EPTIdeas on how to give more exposure to sponsors - Page 11
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Murkury
Canada63 Posts
| ||
|
VirgilSC2
United States6151 Posts
On June 26 2012 10:11 OuchyDathurts wrote: Maybe someone suggested it already but would be pretty easy and relatively quick to do. Just before a game throw up an overlay that goes through a given player's sponsors. 5 seconds a sponsor, generic voice over. EG Demuslim is sponsored by; Intel logo (voice over guy with company tagline) Monster logo (voice over guy with company tagline) Steelseries logo (voice over guy with company tagline) etc running though all companies with a full screen logo, every company gets the same 5 seconds. Liquid Hero is sponsored by; The Little App Factory logo (voice over guy with company tagline) Razor logo (voice over guy with company tagline) Twitch.tv logo (voice over guy with company tagline) etc. Quick and dirty, gets the sponsors exposure before every game. Can be thrown up with an overlay so no ad block sniping them. They do the exact same thing after like every commercial break for real sports. This is a great idea actually. I support this. You don't even have to have the voiceover guy or anything, just say "Player A is sponsored by" and then show each sponsor logo individually for a few seconds. | ||
|
OuchyDathurts
United States4588 Posts
On June 26 2012 13:32 VirgilSC2 wrote: This is a great idea actually. I support this. You don't even have to have the voiceover guy or anything, just say "Player A is sponsored by" and then show each sponsor logo individually for a few seconds. Yeah, you don't need the voice over but as long as the logo is there for 5 seconds anyway you may as well just throw the company tagline out there. Doesn't hurt anything and I'm sure the companies would appreciate it. If I'm not mistaken EG has the most sponsors of anyone. I see 11 on their site and I think some of those aren't sponsors anymore. So at 5 seconds a pop that's 55 seconds worst case scenario. 1 minute 50 if 2 EG players played each other. The 5 seconds can obviously be tweaked and there's nothing saying you don't just do it once at the beginning of a series. Even at once out of 3 games that's more exposure than the zero seconds they're getting now. Plus if a player goes further in a tourney their sponsors get shown in more series, they're more happy. Seems about the most cut and dry way of doing things without getting invasive in the game with it. Hell, if nothing else when they start doing the sponsors before a match you know you have a minute to take a piss or grab something to eat =P | ||
|
peidongyang
Canada2084 Posts
| ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On June 26 2012 07:23 Corvette wrote: people need to realize that if you want something for free or at the very least cheap. You are going to get advertisements. Its a fact of life. Few good things can be done cheaply without advertising dollars. That's not the point, though. The point is that fans and spectators shouldn't be actively trying to solve problems for sponsors and organizers. If they think they need to place more advertisements during a cast, let them think about that and let them do it and see what the response is. If they think they need to go PPV, let them try it and see what the response is (like MLG, for example). If they can't think of any good ideas on their own, too bad. Don't bend over backwards to accommodate them or help them out. They're neither your friends nor business partners. They're the ones trying to sell their stuff to you. If you don't pull for your own interests or if you get sucked into believing that their interest IS your interest (aka the Sundance logic, also the oldest trick in the book), then there's only one side that benefits. Since TB is being quoted in the OP, I think a much better thing to quote him on is his opinion on fans. There is nothing more exploitable in the entertainment industry than an unquestioningly loyal fanbase. | ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
Please, please don't shit up SC2 by adding your logo to the map. I already ignore LG-IM or whatever it is. It's IMMVP and IMNesta. Not PepsicolaIntelLG-IM. The only time that's actually worked for me was TLAF.. I don't know why but I imagined it in a silly way; the TL Air Force. Speaking of which, I bought a fair few things from The Little App Factory. I didn't need anything from them or even want anything but they are a very manner company and I can't entirely remember what they did but they did some random act of kindness for one of their customers so I bought all of their items to gift to friends. Sponsor Starcraft teams. That is important. But don't shove your shit down my throat. All I will do is kick against you and refuse to buy your shit. | ||
|
AlphaFerg
United States148 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EWUMU.jpg) Dota 2 has ingame placement for team logos that can easily include sponsorships. SC2 has custom logos that can go on buildings. Easy enough to follow suit? | ||
|
AndrewGreve
United States30 Posts
Just four rectangles around their staring positions and fill each one with a different players sponsors. | ||
|
Sea_Food
Finland1612 Posts
On June 26 2012 14:01 peidongyang wrote: This is 100% blizzard's fault tbh. If it wasn't for their rigged ToS we'd see what we saw in WC3 tournies; decals on the maps themselves. Sadly in sc2 you're actually not allowed ads on the maps themselves making blizzard even bigger hypocrites in terms of "growing esports" Blizzard does not give a shit about esports unless they get money from it. They take like 50% add revenue as royalties from tournaments with +5000$ price pool. This actually makes sc2 a kinda terrible esport compared to games like LoL, DotA or fighting games. | ||
|
AndrewGreve
United States30 Posts
