|
On May 17 2012 09:07 m0ck wrote:
While GOM deserves to get beat up over the Naniwa-MLG-incident, for Kespa and MLG to be able to limit players from participating in tournaments serves no-one but the organizers. This is a really unhealthy and unnecessary development and apparently is a reflection of the corporate warfare between IPL and MLG (and of course, the power of Kespa). Stupid, stupid, stupid.
For the sake of the freedom of the players, for the sake of a lively, dynamic scene of differing tournament organizers, for the sake of diversifying power and control, this development should be looked upon very critically.
This is insanely fucking stupid to limit what events a player can play at. I still think there are bitter feelings over IPL after they announced dirt cheap viewing rates.
I'm assuming MLG's PPV got terrible results. There's really no incentive for people to pay when it's essentially the exact same players that we watch weekly on GSL. You limit these new KESPA players to exclusive events and suddenly people are going to have to tune into their PPV to watch them.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On May 17 2012 08:26 Embir wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2012 08:07 Primadog wrote:
Only sundance can make a monopoly look so good. What? It is a load of crap - the same corporationism and desire to total domination and monopol bullshit. I like decentralized structure of SC2 - that there are a lot of clans, communities and small tournaments. It is easy to arrange and do a tournament. In fact players can be very independent and still earn a solid amount of money. Of course it is not a good situation for big molochs like Kespa or MLG. Tournaments and players outside their structures make them earn less money. For example why should I pay for MLG Arena if there is probably a few more tournaments with probably evenly fun and dramatic matches - even if participants are not exactly on par. So yes, the current decentralized state of SC2 is the best state for me.
I like decentralized structure of SC2 - that there are a lot of clans, communities and small tournaments.
I honestly don’t understand why people at this point in time think this is OK.
Imagine what joke soccer would be if there was no Fifa, no leagues and no championships and instead teams would just randomly fly around and participate in various random tournaments.
There is actually a small chance that SC2 drops the shitty "e-sports" tag and actually becomes a sport like BW was in Korea, but for that you need a head and a body, an organized appearance that will pass to outsiders the image that this is actually a legit thing and not just kids flying around participating in miscellaneous events sharing the stage with LoLs and CoDs.
Also from a spectator point of view, i honestly don’t understand how you can like the current model.
Using the soccer analogy again, we have national leagues which crown the national champion then we have the European leagues that crown the European champion, then separately you have various cups, including euro cup and world cup.
What do you have in SC2 ? Weekend tournaments and the "champion of the month"GSL. How is this exciting to anyone?
|
Dont make shitty comparisons. Soccer is a team sport. Sc2 is more like Tennis and every tennis pro can do what ever the fuck he wants.
|
Kespa players playing in in Kespa leagues and partnered leagues, Makes sense. Who really assumed Kespa is gonna let their players play outside in other leagues without a partnership? ppl this is Kespa we're talking about.
|
The under handed jabs Sundance directs towards GOM / IPL (directly and indirectly) is a little unprofessional and a little immature if you ask me...
|
On May 17 2012 09:25 Jarree wrote:
Dont make shitty comparisons. Soccer is a team sport. Sc2 is more like Tennis and every tennis pro can do what ever the fuck he wants.
Funny how my comparison actualy worked in BW despite being a 1 player game too, teams in BW were actualy a big part of the fun, while in SC2 teams are only needed for plane tickets.
Tennis and also golf have a peculiar way of operating their busyness, trying to reproduce this model for anything other than tennis and golf and expect it to be successfull is utopian.
|
On May 17 2012 09:16 Orracle wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2012 09:07 m0ck wrote:
While GOM deserves to get beat up over the Naniwa-MLG-incident, for Kespa and MLG to be able to limit players from participating in tournaments serves no-one but the organizers. This is a really unhealthy and unnecessary development and apparently is a reflection of the corporate warfare between IPL and MLG (and of course, the power of Kespa). Stupid, stupid, stupid.
For the sake of the freedom of the players, for the sake of a lively, dynamic scene of differing tournament organizers, for the sake of diversifying power and control, this development should be looked upon very critically. This is insanely fucking stupid to limit what events a player can play at. I still think there are bitter feelings over IPL after they announced dirt cheap viewing rates. I'm assuming MLG's PPV got terrible results. There's really no incentive for people to pay when it's essentially the exact same players that we watch weekly on GSL. You limit these new KESPA players to exclusive events and suddenly people are going to have to tune into their PPV to watch them.
Then you would assuming wrong. Its already been said that the PPVs were a success and Sundance even said they make more off the PPV then they do the championship events.
|
On May 17 2012 08:26 Embir wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2012 08:07 Primadog wrote:
Only sundance can make a monopoly look so good. What? It is a load of crap - the same corporationism and desire to total domination and monopol bullshit. I like decentralized structure of SC2 - that there are a lot of clans, communities and small tournaments. It is easy to arrange and do a tournament. In fact players can be very independent and still earn a solid amount of money. Of course it is not a good situation for big molochs like Kespa or MLG. Tournaments and players outside their structures make them earn less money. For example why should I pay for MLG Arena if there is probably a few more tournaments with probably evenly fun and dramatic matches - even if participants are not exactly on par. So yes, the current decentralized state of SC2 is the best state for me.
