Maybe because his premise was wrong. His thesis didn't pan out. Top that off with the fact that SC2 isn't dying, and that would allow us to conclude that maybe he jumped the gun a little bit.
Tell me which part of his thesis was incorrect (please look at his actual arguments).
Also, "didn't pan out" makes no sense as his time horizont was 2 years. (he actually predicted viewers would increase after HOTS was released).
This is the problem with all the Destiny-haters. Either they haven't actually taken the time to read it, or they didn't understand it. The only thing I believe we can criticise him for, is not comming up with some kind of definition for what he implies by "death". (as somet people apparently takes that as a sign noone will play it). He probably implies by "death" that the scene will be like 2-4 times smaller 2 years from now than it was in the end of WOL (or something like that).
I've actually done that. Just because his horizon is 2 years does not mean that he can just make it so. He gives no reason for that. Furthermore, it's hard to take it seriously when he has lines that are meant to parody the community in an incredibly offensive manner. It has been said before, he caters to a less competitive community that enjoy watching him, this means that his view is going to be something that wants to grow that; i.e. bunker wars games, custom games in general, achievements. On TL, the site tends to cater to competitive people, and in general I can't think of an enormous non-competitive factor that kept BW alive. It has been said before that it isn't that he is necessarily wrong, but he is going to be biased towards the community he wants to see grow. I personally also just think that a major reason why his argument is even considered is because of his standing in the community; I see more of his supporters shouting down people that have reasonable issues with his argument's frame, not just the fact he doesn't define what death is, rather than people just randomly criticising his argument here. That is just the way I see it, I understand if we have differing opinions about this.
Maybe because his premise was wrong. His thesis didn't pan out. Top that off with the fact that SC2 isn't dying, and that would allow us to conclude that maybe he jumped the gun a little bit.
Tell me which part of his thesis was incorrect (please look at his actual arguments).
Also, "didn't pan out" makes no sense as his time horizont was 2 years. (he actually predicted viewers would increase after HOTS was released).
This is the problem with all the Destiny-haters. Either they haven't actually taken the time to read it, or they didn't understand it. The only thing I believe we can criticise him for, is not comming up with some kind of definition for what he implies by "death". (as somet people apparently takes that as a sign noone will play it). He probably implies by "death" that the scene will be like 2-4 times smaller 2 years from now than it was in the end of WOL (or something like that).
I've actually done that. Just because his horizon is 2 years does not mean that he can just make it so. He gives no reason for that. Furthermore, it's hard to take it seriously when he has lines that are meant to parody the community in an incredibly offensive manner. It has been said before, he caters to a less competitive community that enjoy watching him, this means that his view is going to be something that wants to grow that; i.e. bunker wars games, custom games in general, achievements. On TL, the site tends to cater to competitive people, and in general I can't think of an enormous non-competitive factor that kept BW alive. It has been said before that it isn't that he is necessarily wrong, but he is going to be biased towards the community he wants to see grow. I personally also just think that a major reason why his argument is even considered is because of his standing in the community; I see more of his supporters shouting down people that have reasonable issues with his argument's frame, not just the fact he doesn't define what death is, rather than people just randomly criticising his argument here. That is just the way I see it, I understand if we have differing opinions about this.
He gives no reason for the exact time horizont. Correct. But whether its 1.5 years, 2.5 yers or 3 years isn't that important (it's really not the essense of the article). That doesn't mean you can't disagree with his timeline and think he is wrong in that regard, but if that is the only thing you took away from the article, you missed the point. The important thing to take away from his article is that Blizzard needs to change its business model to make the game more appealing to casuals, which will have the effect of boosting Sc2 as an esports. If blizard doesn't do that, Sc2 will eventually "die" as an esport. Sure he could expressed him self in a less drastic way, however the response he gets from all the haters is absolutely ridcilous. I can't believe Destiny-haters just can't analyze his arguments/thought proces and argue were he goes wrong in order to end up with the conlcusion, instead of just blindly shitting on him.
Anyway if you have actually analyzed his arguments (and you are sure you actually understand the essense of the article), please link me to that.
Maybe because his premise was wrong. His thesis didn't pan out. Top that off with the fact that SC2 isn't dying, and that would allow us to conclude that maybe he jumped the gun a little bit.
