|
just in reference to what grubby said on liquipedia, i think he is completely wrong. the people who contribute a lot to that page are the unthanked heroes of esports. they put in tons of work for no reward, asking them to do anymore is really unfair.
most tourneys these days (the mediocre ones anyway) really fail to hype themselves up. they spend thousands flying out players or producing a stage or hiring a venue, but they dont hype themselves at all. every league seems to complacent that if they make 1 TL thread, the community will do the rest of the work. Leagues need to start hiring coverage coordinators to hype the event, produce youtube videos, update with no info and work on the liquipedia page. asking for volunteers to fix your event for you when you are trying to turn a profit is bullshit.
people already do more for free in this community than any other, asking them to do more is really not what needs to be done. if leagues want to be professional, and to stand out above the rest i agree with grubbys spirit, but i believe they need to shoulder the responsibility to hype themselves and promote themselves, not to pass it down to the viewer.
|
Damn, this is an excellent post with some really spot on suggestions. Nice job!
|
Grubby Delivers, as per uj. Savin' eSports like a baws
|
On October 20 2012 00:20 turdburgler wrote:
just in reference to what grubby said on liquipedia, i think he is completely wrong. the people who contribute a lot to that page are the unthanked heroes of esports. they put in tons of work for no reward, asking them to do anymore is really unfair.
most tourneys these days (the mediocre ones anyway) really fail to hype themselves up. they spend thousands flying out players or producing a stage or hiring a venue, but they dont hype themselves at all. every league seems to complacent that if they make 1 TL thread, the community will do the rest of the work. Leagues need to start hiring coverage coordinators to hype the event, produce youtube videos, update with no info and work on the liquipedia page. asking for volunteers to fix your event for you when you are trying to turn a profit is bullshit.
people already do more for free in this community than any other, asking them to do more is really not what needs to be done. if leagues want to be professional, and to stand out above the rest i agree with grubbys spirit, but i believe they need to shoulder the responsibility to hype themselves and promote themselves, not to pass it down to the viewer.
^
I really don't want to be giving this thread anymore attention. The other thread was more than enough and now look at the general section.
It's flooded with people thinking the sky is falling. Not to say there isn't good criticism, but in reality when you see a guy like Dustin Browder at an event or someone else in high place. You really should ask to take them aside for a moment Grubby to talk to them about your concerns because stuff like this is nothing more than fluff considering lots of the core issues rests with Blizzard.
This doesn't resolve anything.
|
The doom and gloom is depressing. eSports is stronger than it's ever been, SC2 is still very strong, and the ARTS games are just bringing the whole scene up with them. Why so serious everyone? It's a good time for eSports, and with a major expansion coming for SC2 to inject some life back in to it, it's a good time for SC2. For a game that is supposedly dying, it's funny that I can turn on Twitch any night of the week and see tournament grade content, even if it's just another IPL qualifier.
Grubby makes some amazing points, and every scene/game has points it could improve on...but some of the other doom/gloom hyperbolic crazy talk in this thread is just silly. People need to be less emotional and actually analyze the situation logically and realize that SC2 isn't falling apart. One team, that we've known for months was on shaky ground, disbanded. We just had two huge ARTS tournaments, which are putting the eSports focus on them right now.
I think some of your heads would explode if you were big Dota 2 fans and saw what that scene goes through every year after The International. If you think SC2 is falling apart, you'd think that scene was going supernova. SC2 is the model of stability in eSports right now, and nothing on the immediate horizon is threatening that.
|
Very logical by Grubby. The Community has spoken, let*s hope Blizzard is smart about this!
