 4000 viewers?
|
tbh I don't mind that they had no free stream. While I prefer it I think that MLG has done well enough that enough people would buy it. The price however is far, far, far too expensive.
Seriously with the competition they had trough free streams and assembly I wasn't even tempted to pay 20bucks. Sure it's 30-somewhat hours but who can watch all of it. In my opinion comparing it to UFC is a bit off as well since the target audience is different (SC2 is junger and I doubt that making the ticket 20 instead of say 10 bucks payed off).
|
On February 27 2012 16:19 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 15:48 DoomBacon wrote:On February 27 2012 15:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On February 27 2012 15:26 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:09 mvtaylor wrote:On February 27 2012 15:07 StarBrift wrote:On February 27 2012 15:02 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:57 jmbthirteen wrote:On February 27 2012 14:53 Ghost.573 wrote:On February 27 2012 14:47 jmbthirteen wrote:
[quote]
Except every tournament realizes if everyone goes PPV it cant be sustained since there isn't that much money the community is willing to spend. Competition would be fierce and only a few would survive. Which is exactly what i said a few pages back. Thats the deal though. If the company sees that it can make money this way than it will try. They may know that not every tournament can do it, but that is perfect for businesses. If they can monopolize or get close to it than they will make the majority of the money from the game. Its good for business but bad for SC2. I realize its stretching, but it is a logical path that this could go if the tools are there. If every company is dumb enough to make all their stuff PPV then only the strong deserve to survive. As many others have pointed out, UFC seems to be thriving just great off of PPV. If you can make money doing it, than do it. If MLG made a good profit, they will do it again and it is a slippery slope then. Yes they may lose their viewers, and if so they will go back to the old model. However, if they don't lose too many then it will be PPV always. Basically if they profit enough of of this arena, I don't think they would think twice about trying it with the circuit. You say that UFC is thriving and it may be economically. But it's miniscule in terms of viewership. That model works especially well for them because their product is really targeted at males from 18-40 or something like that. They're not looking to grab kids or laeger quantities of women because they know they can't with that kind of entertainment. Sc2 however does not restrict itself to young adult males. SC2 is utterly 100% mainly watched by young adult males. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=214457 My point was that the product itself does not cater to young men specifically. Young men is the majority of viewers (allthough your argument fall apart when you consider the vast ammount of teen guys that can't pay for PPV) but there is nothing in the actual game that is repellant to women (except maybe booth girls but they aren't abundant). UFC is based on fighting (something that almost only men enjoy watching) and they have such things as bikini babes as part of the entertainment. They have simply conceeded any oppurtunity to grow a female market. Sc2 may not be played by a lot of women but look into a crowd at MLG and I'll wager you'll see atleast 10% women which is good if you consider the enourmous skew of male to female players in the game. What I'm saying is that UFC targets a very specific type of people to buy their product. The sc2 scene is trying to grow and diversify and that also encompasses bringing in more women etc. If they were to add booth babes to every tournament most people would consider that a bad buissness move since they are alienating an untapped potential female fanbase (which has been proven to exist in brood war by the way). Why is it that the same type of limiting of the scene that removes any potential viewership from the lower socio economic buyer is percieved as a non-problem? Lastly TL does not represent the entirety of people that follow MLG or other sc2 events. Most casual viewers do not hang here at all and I would assume many of those are women. Maybe in Sweden, but not at ALL in the United States. In the states, in general, woman are VERY turned off by video games. And the specific games they are turned off by? World of Warcraft and Starcraft. Arguably the two biggest antifemale games out there (to the majority, I do realize there are a decent # of woman WoW gamers). When girls think of "nerds" they think of WoW and SC, from my personal experience at least. I can't imagine women EVER making up a decent viewer base for SC2. Hell, they don't make a decent viewerbase for the majority of sports on TV (unless they're sitting with a male), why would SC2 be more likely? Point is, SC2 is not marketable imo to females whatsoever, and it's futile to even try. About 30% of the crowd at the barcraft I went to was female. Yep they couldn't STAND being around NERDs and watching NERD games being played by NERDs. I don't know what kind of community you live in but it's not uncommon for women so be gamers... Where is it common for women to be gamers? Because it's damn sure not here on TL.net. Nor is it anywhere I've been. Went to high school in a place predominately white/wealthy, and now go to college in one of the most Asian universities out there (UCI). Neither has any substantial gaming population. Neither has girls significantly into gaming, from what I've seen at the clubs/facebook groups/barcrafts/MLG Anaheim attended. Would anyone here actually bring up Starcraft if hitting on a woman at a bar, or bring it up on a first date? Guys will generally brag about being on the men's swimming team, but I've never once in my life heard of a guy bragging to a girl he just met about being super good at Starcraft. An exception might be a progamer. But if you're just "really good" aka high masters/GM status but nothing more, please, even I'd personally laugh at a guy doing that. Well, that's the kind of community I live in. Not sure where the hell you are. Your seemingly random capitalization of the word "nerds" is also retarded.
If I'm just really good at basketball (ie not on a team of some sorts) I'm not bringing it up when i'm hitting on chicks. "Oh yeah, I'm the third highest scorer on my YMCA basketball team" isn't working with the ladies any more than "I'm a masters sc2 player"
|
I just watched on majorleaguegaming.com/live without any kind of workaround and it worked.... They really fucked up that paywall
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
