|
On May 01 2013 05:31 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 05:23 BronzeKnee wrote:On April 30 2013 22:33 Plansix wrote:On April 30 2013 22:27 poorcloud wrote:
Isn't it weird that the quality of the competition in this tournament is evidently lower but the prize pool is the same???
It almost seems like Blizzard is trying to manipulate and regulate the market rather than allowing free competition. Prize pools have nothing to do with a free market in any way. You don't understand economics at all. A big prize pool attracts good players, which attracts fans, and those fans attract sponsors... BroneKnee, stop editing my posts to serve your point. I am talking about the concept of the Free Market, created by Adam Smith Show nested quote +On April 30 2013 22:33 Plansix wrote:On April 30 2013 22:27 poorcloud wrote:
Isn't it weird that the quality of the competition in this tournament is evidently lower but the prize pool is the same???
It almost seems like Blizzard is trying to manipulate and regulate the market rather than allowing free competition. Prize pools have nothing to do with a free market in any way. There is no product being provided to the player or exchange of goods for services. Adam Smith would not approve of your theory. If anything, Blizzard is attempting to have a promote a skilled player pool in each time zone. Basing the prize pool on the projected skill of the players is very silly when anyone from any region can compete in the event. Also, if you knock down the prize pool based on the community's perception of the skill level of the player pool, the high skilled players will simply move to a different region the community believe that the skill level is higher. I made a number of other points in that post and if you don't want to respond to those, don't respond at all. I agree with the points later in the post that the money promotes players moving to different regions, so I am even sure what you are trying to say.
I'm not editing your post. What you said was not a valid statement: "Prize pools have nothing to do with a free market in any way"? Prize Pools are tied to the free market in every way. I didn't even take your quote out of context and I'll respond to the bold part now.
Tell me, why is Blizzard attempting to promote a skilled player pool? Let's think about... do you really think it has nothing to do with Blizzard wanting to make more money? No, they want to a create a skilled player pool to advance their game and attract fans who pay to watch those games and sponsors.
Remember, the rest of what I said: "A big prize pool attracts good players, which attracts fans, and those fans attract sponsors..."
So a big prize pool attracts and develops good players, who attracts fans who pay for the product and fans attracts sponsors that pay for the prize pool. And Blizzard takes a cut of it all..
This entire endeavor, E-Sports is about making money. They do so by producing games people want to watch and get excited about. Just like the NFL, or NBA, Boxing, ect... It is entirely driven by the free market.
Blizzard is investing in E-Sports with their prize pools to develop players to attract paying fans that will attract sponsors ect... they expect a return on this, Blizzard isn't a charity.
|
On May 01 2013 05:35 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 05:31 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 05:23 BronzeKnee wrote:On April 30 2013 22:33 Plansix wrote:On April 30 2013 22:27 poorcloud wrote:
Isn't it weird that the quality of the competition in this tournament is evidently lower but the prize pool is the same???
It almost seems like Blizzard is trying to manipulate and regulate the market rather than allowing free competition. Prize pools have nothing to do with a free market in any way. You don't understand economics at all. A big prize pool attracts good players, which attracts fans, and those fans attract sponsors... BroneKnee, stop editing my posts to serve your point. I am talking about the concept of the Free Market, created by Adam Smith On April 30 2013 22:33 Plansix wrote:On April 30 2013 22:27 poorcloud wrote:
Isn't it weird that the quality of the competition in this tournament is evidently lower but the prize pool is the same???
It almost seems like Blizzard is trying to manipulate and regulate the market rather than allowing free competition. Prize pools have nothing to do with a free market in any way. There is no product being provided to the player or exchange of goods for services. Adam Smith would not approve of your theory. If anything, Blizzard is attempting to have a promote a skilled player pool in each time zone. Basing the prize pool on the projected skill of the players is very silly when anyone from any region can compete in the event. Also, if you knock down the prize pool based on the community's perception of the skill level of the player pool, the high skilled players will simply move to a different region the community believe that the skill level is higher. I made a number of other points in that post and if you don't want to respond to those, don't respond at all. I agree with the points later in the post that the money promotes players moving to different regions, so I am even sure what you are trying to say. I'm not editing your post. What you said is not a valid statement: "Prize pools have nothing to do with a free market in any way"? Prize Pools are tied to the free market in every way. Tell me, why is Blizzard attempting to promote a skilled player pool? Let's think about... do you really think it has nothing to do with Blizzard wanting to make more money is economically driven? Remember, the rest of what I said: A big prize pool attracts good players, which attracts fans, and those fans attract sponsors...So a big prize pool attracts good players, who attracts fans, who attracts sponsors that pay for the prize pool. And Blizzard takes a cut of it all.. This entire endeavor, E-Sports is about making money. They do so by producing games people want to watch and get excited about. Just like the NFL, or NBA, Boxing, ect... It is entirely driven by the free market.