Tell me which part of his thesis was incorrect (please look at his actual arguments).
Also, "didn't pan out" makes no sense as his time horizont was 2 years. (he actually predicted viewers would increase after HOTS was released).
This is the problem with all the Destiny-haters. Either they haven't actually taken the time to read it, or they didn't understand it. The only thing I believe we can criticise him for, is not comming up with some kind of definition for what he implies by "death". (as somet people apparently takes that as a sign noone will play it). He probably implies by "death" that the scene will be like 2-4 times smaller 2 years from now than it was in the end of WOL (or something like that).
I've actually done that. Just because his horizon is 2 years does not mean that he can just make it so. He gives no reason for that. Furthermore, it's hard to take it seriously when he has lines that are meant to parody the community in an incredibly offensive manner. It has been said before, he caters to a less competitive community that enjoy watching him, this means that his view is going to be something that wants to grow that; i.e. bunker wars games, custom games in general, achievements. On TL, the site tends to cater to competitive people, and in general I can't think of an enormous non-competitive factor that kept BW alive. It has been said before that it isn't that he is necessarily wrong, but he is going to be biased towards the community he wants to see grow. I personally also just think that a major reason why his argument is even considered is because of his standing in the community; I see more of his supporters shouting down people that have reasonable issues with his argument's frame, not just the fact he doesn't define what death is, rather than people just randomly criticising his argument here. That is just the way I see it, I understand if we have differing opinions about this.
He gives no reason for the exact time horizont. Correct. But whether its 1.5 years, 2.5 yers or 3 years isn't that important (it's really not the essense of the article). That doesn't mean you can't disagree with his timeline and think he is wrong in that regard, but if that is the only thing you took away from the article, you missed the point. The important thing to take away from his article is that Blizzard needs to change its business model to make the game more appealing to casuals, which will have the effect of boosting Sc2 as an esports. If blizard doesn't do that, Sc2 will eventually "die" as an esport. Sure he could expressed him self in a less drastic way, however the response he gets from all the haters is absolutely ridcilous. I can't believe Destiny-haters just can't analyze his arguments/thought proces and argue were he goes wrong in order to end up with the conlcusion, instead of just blindly shitting on him.
Anyway if you have actually analyzed his arguments (and you are sure you actually understand the essense of the article), please link me to that.
Just re-read through Destiny's post. You are pretty accurate, Destiny does not declare SC2 dead, he doesn't even guarantee it will be dead by LOTV. He states that Blizzard must make changes, they are the focal point that needs to be fixed, OR then SC2 will die. In logical terms, if Blizzard does not change its approach, then Starcraft will see a massive drop in Esports popularity.
It doesn't even feel like he's making a definitive argument to it dying or not dying, hes arguing that only Blizzard can save it. His title directly states that the survival of the game relies far more on Blizzard than upon the community's involvement. The closest thing Destiny comes to stating something about true doom is when he says that a big "nail of the coffin" is the lack of lasting growth after the first week of the Hots beta and comparing it to the Brood War growth. However, his argument comparing the Hots beta with Brood War makes no sense at all. The conditions for the two are completely different, there was already an established tournament scene for WoL, Brood War had nowhere to go but up.
And can you honestly tell me that currently Blizzard isn't attempting to inject new life into the game and make it more accessible for non-competitive players?
- More ways to get achievements - Customizable decals or skins for units - Paid/unpaid name change - Fix the cluster that is "The Arcade"
These were the four things Destiny listed as suggestions for Blizzard as things to implement for Blizzard(I deleted his extraneous parenthesized mentions, they don't add anything except profanity.)
Let's have a look through each of these suggestions.
The first suggestion seems like there has been headway made, there are extra achievements based particularly on the leveling system that was introduced and other things.
The second suggestion is there, and in fact there are a number of people complaining about disabling the skins because it confuses them. We know the second exists.
The third suggestion is not present to my knowledge, they whiffed on this in Destiny's eyes.
The fourth suggestion feels at worst partially done. There's is a full tab for the arcade on the main screen, spotlighting certain games, more options to navigate to games that you want. It probably isn't fully done, certain maps at the top still dominate everything else.