Look at the PGA tour. Four huge tournaments that everyone cares about, plenty of smaller competitions for the tour players to earn money. Everything that you imagine going away with this can still exist. Same with NASCAR and Tennis.
|
On May 17 2012 09:47 Adreme wrote:
Then you would assuming wrong. Its already been said that the PPVs were a success and Sundance even said they make more off the PPV then they do the championship events.
Be careful of taking everything at face value. No way he would come out and say they were a failure, so I wouldn't have expected to hear anything else. When you factor in flying 32 players out, covering their rooms, etc, I really have a hard time believing it was very profitable.
|
On May 17 2012 09:16 Orracle wrote:
While GOM deserves to get beat up over the Naniwa-MLG-incident, for Kespa and MLG to be able to limit players from participating in tournaments serves no-one but the organizers. This is a really unhealthy and unnecessary development and apparently is a reflection of the corporate warfare between IPL and MLG (and of course, the power of Kespa). Stupid, stupid, stupid.
For the sake of the freedom of the players, for the sake of a lively, dynamic scene of differing tournament organizers, for the sake of diversifying power and control, this development should be looked upon very critically.
On May 17 2012 09:07 m0ck wrote:
This is insanely fucking stupid to limit what events a player can play at. I still think there are bitter feelings over IPL after they announced dirt cheap viewing rates.
I'm assuming MLG's PPV got terrible results. There's really no incentive for people to pay when it's essentially the exact same players that we watch weekly on GSL. You limit these new KESPA players to exclusive events and suddenly people are going to have to tune into their PPV to watch them.
I can only assume with how confidently you two assert these facts that you sat in on the KeSPa-MLG negotiations and know for a fact that MLG was the one who pushed exclusivity on KeSPa and not the other way around, along with that you are also in the know about other potential bidders for KeSPa and that they would have taken a moral stand against exclusivity for the sake of the community. Otherwise it'd be just rubbish speculation...
|
|
|
Exclustivity isn't the answer. MLG already learned this lesson, anyone remember their Halo players at ESWC? Why are they trying again?
|
On May 17 2012 10:05 patzernuk wrote:
I can only assume with how confidently you two assert these facts that you sat in on the KeSPa-MLG negotiations and know for a fact that MLG was the one who pushed exclusivity on KeSPa and not the other way around, along with that you are also in the know about other potential bidders for KeSPa and that they would have taken a moral stand against exclusivity for the sake of the community. Otherwise it'd be just rubbish speculation...
Whether it was MLG or KESPA that pushed it, there is no difference. If two kids robbed a bank, would you give a shit who's idea it was? Absolutely not. You would want them both to be punished. This is no different. The fact that these two parties came to a mutual agreement on controlling what players can do is what's awful.
|
Cool, thanks for posting. Will check it out, should be interesting.
|
On May 17 2012 10:01 Orracle wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2012 09:47 Adreme wrote:
Then you would assuming wrong. Its already been said that the PPVs were a success and Sundance even said they make more off the PPV then they do the championship events. Be careful of taking everything at face value. No way he would come out and say they were a failure, so I wouldn't have expected to hear anything else. When you factor in flying 32 players out, covering their rooms, etc, I really have a hard time believing it was very profitable.
The fact that they are having 2 arenas per season is proof enough that they are making money off of them. If the concept was a failiure they wouldnt continue it just to prove a point and with the limited amount of investment that something like an Arena requires its not hard to turn a profit off of them.
|
On May 17 2012 09:47 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2012 09:16 Orracle wrote:On May 17 2012 09:07 m0ck wrote:
While GOM deserves to get beat up over the Naniwa-MLG-incident, for Kespa and MLG to be able to limit players from participating in tournaments serves no-one but the organizers. This is a really unhealthy and unnecessary development and apparently is a reflection of the corporate warfare between IPL and MLG (and of course, the power of Kespa). Stupid, stupid, stupid.
For the sake of the freedom of the players, for the sake of a lively, dynamic scene of differing tournament organizers, for the sake of diversifying power and control, this development should be looked upon very critically. This is insanely fucking stupid to limit what events a player can play at. I still think there are bitter feelings over IPL after they announced dirt cheap viewing rates. I'm assuming MLG's PPV got terrible results. There's really no incentive for people to pay when it's essentially the exact same players that we watch weekly on GSL. You limit these new KESPA players to exclusive events and suddenly people are going to have to tune into their PPV to watch them. Then you would assuming wrong. Its already been said that the PPVs were a success and Sundance even said they make more off the PPV then they do the championship events.
what else is he going to say "Yes I burned another 10% of our cash assets, but never worry fearless VC investors, I just need another 4 rounds of investments and youll definitely break even!"
|
On May 17 2012 10:47 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2012 09:47 Adreme wrote:On May 17 2012 09:16 Orracle wrote:On May 17 2012 09:07 m0ck wrote:
While GOM deserves to get beat up over the Naniwa-MLG-incident, for Kespa and MLG to be able to limit players from participating in tournaments serves no-one but the organizers. This is a really unhealthy and unnecessary development and apparently is a reflection of the corporate warfare between IPL and MLG (and of course, the power of Kespa). Stupid, stupid, stupid.