Removing things from a post counts as editing. Removing things I say later on because you only want to respond to one sentence is editing the post to benefit your point. It's called quoting out of context, cite a single sentence or part of a sentence without the rest of the paragraph to distort its intended meaning.
I didn't say that prize pools were removed from the free market. I said they are not set by the free market, which is detailed in the parts you removed. The prize pool itself is not a product or a service and no prize pool in any sport is reflective the amount of effort used to obtain it. The process of setting the prize pool not the same process as setting the price of a pair of shoes.
The prize pool and money make promote actions and affect the market for players and where they decide to play. I never argued that was not true. I also provided reasons why Blizzard and the leagues would want a level prize pool across the regions.
|
Like anyone is even remotely surprised by who advanced here.
Right..
|
Neither of them should be allowed to play in this tournament.
|
On May 01 2013 01:55 MstrJinbo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 01:41 Aveng3r wrote:
see this is why I cant get behind this idea. the AMERICAN qualifiers had snute and thestc advancing, and, brace yourself everyone, NEITHER of them are american. what exactly is the point of regional qualifiers here?? We still have State, Goswer, hellokitty, Suppy, illusion, minigun and IdrA left. My heart tells me one of them will get through. Although all my other senses tells me otherwise 
if we are lucky than one of them will make it through the american qualifiers, I agree with you here
|
On May 01 2013 05:49 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:
Neither of them should be allowed to play in this tournament.
The qualification process will likely take care of that process if that is true. I am sure after a season or two we will have a very different line up.
|
You're making basic mistakes in your understanding of capitalism, mistaking who are the consumers (fans) and who are the providers (players and organizations). You're also making a mistake with your writing. Each statement you write should be valid and should stand on it's own, unless it is sarcasm, in which case it should be obvious sarcasm even if someone quote it alone. That is a good writing.
To illustrate this, please quote me out of context.
Let's take a look at what you said...
I didn't say that prize pools were removed from the free market. I said they are not set by the free market, which is detailed in the parts you removed.
I don't think you said that earlier. In fact let me quote you...
On May 01 2013 05:31 Plansix wrote:
Prize pools have nothing to do with a free market in any way.
You were quite clear they have nothing to do with the free market in any way. Now you're just dancing around semantically.
Either way, it doesn't matter, both arguments you made are invalid. Prize pools are set by the free market. Blizzard is investing in E-Sports because they expect a return, that is how the free market works. When you put stock into a company, you think that company can use your money to make even more and money, and you think that company is going to do well. This is exactly the same to Blizzard's investment into E-Sports.
They believe that higher prize pools will result in better players and more fans which means more money and sponsors for them. Otherwise they wouldn't have raised the prize pools in the first place. Blizzard believes this WCS thing is going to work out, and is backing it with it's money, the same way someone backs Google with the money by buying stock.
That is how the free market works. Blizzard is free in the market to set the prize pool to whatever point it thinks it can make the most money, provided they afford said point. Blizzard did exactly that, they would be stupid not too. In this case, this is a long term investment.
|
On May 01 2013 05:51 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 05:49 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:
Neither of them should be allowed to play in this tournament. The qualification process will likely take care of that process if that is true. I am sure after a season or two we will have a very different line up.
By the end of the year I expect it will basically become so bad than Blizzard will be forced to put a residency rule in.
|
On May 01 2013 05:57 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 05:51 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 05:49 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:
Neither of them should be allowed to play in this tournament. The qualification process will likely take care of that process if that is true. I am sure after a season or two we will have a very different line up. By the end of the year I expect it will basically become so bad than Blizzard will be forced to put a residency rule in.
Yes, it is very likely going to change. We already get to see Koreans in the GSL and Proleague, we don't need to see them in WCS America too. I for one, want to see the American scene and European scene without Koreans.
I'd certainly watch more WCS if that was the case.
|
United States97276 Posts
On May 01 2013 05:57 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 05:51 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 05:49 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:
Neither of them should be allowed to play in this tournament. The qualification process will likely take care of that process if that is true. I am sure after a season or two we will have a very different line up. By the end of the year I expect it will basically become so bad than Blizzard will be forced to put a residency rule in.
