|
On August 27 2012 17:52 MrCon wrote:I don't understand the "KEspa send 90 players" Why the hell Kespa would send anyone, just let those who can play, play. Kespa sending players sounds like the players can be chosen with arbitrary criteria. edit : good news anyway 
Yeah this is what I just can't get. Why does KeSPA have to send "0", "90" or any fixed amount of players. Just send the ones who want to compete. How hard a concept is that for them to grasp?
That's why I'm not really satisfied.
|
On August 27 2012 17:53 6NR wrote:
In the long run, will we have a consolidated Korean SC2 organization, or 2 organizations like we have today?
A lot will depend on how the interest picks up in the next few months.
I want to see 2 organizations, but not the 2 that is currently right now. One for the players, and one for the sponsers, across both the KeSPA teams and eSF teams.
|
On August 27 2012 17:53 6NR wrote:
In the long run, will we have a consolidated Korean SC2 organization, or 2 organizations like we have today?
A lot will depend on how the interest picks up in the next few months.
Fight will certainly come, revenge is inevitable.
|
On August 27 2012 17:53 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:51 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:32 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2012 17:28 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:21 Frankon wrote:Now if Kespa doesn't get 21 players into the Code A through the qualifiers it would be a upset for them.... On August 27 2012 16:59 coloursheep wrote:
I did not say they took their players out, I said they refused to let their players compete which is exactly what they did.
Read again what you wrote.... Took out means that they were already in it in the first place. So ESF, not GOM which you are blaming, is not allowed to have their players not compete in OSL but KESPA can have their players not compete in GSL, how is that not the definition of hypocritical? I said KESPA can have their players not complete, yes the first time I misstated, but i rephrased it as you can see above and you restated that I said took their players out which as you can see in the post I did not. esf would have hurt ogn(maybe cancel event, FIRST SC2 OSL!!) more than kespa hurting gomtv(disappointing hyped fans). osl was already set. gsl4 didnt even start. This was started by KESPA not competing in GSL4, everything that followed was a result of this decision and therefore the blame belongs to KESPA. ...and who is disputing that? no one from what i can see. but to say what esf did is on par with what kespa did...not even close.
I dispute it. There was no conflict until ESF threw a fit and held the OSL for ransom.
|
On August 27 2012 17:53 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:51 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:32 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2012 17:28 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:21 Frankon wrote:Now if Kespa doesn't get 21 players into the Code A through the qualifiers it would be a upset for them.... On August 27 2012 16:59 coloursheep wrote:
I did not say they took their players out, I said they refused to let their players compete which is exactly what they did.
Read again what you wrote.... Took out means that they were already in it in the first place. So ESF, not GOM which you are blaming, is not allowed to have their players not compete in OSL but KESPA can have their players not compete in GSL, how is that not the definition of hypocritical? I said KESPA can have their players not complete, yes the first time I misstated, but i rephrased it as you can see above and you restated that I said took their players out which as you can see in the post I did not. esf would have hurt ogn(maybe cancel event, FIRST SC2 OSL!!) more than kespa hurting gomtv(disappointing hyped fans). osl was already set. gsl4 didnt even start. This was started by KESPA not competing in GSL4, everything that followed was a result of this decision and therefore the blame belongs to KESPA. ...and who is disputing that? no one from what i can see. but to say what esf did is on par with what kespa did...not even close.
Obviously they have to threaten with something that's as big or bigger than what KeSPA did, otherwise KeSPA just stays out and OSL gets an unfair advantage over GSL. Can you list all the other things ESF could have done that would get noticed by KeSPA?
|
On August 27 2012 17:54 MCXD wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:52 MrCon wrote:I don't understand the "KEspa send 90 players" Why the hell Kespa would send anyone, just let those who can play, play. Kespa sending players sounds like the players can be chosen with arbitrary criteria. edit : good news anyway Yeah this is what I just can't get. Why does KeSPA have to send "0", "90" or any fixed amount of players. Just send the ones who want to compete. How hard a concept is that for them to grasp? That's why I'm not really satisfied.
My suspicion is that, sending this many players improves their chances, and would overwhelm GOM, both in terms of the competition and with organizing. Speculation.
|
On August 27 2012 17:54 MCXD wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:52 MrCon wrote:I don't understand the "KEspa send 90 players" Why the hell Kespa would send anyone, just let those who can play, play. Kespa sending players sounds like the players can be chosen with arbitrary criteria. edit : good news anyway Yeah this is what I just can't get. Why does KeSPA have to send "0", "90" or any fixed amount of players. Just send the ones who want to compete. How hard a concept is that for them to grasp? That's why I'm not really satisfied.
Even though this may not be the best victory, it is a victory nonetheless. We will just have to see who the players are in the qualifiers just to see if they are some random B-teamers, or A-teamers + B-Teamers. Or those 90 people are the ones who do want the try to qualify.
As I said before, this battle we are victorious.