For the sake of the freedom of the players, for the sake of a lively, dynamic scene of differing tournament organizers, for the sake of diversifying power and control, this development should be looked upon very critically. This is insanely fucking stupid to limit what events a player can play at. I still think there are bitter feelings over IPL after they announced dirt cheap viewing rates. I'm assuming MLG's PPV got terrible results. There's really no incentive for people to pay when it's essentially the exact same players that we watch weekly on GSL. You limit these new KESPA players to exclusive events and suddenly people are going to have to tune into their PPV to watch them. Then you would assuming wrong. Its already been said that the PPVs were a success and Sundance even said they make more off the PPV then they do the championship events. what else is he going to say "Yes I burned another 10% of our cash assets, but never worry fearless VC investors, I just need another 4 rounds of investments and youll definitely break even!"
Agreed
MLG is gonna disappear from the SC2 scene eventually if what they're trying to do doesn't work. Trying to legitimize this hobby is too ambitious and too costly in my opinion. Leagues should just focus on hosting amazing tournaments rather then trying to make playing SC2 a sport.
|
On May 17 2012 10:01 Orracle wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2012 09:47 Adreme wrote:
Then you would assuming wrong. Its already been said that the PPVs were a success and Sundance even said they make more off the PPV then they do the championship events. Be careful of taking everything at face value. No way he would come out and say they were a failure, so I wouldn't have expected to hear anything else. When you factor in flying 32 players out, covering their rooms, etc, I really have a hard time believing it was very profitable.
Well then I doubt any amount of evidence will convince you otherwise. You seem set on believing what you want to believe, despite statements from various MLG folks to the contrary + continued arena events which could have easily been hacked off had they not done well. Add in the recent VC round and the sudden abandonment of the Columbus, OH studio project discussed at the end of last year, coupled with the equally sudden announcement of a PPV arena in the NYC offices, and it's logical to conclude that the VC's told MLG it was time to get profitable now or else. And if it wasn't doing well, you can bet the VC's would have looked at the arena balance sheets and ordered MLG to stop them asap, because when you're on your 4th or 5th round of funding, they have that leverage because their equity stake is too big to ignore.
It might also be part of the reason the MLG/KeSPA agreement is exclusive, that if MLG wants to realize its vision of having a global league, the VCs insist its league partnerships must have exclusivity in order to monetize the space and be sustainable. So endgame (after future partnerships are brokered) is basically KeSPA + MLG + DH + ESL = global SC2 league partnership, including collaboration on scheduling, cross-tournament group seeds, PL finals in NA (MLG) and EU (DH) and elsewhere around the world (ESL), etc. Consolidation through collaboration, basically. Not one league, but a collective acting as one in key areas (probably not all). I'm not sure how I feel about this just yet as I enjoy, for the most part, the current SC2 model we have, but I can see the business logic that could be at work, given the somewhat limited information out there.
|
On May 17 2012 11:11 delo wrote:
Well then I doubt any amount of evidence will convince you otherwise. You seem set on believing what you want to believe, despite statements from various MLG folks to the contrary + continued arena events which could have easily been hacked off had they not done well. Add in the recent VC round and the sudden abandonment of the Columbus, OH studio project discussed at the end of last year, coupled with the equally sudden announcement of a PPV arena in the NYC offices, and it's logical to conclude that the VC's told MLG it was time to get profitable now or else. And if it wasn't doing well, you can bet the VC's would have looked at the arena balance sheets and ordered MLG to stop them asap, because when you're on your 4th or 5th round of funding, they have that leverage because their equity stake is too big to ignore.
It might also be part of the reason the MLG/KeSPA agreement is exclusive, that if MLG wants to realize its vision of having a global league, the VCs insist its league partnerships must have exclusivity in order to monetize the space and be sustainable. So endgame (after future partnerships are brokered) is basically KeSPA + MLG + DH + ESL = global SC2 league partnership, including collaboration on scheduling, cross-tournament group seeds, PL finals in NA (MLG) and EU (DH) and elsewhere around the world (ESL), etc. Consolidation through collaboration, basically. Not one league, but a collective acting as one in key areas (probably not all). I'm not sure how I feel about this just yet as I enjoy, for the most part, the current SC2 model we have, but I can see the business logic that could be at work, given the somewhat limited information out there.
Honestly, do you really believe if PPV events did awful, MLG would come out and say so? Absolutely not. Hell, they restructured the pay model as soon as the first one was over. MLG is trying to take steps to make PPV events profitable, and their investors expect the same. When an investor gives you money, they want you to spend it. They didn't give it to a company just to let it sit in the bank accumulating negligible interest. What is a better way to turn PPV events more profitable than charging people to watch the new up and coming SC2 players? These are drastic steps they're taking, and I believe it's because they were doing bad with their previous arenas. Unfortunately, I think this type of monopolization will turn their PPV events very profitable.
|
gom had it coming to them. why revoke a seed over that incident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