I thought I read somewhere that this was already the plan. Something about how these first few seasons were supposed to entice teams to set up houses in other regions and next year the whole tournament was going to be played offline. Dont 100% remember where I read that, though.
|
On May 01 2013 05:57 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 05:51 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 05:49 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:
Neither of them should be allowed to play in this tournament. The qualification process will likely take care of that process if that is true. I am sure after a season or two we will have a very different line up. By the end of the year I expect it will basically become so bad than Blizzard will be forced to put a residency rule in.
Once the round of 32 and challengers division become an in studio broadcast, they won't need a residency rule. The fact that the players will be expected to show up weekly will solve that problem. It will also remove a lot of the players who aren't committed to the playing, because they simply won't move.
|
On May 01 2013 06:02 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 05:57 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:On May 01 2013 05:51 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 05:49 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:
Neither of them should be allowed to play in this tournament. The qualification process will likely take care of that process if that is true. I am sure after a season or two we will have a very different line up. By the end of the year I expect it will basically become so bad than Blizzard will be forced to put a residency rule in. Once the round of 32 and challengers division become an in studio broadcast, they won't need a residency rule. The fact that the players will be expected to show up weekly will solve that problem. It will also remove a lot of the players who aren't committed to the playing, because they simply won't move.
That's fine too, provided we don't see Koreans moving en masse to the USA in order to play WCS NA.
Basically WCS should exist to promote local talent. I have no issue with the odd Korean or European living elsewhere and therefore helping out the local scene (eg. Demuslim, ForGG, Polt, Violet, Select etc...) but the overwhelming majority should be players who are citizens of the region in question.
|
On May 01 2013 05:52 BronzeKnee wrote:You're making basic mistakes in your understanding of capitalism, mistaking who are the consumers (fans) and who are the providers (players and organizations). You're also making a mistake with your writing. Each statement you write should be valid and should stand on it's own, unless it is sarcasm, in which case it should be obvious sarcasm even if someone quote it alone. That is a good writing. To illustrate this, please quote me out of context. Let's take a look at what you said... Show nested quote +I didn't say that prize pools were removed from the free market. I said they are not set by the free market, which is detailed in the parts you removed. I don't think you said that earlier. In fact let me quote you... Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 05:31 Plansix wrote:
Prize pools have nothing to do with a free market in any way. You were quite clear they have nothing to do with the free market in any way. Now you're just dancing around semantically. Either way, it doesn't matter. Blizzard is investing in E-Sports because they expect a return, that is how the free market works. When you put stock into a company, you think that company can use your money to make even more and money, and you think that company is going to do well. This is exactly the same to Blizzard's investment into E-Sports. They believe that higher prize pools will result in better players and more fans which means more money and sponsors for them. Otherwise they wouldn't have raised the prize pools in the first place. Blizzard believes this WCS thing is going to work out, and is backing it with it's money, the same way someone backs Google with the money by buying stock.
That is how the free market works.
Do you argue like this in real life? Jump on one sentence in a whole paragraph and then talk down to the person, using phrases like "basic mistakes in your understanding of capitalism"? I am citing Adam Smith, who coined the phrase "free market", so maybe I might not be totally clueless.
Once again, I stated that the way prize pools are set is not done in the same way that a pair of shoes are priced. Prize pools are not a retail product and the amount they are worth is not reflective of the amount of work put in. The post I was responding to stated that Blizzard was trying to "control the market", which is a silly thing to say. There is no prize pool market that Blizzard is controlling or leagues are fighting over.
|
Not really spoilers in my opinion. :p
|
On May 01 2013 06:11 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 06:02 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 05:57 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:On May 01 2013 05:51 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 05:49 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:
Neither of them should be allowed to play in this tournament. The qualification process will likely take care of that process if that is true. I am sure after a season or two we will have a very different line up. By the end of the year I expect it will basically become so bad than Blizzard will be forced to put a residency rule in. Once the round of 32 and challengers division become an in studio broadcast, they won't need a residency rule. The fact that the players will be expected to show up weekly will solve that problem. It will also remove a lot of the players who aren't committed to the playing, because they simply won't move. That's fine too, provided we don't see Koreans moving en masse to the USA in order to play WCS NA. Basically WCS should exist to promote local talent. I have no issue with the odd Korean or European living elsewhere and therefore helping out the local scene (eg. Demuslim, ForGG, Polt, Violet, Select etc...) but the overwhelming majority should be players who are citizens of the region in question.
Clearly, and I doubt that a lot of Korean players are going to come over on mass to play in WCS America. I mean, look at Korea and how many non-Koreans live there. I don't expect them to move en masse to NA for any reason. We might get a few more Polts and MCs(who is in EU), but that is about it.
|
Congratulations to Snute and TheStC!
|
Snute came VERY close to beating TheStC, glad he qualified too!
|
On May 01 2013 05:49 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:
Neither of them should be allowed to play in this tournament.