|
Yeah without them Casual gamers the game won't be that much ;(
|
On October 19 2012 15:41 Grubby wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 15:40 itsjustatank wrote:» Without a governing body, there can be bullying, or senseless competition over a date which ends up hurting both tournaments. Isolating the free market as a problem is pretty hilarious. If companies cannot survive, they have an inferior product and deserve to get bounced out of the scene. Keeping them around through the establishment of a cartel creates a disincentive to innovate. » A governing body would require authoritative power over all tournament organizers in order to work. They would also need financial stability (to pay out the people who have the hard work of keeping tournaments in line, and for other reasons), and all this body must be kept objective & fair, mediating and reaching compromises which everyone can be equally unhappy with (the golden rule of compromise). I think I don't need to tell you how hard it would to found an organization that has all these attributes, no matter how much we seem to want one - and therefore how long it'll probably still take for one to appear. This is illegal in multiple jurisdictions, such as the United States and the European Union. And before you say that real sports organizations exist, you have to understand that they receive statutory exemptions to antitrust law through years of lobbying and billions of dollars of marketing that ESPORTS can't match. Which is why I said finances are important. As I think shone through, I consider it unlikely that this would happen. I didn't know about the illegal/exemption thing though, that's interesting. Though I have to say, that eSports doesn't necessarily go by the same laws that we recognize in the Real World.
I am not sure, but as far as I know, each tournament with a prizepool bigger than a certain amount has to apply for a license to hold this tournament, at Blizzard. This would mean that if Blizzard would set up an organisation to regulate fair competition, that they would be in their right. After all, you have to have a license from them to get 'permission' to hold a tournament. Then there's lot of sub-conditions to it. Wouldn't this mean that Blizzard would have the ability to be that neutral party in the world, due to their IP rights and contracts with all parties together?
Theoretically of course.
|
On October 20 2012 00:41 Aelonius wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 15:41 Grubby wrote:On October 19 2012 15:40 itsjustatank wrote:» Without a governing body, there can be bullying, or senseless competition over a date which ends up hurting both tournaments. Isolating the free market as a problem is pretty hilarious. If companies cannot survive, they have an inferior product and deserve to get bounced out of the scene. Keeping them around through the establishment of a cartel creates a disincentive to innovate. » A governing body would require authoritative power over all tournament organizers in order to work. They would also need financial stability (to pay out the people who have the hard work of keeping tournaments in line, and for other reasons), and all this body must be kept objective & fair, mediating and reaching compromises which everyone can be equally unhappy with (the golden rule of compromise). I think I don't need to tell you how hard it would to found an organization that has all these attributes, no matter how much we seem to want one - and therefore how long it'll probably still take for one to appear. This is illegal in multiple jurisdictions, such as the United States and the European Union. And before you say that real sports organizations exist, you have to understand that they receive statutory exemptions to antitrust law through years of lobbying and billions of dollars of marketing that ESPORTS can't match. Which is why I said finances are important. As I think shone through, I consider it unlikely that this would happen. I didn't know about the illegal/exemption thing though, that's interesting. Though I have to say, that eSports doesn't necessarily go by the same laws that we recognize in the Real World. I am not sure, but as far as I know, each tournament with a prizepool bigger than a certain amount has to apply for a license to hold this tournament, at Blizzard. This would mean that if Blizzard would set up an organisation to regulate fair competition, that they would be in their right. After all, you have to have a license from them to get 'permission' to hold a tournament. Then there's lot of sub-conditions to it. Wouldn't this mean that Blizzard would have the ability to be that neutral party in the world, due to their IP rights and contracts with all parties together? Theoretically of course.
The problem with this is the "Riot Effect", something most eSports fans loath. That is, Riot is the sole arbiter of their own game. That causes the tournament structure to completely rotate around Riot's center of orbit. If Riot ever back out, or lowers support, the whole scene gets the rug pulled out from under it.
I'm not explaining it as well as Tobi Wan did, but if you watch the Real Talk with Tobi Wan, he explains it very well. Not saying Blizzard couldn't do it, but they'd need to do it more like Valve and less like Riot. Stewardship, not control. There's a difference.