On June 26 2012 14:24 Talin wrote: + Show Spoiler + On June 26 2012 07:23 Corvette wrote: people need to realize that if you want something for free or at the very least cheap. You are going to get advertisements. Its a fact of life. Few good things can be done cheaply without advertising dollars. That's not the point, though. The point is that fans and spectators shouldn't be actively trying to solve problems for sponsors and organizers. If they think they need to place more advertisements during a cast, let them think about that and let them do it and see what the response is. If they think they need to go PPV, let them try it and see what the response is (like MLG, for example). If they can't think of any good ideas on their own, too bad. Don't bend over backwards to accommodate them or help them out. They're neither your friends nor business partners. They're the ones trying to sell their stuff to you. If you don't pull for your own interests or if you get sucked into believing that their interest IS your interest (aka the Sundance logic, also the oldest trick in the book), then there's only one side that benefits. Since TB is being quoted in the OP, I think a much better thing to quote him on is his opinion on fans. There is nothing more exploitable in the entertainment industry than an unquestioningly loyal fanbase. That's not the point. Why should you be actively trying to stop fans/spectators from solving problems for sponsors/organizers? They are neither your enemies nor competitors. They are trying to sell me stuff, but they are willing to give me money(in the form of free entertainment) BEFORE I spend any money and completely at my choice to view or not. My interests include more entertainment, and I prefer paying for it with my time over my money(I have more time than money). Of course I have a value on my time and expect to be entertained enough to compensate for the amount of time their ads are on my devices. Do not get sucked into believing that YOUR interests are universal, or that anyone that wishes to help others for free has not given any thought to the worth of their help. You helping is not expected, but obstructing the thread is unnecessary and rude. Perhaps there is some harm you are expecting this thread to cause you. | ||
|
OptimusYale
Korea (South)1005 Posts
On June 26 2012 14:35 Probe1 wrote: Btw sponsors: I don't notice your ads on baseball fields or soccer pitches. The more annoying the ad the quicker I am to make fun of it and the more intrusive it is the further I will go to block or disable it. Please, please don't shit up SC2 by adding your logo to the map. I already ignore LG-IM or whatever it is. It's IMMVP and IMNesta. Not PepsicolaIntelLG-IM. The only time that's actually worked for me was TLAF.. I don't know why but I imagined it in a silly way; the TL Air Force. Speaking of which, I bought a fair few things from The Little App Factory. I didn't need anything from them or even want anything but they are a very manner company and I can't entirely remember what they did but they did some random act of kindness for one of their customers so I bought all of their items to gift to friends. Sponsor Starcraft teams. That is important. But don't shove your shit down my throat. All I will do is kick against you and refuse to buy your shit. I really don't get this sentiment. I agree we shouldn't be doing shit for free, and thats essentially what we're doing now. How is having LG-IM a slap in the face for you. It's a company that has invested more money to get naming rights. You're a soccer fan right? Tell me what is the name of Arsenal's Soccer Ground? Now tell me the name of Manchester Cities. You see that right there...that's naming rights and it strongly associates your Brand with another. When both brands match ideals (emirates with arsenal, arsenal known for its exceptionally beautiful football, Emirates known for their super comfortable flights), it only makes sense in some right to sell the naming. It also means that regardless, LG will get a name sponsor every game. Map ad's will not ruin the game if it's done right. The old GSL style where before everygame was the Tournaments sponsor was perfectly fine. We consume more adverts a day than most people even realise. You think you don't pay attention, but I bet that 99.9% of what you own was advertised to you in some way or another, and you may or may not have realised that those adverts influenced your final decision to buy one product over another, but it works. If heavy sponsorship is whats needed to keep esports going....fucking do it. | ||
|
FreudianTrip
Switzerland1983 Posts
On June 26 2012 07:12 Blackfoger wrote: God fucking damnit. This is like the 8th time someone has quoted one of my posts and said this. Do you people just not read or are you trying to twist my point of view to make it sound like I'm some crazy belligerent outlier that smells weird and walks around wearing a tin-foil hat? Because it's definitely one of the two. Not one fucking person has come up with a single idea that creates a new type of awareness with-in eSports. All that's been pushed is the same 3 fucking ideas that always get pushed and they're bad ideas. The reason they haven't been incorporated is because they don't create extra awareness they just create more of the same awareness. And you aren't going to negotiate a raise on your advertising contract by saying to your sponsor, "Yeah we're going to show your logo for an extra 3 seconds every half an hour. Gimme another 20k" That's not how it works. If a logo is surrounded by 10 other logos it loses it's effectiveness so it's a bad idea in that way, if it's a one brand tournament, let's take ZOTAC Cups or Playhem Dailys as an example. An extra ZOTAC or Playhem logo on the map isn't creating anymore brand awareness than before so you're not going to pay extra to receive said sponsorship. Actually you are wrong yet again, please don't talk unless you know the business behind esports. http://investor.ea.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=507251. Having more sponsors and money is going to help the community. More advertising helps and is able to push Esports. The money has been increasing year to year same with the amount of viewership MLG Anaheim is key evidence of that. The Esports model is based upon capitalism as others have put it and we are reliant on sponsorships. The OP asked the question to help the community in some sense and I commend him for asking the question. It;s the same question all sc2 teams are asking to increase their income. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH. When did people on the internet stop learning how to read. How do you quote a post of mine where I say I've been misquoted only to mis fucking quote me. Jesus christ. That link? It's a different brand awareness. They're not advertising Medal Of Honour in a Medal of Honour game. And then he goes on the rant about Advertisers pushing eSports. The eSports model is based on capitalism... That sentence barely even means anything. God this threads dumb. People on the internet are fucking retarded these days. I'm out. On June 26 2012 17:10 OptimusYale wrote: I really don't get this sentiment. I agree we shouldn't be doing shit for free, and thats essentially what we're doing now. How is having LG-IM a slap in the face for you. It's a company that has invested more money to get naming rights. You're a soccer fan right? Tell me what is the name of Arsenal's Soccer Ground? Now tell me the name of Manchester Cities. You see that right there...that's naming rights and it strongly associates your Brand with another. When both brands match ideals (emirates with arsenal, arsenal known for its exceptionally beautiful football, Emirates known for their super comfortable flights), it only makes sense in some right to sell the naming. It also means that regardless, LG will get a name sponsor every game. Map ad's will not ruin the game if it's done right. The old GSL style where before everygame was the Tournaments sponsor was perfectly fine. We consume more adverts a day than most people even realise. You think you don't pay attention, but I bet that 99.9% of what you own was advertised to you in some way or another, and you may or may not have realised that those adverts influenced your final decision to buy one product over another, but it works. If heavy sponsorship is whats needed to keep esports going....fucking do it. Arsenal Fan here. It's called Ashburton Grove. Man United's stadium is called Old Trafford and Man City's stadium is called Maine Road. Just because ESPN calls it something doesn't make it the name. St James' Park is clearly not called The Sport Direct Arena while we're at it. edit: k now I'm out | ||
|
FreudianTrip
Switzerland1983 Posts
| ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On June 26 2012 16:43 AndrewGreve wrote: My interests include more entertainment, and I prefer paying for it with my time over my money(I have more time than money). The point is that you should prefer not paying for it with anything unless you have to, and even more so not paying more than you pay currently to get the exact same thing. This includes not actively asking for MORE intrusive advertising and banner space covering your screen. It might not be the biggest deal in the world, but it's normal to want less of that rather than more. Just like it's normal for sponsors to want more rather than less, and in turn for league organizers to have to balance between the two. It's absolutely illogical to want to give away more to a business (we're not talking about the community here), and people who do that are projecting companies' interests as their own. Mostly due to the fear that if they're not making enough money, they'll go away and you won't get your entertainment. Which is, again, the oldest trick in the book when it comes to exploiting fans. It's the same as when people say that if you don't buy games, the industry will collapse and nobody will make games any more. Demand what's good for you. If the industry is sustainable and the product is popular and interesting enough, it'll live. If it's not, it won't. It's that simple. | ||
|
redruMBunny
74 Posts
The point is that you should prefer not paying for it with anything unless you have to &c &c. A few different posters have said "This is what you SHOULD want" &c. (Not to pick on the quoted quote's author; it was just one among many.) People have their own preferences. Nobody SHOULD want ice cream. It's not healthy. But it's tasty, right? I <3 ice cream. You scream, I scream, we all scream for ice cream. So all in all, although I understand some people's preferences disturb other people, please - even if you are disturbed by someone else's preferences, please do not say their preferences are unnatural, etc. etc. (I'm not saying you shouldn't have an opinion! Even an opinion about what others' opinion should be is, well, you know, a preference, right? Perfectly justified.) But let's please not be believing that just because one has a strongly held opinion that it is in fact the only correct and justified one. -- (Personally I don't care much about the issue. Although I think it would be cool to have Pizza Hut supply depots.) | ||
|
BrosephBrostar
United States445 Posts
| ||
zezamer
Finland5701 Posts
Spare me from logos of dozen small sponsors in the beginning of the game please. Why should razer get huge exposure for giving free equipment for half of teams(?). | ||
|
Hiea
Denmark1538 Posts
It certainly doesn't annoy me. Sponsers are what keeps SC2 running, without it there would be nothing called Esports. What TB was talking about in that interview was for ONLINE tournaments, in an online tournament, you get the tournaments sponsers, but why do players play them for other thing than personal money? their sponsers aint shown, sponsers don't care if you play in online tournament that much. If they just add logos at some point, either like the old GSL style one where it does it on the player intros, or to the side of the screen, where it isn't intrusive. | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6207 Posts
| ||
|
chocopan
Japan986 Posts
On June 26 2012 14:24 Talin wrote: Don't bend over backwards to accommodate them or help them out. They're neither your friends nor business partners. They're the ones trying to sell their stuff to you. If you don't pull for your own interests or if you get sucked into believing that their interest IS your interest (aka the Sundance logic, also the oldest trick in the book), then there's only one side that benefits. Well, I see it as sort of lobbying for the kind of promotion I prefer over the kind I find invasive (and that may harm the popularity of the sport in the longer term). Ie. map logo placement over mid game commercial breaks (which i despise with every fibre of my being and more than a few of those that are not). | ||
| ||