This is funny to me because you, for the longest time, have been promoting the "lmao foreigner pros are shit" attitude. 
|
All this talk about free markets and communism in this situation really shows a profound misunderstanding of those concepts. Those concepts have nothing to do with this topic. Blizzard is not the State. What Blizzard does with their money is their decision. In a free market people do with their money what they want, and they enter in contracts with others as they choose, and that is all that has happened here. It's rather funny that some want to dictate how a company should spend their own money, and then claim they want to do that in the name of Free Markets. People are so full of random hate towards Blizzard that they'll make/defend any argument, so long as it supports the dogma: "Blizzard is evil/wrong about everything".
|
On May 01 2013 06:18 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 05:52 BronzeKnee wrote:You're making basic mistakes in your understanding of capitalism, mistaking who are the consumers (fans) and who are the providers (players and organizations). You're also making a mistake with your writing. Each statement you write should be valid and should stand on it's own, unless it is sarcasm, in which case it should be obvious sarcasm even if someone quote it alone. That is a good writing. To illustrate this, please quote me out of context. Let's take a look at what you said... I didn't say that prize pools were removed from the free market. I said they are not set by the free market, which is detailed in the parts you removed. I don't think you said that earlier. In fact let me quote you... On May 01 2013 05:31 Plansix wrote:
Prize pools have nothing to do with a free market in any way. You were quite clear they have nothing to do with the free market in any way. Now you're just dancing around semantically. Either way, it doesn't matter. Blizzard is investing in E-Sports because they expect a return, that is how the free market works. When you put stock into a company, you think that company can use your money to make even more and money, and you think that company is going to do well. This is exactly the same to Blizzard's investment into E-Sports. They believe that higher prize pools will result in better players and more fans which means more money and sponsors for them. Otherwise they wouldn't have raised the prize pools in the first place. Blizzard believes this WCS thing is going to work out, and is backing it with it's money, the same way someone backs Google with the money by buying stock.
That is how the free market works.
Do you argue like this in real life? Jump on one sentence in a whole paragraph and then talk down to the person, using phrases like "basic mistakes in your understanding of capitalism"? I am citing Adam Smith, who coined the phrase "free market", so maybe I might not be totally clueless. Once again, I stated that the way prize pools are set is not done in the same way that a pair of shoes are priced. Prize pools are not a retail product and the amount they are worth is not reflective of the amount of work put in. The post I was responding to stated that Blizzard was trying to "control the market", which is a silly thing to say. There is no prize pool market that Blizzard is controlling or leagues are fighting over.
I argue like this on the internet, because this is the internet. I do enjoy debating in real life greatly, but that has nothing to do with this.
The free market is far more than pricing of retail products or basic services.
Take stocks for example. The stock price itself it based purely on supply and demand. The higher the demand for a stock, the lower the supply and the higher the price goes. Simple economics.
But what about the decision to buy a stock... that is where it becomes complex. Obviously, if you knew what each stock going to do in value, you'd put all you money into the stock that was going to make you the most money, and only that stock.
But people generally don't do that, because no one can say with certainty what each stock is going to do in value. So we spread out our portfolios to mitigate risk. That decision is related to supply and demand in some ways(related in that you might not buy a stock that you think will do well because the demand for it is high, and thus the price is more than you can afford or in the sense that you believe the future demand for a stock will increase, and thus it's price will increase) but supply and demand isn't the be all end all there. Yet, you can make different decisions in the free market because it is unhindered by external regulation or control by the government. No one is telling what stocks you must buy or can't buy.
And thus, the decision about whether or not to buy a stock, (which is connected the free market) is analogous to what Blizzard is doing here with prize pools. Blizzard is free and unhindered by external regulation or control by the government, to feed E-Sports with high prize pools, with the belief that these prize pools will ultimately lead them to make more money in the end by developing a better player base which in turn makes the game more fun to watch.
Blizzard is investing as much as money as they are believe is necessary (up to the point they can afford) to make as much money as possible, and they free to do so. They believe they can create a higher demand for E-Sports with this action, because they believe the action of creating bigger prize pools will result in a better product.
The piece about comparing the government to Blizzard, and the competitors to companies under a government is an interesting comparison, and goes far in showing that the beliefs of capitalism and the free market are incredibly flawed.
This has become overly complex. The entire point of this argument was to show that the free market controls prize pools. While you haven't outright admitted that it was a poor choice of words on your part, I believe I've shown that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