So headway has been made on three of these four, and one of them is pretty much nailed. Therefore, even if SC2 is dead by LOTV, Destiny will still be wrong and have missed the mark on his argument.
Maybe because his premise was wrong. His thesis didn't pan out. Top that off with the fact that SC2 isn't dying, and that would allow us to conclude that maybe he jumped the gun a little bit.
Tell me which part of his thesis was incorrect (please look at his actual arguments).
Also, "didn't pan out" makes no sense as his time horizont was 2 years. (he actually predicted viewers would increase after HOTS was released).
This is the problem with all the Destiny-haters. Either they haven't actually taken the time to read it, or they didn't understand it. The only thing I believe we can criticise him for, is not comming up with some kind of definition for what he implies by "death". (as somet people apparently takes that as a sign noone will play it). He probably implies by "death" that the scene will be like 2-4 times smaller 2 years from now than it was in the end of WOL (or something like that).
I've actually done that. Just because his horizon is 2 years does not mean that he can just make it so. He gives no reason for that. Furthermore, it's hard to take it seriously when he has lines that are meant to parody the community in an incredibly offensive manner. It has been said before, he caters to a less competitive community that enjoy watching him, this means that his view is going to be something that wants to grow that; i.e. bunker wars games, custom games in general, achievements. On TL, the site tends to cater to competitive people, and in general I can't think of an enormous non-competitive factor that kept BW alive. It has been said before that it isn't that he is necessarily wrong, but he is going to be biased towards the community he wants to see grow. I personally also just think that a major reason why his argument is even considered is because of his standing in the community; I see more of his supporters shouting down people that have reasonable issues with his argument's frame, not just the fact he doesn't define what death is, rather than people just randomly criticising his argument here. That is just the way I see it, I understand if we have differing opinions about this.
He gives no reason for the exact time horizont. Correct. But whether its 1.5 years, 2.5 yers or 3 years isn't that important (it's really not the essense of the article). That doesn't mean you can't disagree with his timeline and think he is wrong in that regard, but if that is the only thing you took away from the article, you missed the point. The important thing to take away from his article is that Blizzard needs to change its business model to make the game more appealing to casuals, which will have the effect of boosting Sc2 as an esports. If blizard doesn't do that, Sc2 will eventually "die" as an esport. Sure he could expressed him self in a less drastic way, however the response he gets from all the haters is absolutely ridcilous. I can't believe Destiny-haters just can't analyze his arguments/thought proces and argue were he goes wrong in order to end up with the conlcusion, instead of just blindly shitting on him.
Anyway if you have actually analyzed his arguments (and you are sure you actually understand the essense of the article), please link me to that.
Just re-read through Destiny's post. You are pretty accurate, Destiny does not declare SC2 dead, he doesn't even guarantee it will be dead by LOTV. He states that Blizzard must make changes, they are the focal point that needs to be fixed, OR then SC2 will die. In logical terms, if Blizzard does not change its approach, then Starcraft will see a massive drop in Esports popularity.
It doesn't even feel like he's making a definitive argument to it dying or not dying, hes arguing that only Blizzard can save it. His title directly states that the survival of the game relies far more on Blizzard than upon the community's involvement. The closest thing Destiny comes to stating something about true doom is when he says that a big "nail of the coffin" is the lack of lasting growth after the first week of the Hots beta and comparing it to the Brood War growth. However, his argument comparing the Hots beta with Brood War makes no sense at all. The conditions for the two are completely different, there was already an established tournament scene for WoL, Brood War had nowhere to go but up.
And can you honestly tell me that currently Blizzard isn't attempting to inject new life into the game and make it more accessible for non-competitive players?
- More ways to get achievements - Customizable decals or skins for units - Paid/unpaid name change - Fix the cluster that is "The Arcade"
These were the four things Destiny listed as suggestions for Blizzard as things to implement for Blizzard(I deleted his extraneous parenthesized mentions, they don't add anything except profanity.)
Let's have a look through each of these suggestions.
The first suggestion seems like there has been headway made, there are extra achievements based particularly on the leveling system that was introduced and other things.
The second suggestion is there, and in fact there are a number of people complaining about disabling the skins because it confuses them. We know the second exists.
The third suggestion is not present to my knowledge, they whiffed on this in Destiny's eyes.