But the war is far from over.
|
On August 27 2012 17:56 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:53 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2012 17:51 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:32 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2012 17:28 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:21 Frankon wrote:Now if Kespa doesn't get 21 players into the Code A through the qualifiers it would be a upset for them.... On August 27 2012 16:59 coloursheep wrote:
I did not say they took their players out, I said they refused to let their players compete which is exactly what they did.
Read again what you wrote.... Took out means that they were already in it in the first place. So ESF, not GOM which you are blaming, is not allowed to have their players not compete in OSL but KESPA can have their players not compete in GSL, how is that not the definition of hypocritical? I said KESPA can have their players not complete, yes the first time I misstated, but i rephrased it as you can see above and you restated that I said took their players out which as you can see in the post I did not. esf would have hurt ogn(maybe cancel event, FIRST SC2 OSL!!) more than kespa hurting gomtv(disappointing hyped fans). osl was already set. gsl4 didnt even start. This was started by KESPA not competing in GSL4, everything that followed was a result of this decision and therefore the blame belongs to KESPA. ...and who is disputing that? no one from what i can see. but to say what esf did is on par with what kespa did...not even close. I dispute it. There was no conflict until ESF threw a fit and held the OSL for ransom.
No conflict, but there was a betrayal of trust. Blizzard, ESF and the fans all 100% expected them to compete. It was basically an 'informal breach of contract'.
|
On August 27 2012 17:56 6NR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:54 MCXD wrote:On August 27 2012 17:52 MrCon wrote:I don't understand the "KEspa send 90 players" Why the hell Kespa would send anyone, just let those who can play, play. Kespa sending players sounds like the players can be chosen with arbitrary criteria. edit : good news anyway Yeah this is what I just can't get. Why does KeSPA have to send "0", "90" or any fixed amount of players. Just send the ones who want to compete. How hard a concept is that for them to grasp? That's why I'm not really satisfied. My suspicion is that, sending this many players improves their chances, and would overwhelm GOM, both in terms of the competition and with organizing. Speculation.
If that's the intention, why not all players?
|
On August 27 2012 17:53 Aetherial wrote:
What about after season 5? From what I can tell it's only season 4 & 5 now...
With Kespa sending 90 players to the qualfiers (big lol... we need a confirmation and player list) its safe to assume their goal is to get all the code A spots in this qualifier. There is a high chance Kespa will have players in Season 5 code S from that initial batch of code A qualifiers. Add to this suppose code S, up down, A slots they are promised to get i would say they will stay in GSL (if there will not be any serious new rift between GOM and Kespa)
|
United States97274 Posts
Glad Kespa will be participating in the qualifiers and hopefully this OSL can get right back on track!
|
|
|
http://kr.battle.net/sc2/ko/blog/2188781
Good news! Kespa will join the upcoming GSL 4 in an intense competition, and ESF are participating in the Auction All-kill OSL. Blizzard, GOM, ESF, and Kespa, are working together to give fans the best content possible!
OMFG(K)BBQ !
(sorry, just hyped to finally see my favorite BW players compete with the current best players of SC2 much earlier than I had expected after the terrible news a few days ago)
|
On August 27 2012 17:54 MCXD wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:52 MrCon wrote:I don't understand the "KEspa send 90 players" Why the hell Kespa would send anyone, just let those who can play, play. Kespa sending players sounds like the players can be chosen with arbitrary criteria. edit : good news anyway Yeah this is what I just can't get. Why does KeSPA have to send "0", "90" or any fixed amount of players. Just send the ones who want to compete. How hard a concept is that for them to grasp? That's why I'm not really satisfied.
looks like 90 is just a number that thisisgame threw in there, its nothing official.
at least thats how it felt reading the article, the number 90 should be ignored, its only there to show many players are in kespa.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On August 27 2012 17:56 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:53 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2012 17:51 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:32 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2012 17:28 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:21 Frankon wrote:Now if Kespa doesn't get 21 players into the Code A through the qualifiers it would be a upset for them.... On August 27 2012 16:59 coloursheep wrote:
I did not say they took their players out, I said they refused to let their players compete which is exactly what they did.
Read again what you wrote.... Took out means that they were already in it in the first place. So ESF, not GOM which you are blaming, is not allowed to have their players not compete in OSL but KESPA can have their players not compete in GSL, how is that not the definition of hypocritical? I said KESPA can have their players not complete, yes the first time I misstated, but i rephrased it as you can see above and you restated that I said took their players out which as you can see in the post I did not. esf would have hurt ogn(maybe cancel event, FIRST SC2 OSL!!) more than kespa hurting gomtv(disappointing hyped fans). osl was already set. gsl4 didnt even start. This was started by KESPA not competing in GSL4, everything that followed was a result of this decision and therefore the blame belongs to KESPA. ...and who is disputing that? no one from what i can see. but to say what esf did is on par with what kespa did...not even close. I dispute it. There was no conflict until ESF threw a fit and held the OSL for ransom.