|
|
|
On October 20 2012 00:44 Brainling wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2012 00:41 Aelonius wrote:On October 19 2012 15:41 Grubby wrote:On October 19 2012 15:40 itsjustatank wrote:» Without a governing body, there can be bullying, or senseless competition over a date which ends up hurting both tournaments. Isolating the free market as a problem is pretty hilarious. If companies cannot survive, they have an inferior product and deserve to get bounced out of the scene. Keeping them around through the establishment of a cartel creates a disincentive to innovate. » A governing body would require authoritative power over all tournament organizers in order to work. They would also need financial stability (to pay out the people who have the hard work of keeping tournaments in line, and for other reasons), and all this body must be kept objective & fair, mediating and reaching compromises which everyone can be equally unhappy with (the golden rule of compromise). I think I don't need to tell you how hard it would to found an organization that has all these attributes, no matter how much we seem to want one - and therefore how long it'll probably still take for one to appear. This is illegal in multiple jurisdictions, such as the United States and the European Union. And before you say that real sports organizations exist, you have to understand that they receive statutory exemptions to antitrust law through years of lobbying and billions of dollars of marketing that ESPORTS can't match. Which is why I said finances are important. As I think shone through, I consider it unlikely that this would happen. I didn't know about the illegal/exemption thing though, that's interesting. Though I have to say, that eSports doesn't necessarily go by the same laws that we recognize in the Real World. I am not sure, but as far as I know, each tournament with a prizepool bigger than a certain amount has to apply for a license to hold this tournament, at Blizzard. This would mean that if Blizzard would set up an organisation to regulate fair competition, that they would be in their right. After all, you have to have a license from them to get 'permission' to hold a tournament. Then there's lot of sub-conditions to it. Wouldn't this mean that Blizzard would have the ability to be that neutral party in the world, due to their IP rights and contracts with all parties together? Theoretically of course. The problem with this is the "Riot Effect", something most eSports fans loath. That is, Riot is the sole arbiter of their own game. That causes the tournament structure to completely rotate around Riot's center of orbit. If Riot ever back out, or lowers support, the whole scene gets the rug pulled out from under it. I'm not explaining it as well as Tobi Wan did, but if you watch the Real Talk with Tobi Wan, he explains it very well. Not saying Blizzard couldn't do it, but they'd need to do it more like Valve and less like Riot. Stewardship, not control. There's a difference.
A fair point.
The reason I mentioned is that a governing body initiated by the creator of the licensed property, would legally be acceptable if I read it correctly. It may not have to be Blizzard themselves, but a partner that can do this separately from the producer. I feel it might help the scene be more organised and less overly filled with major events for schedule clashes.
I feel that we'd benefit from a central organ which structurizes the tournaments into time-brackets, so that we won't get scheduling conflicts.
|
Grubby showing how it is done as usual. Loving it. Have loved Blizzard games till now, will keep faith.
|
The reason I think League of Legends keeps players playing: because every 2-3 weeks something new is released such as a new Champion. Also, every 2-3 weeks there is a balance patch, fixing and making the game more balanced (or completely fucking up a viability of a champion)
People want new things constantly, and it's going to be hard to keep a player base without patches every so often and new units/features every so often. I mean from the Starcraft 2 standpoint we can say new strategies come out, but for a player like me who cannot execute a strategy perfectly, it just does not appeal. Like how damn long does it take to fix a simple unit (carrier?). I mean people can say it took a few years to get the Champion Evelynn to be viable, but at least Riot got around to fixing this champion instead of leaving it in the dust like Blizzard did to the Carrier. (Why even transfer the unit from SC1 then?)
I think Starcraft 2 would be more interesting if they had objectives in the game, such as if you capture a Generator Field, it increases the income you get from minerals. Leading people to fight over the Generator Field instead of first to destroy each others buildings, I mean that is still the main goal of the game, but have other goals of the game as well.
In League of Legends people can turtle all day to protect their base, or people can force team fights over objectives such as Dragon, Baron and even Turrets. I just think it would be interesting to have other things to fight over, I know there is Xel'Naga watch towers to fight over, but adding even more would bring interesting concepts and strategies to the game.
|
This is an amazing post. I have always been a fan ever since hearing about you, sir. GL and although I am generally a Kespa fan, I wouldn't mind seeing you kick their asses consistently.
In relation to the actual content, I think these are great ideas. I especially like the ideas on getting casual gamers to play the game. I think strong points were made there, the game itself doesn't need to be dumbed down, just create a lot of mini-games that are basically just fun to play without need for ceaseless and competitive practice.
