EPTDH Valencia with eSports Congress - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Laryleprakon
New Zealand9496 Posts
| ||
Megabuster123
Canada1837 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:34 archonOOid wrote: Redeye is a bad host... and here's why; Takes up too much time from the panelists, doesn't distribute questions or time evenly between the panelists, interrupts the panelists with new questions while they are answering the old ones and doesn't address those who have been siting quiet work a while with their perspective. I felt sorry for some of the attendees and turned off the stream. Na, Redeye is a solid host. Some of the panelists literally had nothing to add during certain segments and all of the panelists were losing track of the topic at hand. It's his job to steer them, and I think he did a good job at that. | ||
|
windzor
Denmark1013 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:16 Gamegene wrote: lol alex garfield is relatively overdressed, but tries to tone it down with his shoes zzz. this is stimulating but i'm slightly dissapointed to hear them talk about developers and not have Dustin Browder in to give him 2 cents. What could Dustin really say? He is in no position to make any calls on such an organisation. Hell if it happened he properly wouldn't even know it before it happened. Only thing which Dustin has any "power" over is the balance of the game. He might have some information about what Blizzard is trying to do with the eSports part of the game, but I think people will be disappointed in what he could bring.. | ||
|
PresenceSc2
Australia4032 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:34 archonOOid wrote: Redeye is a bad host... and here's why; Takes up too much time from the panelists, doesn't distribute questions or time evenly between the panelists, interrupts the panelists with new questions while they are answering the old ones and doesn't address those who have been siting quiet work a while with their perspective. I felt sorry for some of the attendees and turned off the stream. i'm going to guess your in the minority there | ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:36 windzor wrote: What could Dustin really say? He is in no position to make any calls on such an organisation. Hell if it happened he properly wouldn't even know it before it happened. Eh, I'd just like some sort of Blizzard/publisher representation | ||
|
StarGalaxy
Germany744 Posts
The camerawork and the sound is really terrible.I did hardly understand any word the korean guy said. | ||
JunkkaGom
Korea (South)855 Posts
| ||
|
Fragile51
Netherlands15767 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:34 archonOOid wrote: Redeye is a bad host... and here's why; Takes up too much time from the panelists, doesn't distribute questions or time evenly between the panelists, interrupts the panelists with new questions while they are answering the old ones and doesn't address those who have been siting quiet work a while with their perspective. I felt sorry for some of the attendees and turned off the stream. The point of a host is to interrupt people when the answers they are giving aren't going anywhere. It keeps the discussion going. | ||
|
Weavel
Finland9221 Posts
| ||
|
windzor
Denmark1013 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:38 Gamegene wrote: Eh, I'd just like some sort of Blizzard/publisher representation This true, there should be a publisher on it. But if they should be represented on the panel, they should also be in a position where they can say things and not just say nice words. Which I think many publishers would mostly do because they haven't really thought about such a scenario. | ||
|
Dosey
United States4505 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:40 windzor wrote: This true, there should be a publisher on it. But if they should be represented on the panel, they should also be in a position where they can say things and not just say nice words. Which I think many publishers would mostly do because they haven't really thought about such a scenario. And they probably wont think about such a scenario without a governing body or at least the makings of such in view. | ||
|
Sumadin
Denmark588 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:32 BobMcJohnson wrote: Yes but having most of the tournaments using only non-ladder maps would force Blizzard to move, just like it did when GSL played with barely any ladder maps and Blizzard had to add Tal'darim. They were never forced to add taldarim, they did it out of free will. | ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:40 windzor wrote: This true, there should be a publisher on it. But if they should be represented on the panel, they should also be in a position where they can say things and not just say nice words. Which I think many publishers would mostly do because they haven't really thought about such a scenario. well that's probably why some of the bigger fish denied the invitations. | ||
|
Laryleprakon
New Zealand9496 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:40 windzor wrote: This true, there should be a publisher on it. But if they should be represented on the panel, they should also be in a position where they can say things and not just say nice words. Which I think many publishers would mostly do because they haven't really thought about such a scenario. Also the people in those positions are normally incredibly busy, someone like Mike Moham for Blizzard I doubt would have been free with a Wow expansion out next week, maybe they asked riot/vavle and they declined. | ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:43 Laryleprakon wrote: Also the people in those positions are normally incredibly busy, someone like Mike Moham for Blizzard I doubt would have been free with a Wow expansion out next week, maybe they asked riot/vavle and they declined. still maybe have someone like rob simpson or some of their lesser fries, and just have them briefed on the companies official positions. | ||
|
ELA
Denmark4608 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:41 Dosey wrote: And they probably wont think about such a scenario without a governing body or at least the makings of such in view. Also, people are forgetting the publisher angle on this - Are publishers really the best suited for a governing body? They would constantly want to push their new title, and not necessarily embody the best interests of a 3-4 year old game which is an e-sports title, putting alot of effort into a title that you or I may not be interested in. I like the idea of publisher involvement, but I think that a governing body dominated by a publisher, can actually do more harm to a community than good. | ||
|
ELA
Denmark4608 Posts
 | ||
|
eericson000
Australia718 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:40 windzor wrote: This true, there should be a publisher on it. But if they should be represented on the panel, they should also be in a position where they can say things and not just say nice words. Which I think many publishers would mostly do because they haven't really thought about such a scenario. Dustin will be on the panel, 3rd panel topic, "Game developers and esports, how they have embraced the concept and changed their games accordingigly. Please check the website that is listed on page 1 of this thread for the schedule and topics covered. Because some of people only appear on certain panel topics. | ||
|
Dosey
United States4505 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:46 ELA wrote: Also, people are forgetting the publisher angle on this - Are publishers really the best suited for a governing body? They would constantly want to push their new title, and not necessarily embody the best interests of a 3-4 year old game which is an e-sports title, putting alot of effort into a title that you or I may not be interested in. I like the idea of publisher involvement, but I think that a governing body dominated by a publisher, can actually do more harm to a community than good. I honestly feel like the first step in a joint effort towards a governing body would be some sort of external online ladder with representatives from each significant tournament having a say in how it is ran, as well as pro/team feedback/support. Basically an ICCUP, but on a bigger scale and with tournament/representative support to act as incentive. This ladder would also be a better and easier way of introducing new maps, amateur players, rules, regulations, etc... finding a common ground between all the different entities to lay the groundwork before they jump into something feet first. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On September 21 2012 18:39 JunkkaGom wrote: can anyone summarize what happened and what each person think? people will likely need to add to this but: Russel: Against a governing body initially because he beleived that esports should be a open style organization... but said that there were some good aspects of it... generally non-commitive... talked about making sure the motives of such an ogarnization were true to the development of esports... Won: Not totally sure... I think he's against it... he's mentioned that there will be difficulties making it function as an international identity... Alex: For it... basically... he said that eventually it will be a financial body who can handle and simplify transactions but at this stage it would be a very softcore version of what it would end up being... also states that he thinks it can't evolve from something that already exists and will need to come about from an outsider perspective... Tomas: I don't know... he barely said anything during the entire segment and I missed his initial minute... David: He's mentioned letting economics and profitability naturally develop a structure and made that the basis of his argument... | ||
| ||