The fourth suggestion feels at worst partially done. There's is a full tab for the arcade on the main screen, spotlighting certain games, more options to navigate to games that you want. It probably isn't fully done, certain maps at the top still dominate everything else.
So headway has been made on three of these four, and one of them is pretty much nailed. Therefore, even if SC2 is dead by LOTV, Destiny will still be wrong and have missed the mark on his argument.
I also do not think the BW comparison was relevant, because as you point out the time was completely diferent and in order to use BW in that article we need analyze a lot of factors. But quite frankly, the BW part wasn't really relevant in order to understand his message.
I am glad that you are trying to analyze his arguments, but I still think you are slightly off in your criticism. First of all, I don't think Destiny (while presenting these arguments) intented to anything else but just give a bit of inspiration (show potential solutions). I think me nor Destiny or at lot of the more competitive gamers here at TL understands the motivations of casual gamers 100%. So Destiny would probably be willing to admit that some of his specific won't solve anything/have flaws (just reread the article, he actually states that these suggestions were just on top of his head, so please do not put to much emphasize on this). Rather, I think he just points to some of the problems which casual players will run into, but I don't think its fair to invalidate Destinys point by arguing that Blizzard is already implementing archievments, improving arcade etc.
But Destiny looks at this on a bigger perspective; Why has it taken so long for Blizzard to fix this stuff? And how will can we ever get more casuals to play the game without fearing ladder anxeity. Yeh obiviously unranked games etc. are improvements, however they won't fix the fundenmental problem. Instead, Destiny believes Blizzard needs to change the business model in order to monetize casual players better (and in return give them more stuff they want).
Thats basically Destinys thought proces and in my opinion that makes 100% sense. Personally I think most of us (incl. Destiny) aren't in a position to suggest how exactly the new business model should look like. My take on this is just that Blizzard needs to hire more MBA guys who should be able to study the market, the target group (casuals), perform interviews, crush numbers and come up with a solution.
EDIT; Regarding the business model change. Destiny talks abit about it here;
Watched you guys first episode, and i'll start out by saying I was a bit worried about the whole premise when I saw it. Mind you this is without having really watched anything related to Steven in some time.
I will say I was pleased with the overall presentation, and surprised at how much Steven's attitude has altered since I last saw him doing much of anything. For Steven I'll say I mean that 100% as a compliment, as in the past I found your personal flavor not to my liking.
So basically big thumbs up, i'll be sure to check out your episode today, my terrible internet willing.
Oh forgot to mention, the reaction to the 'nobody does this for money' guy, was spot on. Being someone who busted their arse doing stuff for MLG back in 2011 and early 2012 for no pay, I can 100% promise you knowing a lot of the 'community guys' that guy couldn't of been more wrong. Do people do this because they love it, hell yeah they do. Do they want to find a way to get income from it so they can quit their day job, of course they do. Anyone thinking that people don't care at all about money is delusional. Anyone who says making money doesn't matter at all to them are either A) flat out a liar, or B) getting enough income elsewhere they don't need money.
Watched about 5 minutes of today's show and was reminded why I never want Destiny to return to this community lol. He's so polarizing as a public figure. Dear god I hope no team is dumb enough to take him on.
This looks awesome! Destiny is a great cohost. great discussions. I look forward to more episodes. Hopefully it will gain in popularity. Destiny can also handle the haters so rack that up as another reason for having him. TeamDestiny fighting!
Destiny has to stop getting distracted on his skype lol.
Like the only con of this show I feel are the moments when Destiny is looking at his skype, Chanman asks him a question, then he goes "wut?". Happened the past two episodes.
On April 12 2013 06:03 SkyDrinker wrote: Didn't really get last weeks episode, as I know nothing about computers. Hope this one will be more interesting.
Yeh it was really boring. They need more topics planned ahead or simply need to cut down the show (maybe it shouldn't last longer than 30-40 minutes).
Today's episode is at 5pm EST. We'll be talking about the impact of maps on competitive gaming and eSports and hopefully one other topic. Q&A from viewers as always to finish.
On April 19 2013 01:24 neozxa wrote: Destiny huh...I'm looking forward on watching the show, but I'm looking forward more on seeing how the stream chat will turn out later.
What an incredibly weird and odd thing to be excited for.
EPT