Also, I love how positive this is. You raise a good point on Blizzard delivering with their expansions. And I remember BW had to reach a certain patch before people thought it was totally balanced. With so much negativity in these forums, a little faith is what we need around here. This would also prevent otherwise constructive suggestions for Blizzard from turning into whines and rants.
Good job. Really, this is a great post.
|
» Difficulty: If the game is not difficult enough, the fans will not respect the players' skill. I have respect for a piano player (One-handed Pirate of the Carribean - By Wibi Soerjadi) because I admire what I cannot do. Blizzard does not need to dumb down the game, because that won't get the casuals back. Improving the Used Map Settings / Arcade will get casuals. They just like to play Tower Defense, DotA, Footmen frenzy and so forth - and in between look at Tournament streams on the BNet 3.0 in-game client.
AND
» Difficulty: If the game is not difficult enough, the fans will not respect the players' skill. I have respect for a piano player (One-handed Pirate of the Carribean - By Wibi Soerjadi) because I admire what I cannot do. Blizzard does not need to dumb down the game, because that won't get the casuals back. Improving the Used Map Settings / Arcade will get casuals. They just like to play Tower Defense, DotA, Footmen frenzy and so forth - and in between look at Tournament streams on the BNet 3.0 in-game client.
I cannot agree more. I've managed to scalp a few GMs here and there with a simple straightforward build that they must have seen many times already I'm sure, and yet they couldn't stop it. I can't stress enough that I would never have pulled this off in Brood War. Watching SC2 is not as impressive as it should be and would benefit from a drastic increase in skill ceiling (which brings us back to the same old topic of bad race design blablabla...)
|
Great read. I agree here with all the points, seeing as this is a more realistic analysis of the game compared to the "sky is falling" threads.
|
On October 20 2012 00:06 itsjustatank wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 16:53 JackReacher wrote:On October 19 2012 15:41 Grubby wrote:On October 19 2012 15:40 itsjustatank wrote:» Without a governing body, there can be bullying, or senseless competition over a date which ends up hurting both tournaments. Isolating the free market as a problem is pretty hilarious. If companies cannot survive, they have an inferior product and deserve to get bounced out of the scene. Keeping them around through the establishment of a cartel creates a disincentive to innovate. » A governing body would require authoritative power over all tournament organizers in order to work. They would also need financial stability (to pay out the people who have the hard work of keeping tournaments in line, and for other reasons), and all this body must be kept objective & fair, mediating and reaching compromises which everyone can be equally unhappy with (the golden rule of compromise). I think I don't need to tell you how hard it would to found an organization that has all these attributes, no matter how much we seem to want one - and therefore how long it'll probably still take for one to appear. This is illegal in multiple jurisdictions, such as the United States and the European Union. And before you say that real sports organizations exist, you have to understand that they receive statutory exemptions to antitrust law through years of lobbying and billions of dollars of marketing that ESPORTS can't match. Which is why I said finances are important. As I think shone through, I consider it unlikely that this would happen. I didn't know about the illegal/exemption thing though, that's interesting. Though I have to say, that eSports doesn't necessarily go by the same laws that we recognize in the Real World. It's not illegal if that governing organization is Blizzard itself, using it's intellectual property rights to use of its game as leverage to force organizers to cooperate. There is something I have been thinking about and considering lately, and the more I think about it, the more certain I am that this could possibly be THE solution to the problems people are seeing with the SC2 scene and tournament saturation. While interesting, Blizzard cannot regulate much more than giving companies the license to operate the game. If they become overbearing in their requirements and restrictions, these organizations will simply drop StarCraft competition and move to a non-Blizzard game.
Same difference. If someone pulls out of running tournaments, Blizzard can allow more from someone else.
I don't think Blizzard could feasibly do this at this point in the development of the tournament scene. This would have worked if they had a clear vision from the start and maintained strong, transparent control.
|
This is a fantastic thread. Easily one of the best posts on TL in the last 6 months.
I agree with almost all of this.
|
» For Liquipedia to get "Liquipedia TV" which is a show that would combine all the results of the past week into a nice consumable TV show
SportsCenter for StarCraft would be amazing. Hard to pull off, but amazing.
|
Amazing post Grubby, really really appreciate concerted effort and care from a high profile professional gamer as yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