Well then, you are either an idiot or being deliberately obtuse for whatever reason. There needs to be a 'Dont fuck me, I wont fuck you'-policy established as soon as possible - KeSPA not letting their players play GSL4 was, very clearly, a dick move.
|
On August 27 2012 17:56 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:53 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2012 17:51 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:32 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2012 17:28 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:21 Frankon wrote:Now if Kespa doesn't get 21 players into the Code A through the qualifiers it would be a upset for them.... On August 27 2012 16:59 coloursheep wrote:
I did not say they took their players out, I said they refused to let their players compete which is exactly what they did.
Read again what you wrote.... Took out means that they were already in it in the first place. So ESF, not GOM which you are blaming, is not allowed to have their players not compete in OSL but KESPA can have their players not compete in GSL, how is that not the definition of hypocritical? I said KESPA can have their players not complete, yes the first time I misstated, but i rephrased it as you can see above and you restated that I said took their players out which as you can see in the post I did not. esf would have hurt ogn(maybe cancel event, FIRST SC2 OSL!!) more than kespa hurting gomtv(disappointing hyped fans). osl was already set. gsl4 didnt even start. This was started by KESPA not competing in GSL4, everything that followed was a result of this decision and therefore the blame belongs to KESPA. ...and who is disputing that? no one from what i can see. but to say what esf did is on par with what kespa did...not even close. I dispute it. There was no conflict until ESF threw a fit and held the OSL for ransom.
Ah if you only understood. I will try to explain as has been said many times in this thread.
Back in broodwar kespa did this exact thing to GOM, made their players boycott them and then GOM died. ESF realizes that kespa is in a win/win situation if they play in OSL while kespa players avoid GOM. This hurts gom alot as having kespa vs GOM players is going to bring a lot more viewers then if it were just GOM players or just Kespa players (at least in terms of international).
So if Kespa allows GOM players to play in OSL but forbids their players from playing in GSL then GSL viewers get hurt and OSL gets a lot more attention then GOM then if both of them had it.
In short Kespa is trying to be the main company over there like in BW. So yes ESF's reaction was smart and good. There is a reason people who followed bw for a long time (I am not one of these people) but you will notice how Idra (former kespa player) Jinro (followed bw forever) and more who followed bw for a long time SUPPORTED ESF's decision and the korean reaction on their forums were hate on Kespa and not GOM.
And Jinro posts above again saying the truth ^_^
|
On August 27 2012 17:59 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:54 MCXD wrote:On August 27 2012 17:52 MrCon wrote:I don't understand the "KEspa send 90 players" Why the hell Kespa would send anyone, just let those who can play, play. Kespa sending players sounds like the players can be chosen with arbitrary criteria. edit : good news anyway Yeah this is what I just can't get. Why does KeSPA have to send "0", "90" or any fixed amount of players. Just send the ones who want to compete. How hard a concept is that for them to grasp? That's why I'm not really satisfied. looks like 90 is just a number that thisisgame threw in there, its nothing official. at least thats how it felt reading the article, the number 90 should be ignored, its only there to show many players are in kespa.
If that's true, then that puts me a little more at ease.
|
On August 27 2012 17:59 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:56 Severedevil wrote:On August 27 2012 17:53 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2012 17:51 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:32 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2012 17:28 coloursheep wrote:On August 27 2012 17:21 Frankon wrote:Now if Kespa doesn't get 21 players into the Code A through the qualifiers it would be a upset for them.... On August 27 2012 16:59 coloursheep wrote:
I did not say they took their players out, I said they refused to let their players compete which is exactly what they did.
Read again what you wrote.... Took out means that they were already in it in the first place. So ESF, not GOM which you are blaming, is not allowed to have their players not compete in OSL but KESPA can have their players not compete in GSL, how is that not the definition of hypocritical? I said KESPA can have their players not complete, yes the first time I misstated, but i rephrased it as you can see above and you restated that I said took their players out which as you can see in the post I did not. esf would have hurt ogn(maybe cancel event, FIRST SC2 OSL!!) more than kespa hurting gomtv(disappointing hyped fans). osl was already set. gsl4 didnt even start. This was started by KESPA not competing in GSL4, everything that followed was a result of this decision and therefore the blame belongs to KESPA. ...and who is disputing that? no one from what i can see. but to say what esf did is on par with what kespa did...not even close. I dispute it. There was no conflict until ESF threw a fit and held the OSL for ransom. Well then, you are an idiot.
Jinro has spoken!!
Do not dare dispute the chin.
|
On August 27 2012 17:58 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 17:53 Aetherial wrote:
What about after season 5? From what I can tell it's only season 4 & 5 now... With Kespa sending 90 players to the qualfiers (big lol... we need a confirmation and player list) its safe to assume their goal is to get all the code A spots in this qualifier. There is a high chance Kespa will have players in Season 5 code S from that initial batch of code A qualifiers. Add to this suppose code S, up down, A slots they are promised to get i would say they will stay in GSL (if there will not be any serious new rift between GOM and Kespa)
If they did end up getting a lot of spots then KESPA will have a lot of power over GOM in the future... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
