The Armchair Athleticism critical series is an opinion-base article series regarding the issues and sociocultural deficiencies of the eSports scene. All articles are perceptive-base and revolving around my own experiences and understanding of the subculture.
Sociology Major & Professional Writing Minor at Concordia, Associate's Degree in Psychology & Sociology (Vanier College)
Contributed to over 11 local/national/international events - totaling up to 74,000 attendants/online spectators.
Organized/managed eight different eSports professional organizations. In addition to spearheading public relations division, news writing and marketing.
Writer of over 150 articles for various established mainstream electronic-sports websites and reporter/interviewer for established electronic-sports news sites and 200 pieces revolving around sociocultural analysis and player guides for Valve's Dota 2.
Attained over 100,000 views for Armchair Athleticism, over 2.25 million subscriptions over 105 Valve's Dota 2 player guides.
Why are you starting your own space? I was listening to the suggestions of several friends and I finally started this space after I hit a dead-end in my endeavours in E-Sports. I’m at a point where I am not really affiliated with anyone and now’s a better time than ever to do some opinion topics. Doing my own content meant I would be alone and would work around my own initiative, drive and interest. However, it also meant that I may do something that requires more work than I thought and I would be on my own. It meant that the community reception can be more direct and harsh towards me personally and my views as I would not be backed by some credible organization as when I was writer for some. In the end, this series that took me about a month of writing, editing, verification and re-writing will really be everything I’ve learned, observed and felt throughout my time. I started out with three pieces and ended up going to ten. All of them delve into inspecting the five perspectives of the scene: teams, tournaments, players, spectators and contributors. Ultimately, it aims to really take a strong look into the many issues that inhibit the StarCraft community and E-Sports culture.
Before Heart of the Swarm, there were mentions about how the scene of StarCraft II was ‘dying’; an unclear term as to what extent the eSports competition of StarCraft would dissolve to. While no one denies that the height of StarCraft II has passed after the mid-season of 2012, it’s important to note that some parts of the scene are, in fact, at a decline while others are just the natural filter of a growing subculture. The need to highlight what is worrisome and what is a natural filtered growth of StarCraft II can help create proper direction in terms of focus and urging for future endeavors in those specific fields.
For the past two or three months, I have been thinking about writing something about StarCraft’s situation overall. Actually, since Travis from League of Legends, mentioned, minorly, about how StarCraft is dying (six months ago) and in relation to how people are jumping ship to produce content for League of Legends; I have always wanted to magnify how StarCraft is coming down from its height of new content, personalities and organizations. In October and November, I noted how we were oversupplied on tournaments, new content and a lack of rotation in terms of progaming champions. Now we are starting to see new victors (usually from South Korea) but perceptively less tournaments and webshows. When people highlight the state of StarCraft, they often compare it to that of late 2011, as if the people involved and those on the outside, maintain a consistent and constant interest in a game for years on end. This coming and going, both business-wise and in general, is a filtered growth of the scene: it is the narrowing of relevant content and the decline of new events, streams and bad practices. I do think, in a lot of ways, StarCraft can be improved ranging from spread player-exposure, cycling through newer iconic people as well as Blizzard’s policy/approach in being involved with the community.
(It starts at 6:15)I suggest you take a listen to it, not all of it is relevant to StarCraft, but his personal concerns are mirrored in all eSports of today and the future. It’s insightful because they were concerns mentioned here or within communities in the past.
However, to claim StarCraft II is dying is to overlook the grand scheme of things and to ignore anything from 2010 to now. In essence, just because there is less of something, does not mean there is less popularity or interest. To put into context: despite there being more talk and more support for Dota 2 and League of Legends, does not necessarily correlate to a major decline in StarCraft II. Audiences are not exclusive to games and they are certainly not a limited resource. We’re concluding that the interest of eSports titles has grown.
"It’s dying, right? That scene is kind of dying. Maybe Heart of the Swarm will reinvigorate and I will be laughed at whenever it is a much bigger eSport than League of Legends. But I don’t think that’s the case, I don’t think it will die anytime soon, right? But basically in the StarCraft scene: things got really big but it stopped growing shortly after I sorta started following it and then it just sorta started going downhill, right? But at the same time, the content started going up and up and there was so much saturation of people doing interviews and shows. It just everything got diluted and what I think is happening right now is that there are a lot of StarCraft personalities and content-creators moving over to League of Legends side […] ”
- Travis from his Youtube series: Monday Musings
The mix understanding of StarCraft’s actual growth is due, in part, of the organizers who stretched their numbers and overhyped their achievements. It’s easy, in retrospect, to look at where we saw StarCraft going and now realizing that perhaps we exaggerated a bit in our feelings of grandeur. Now with RIOT and League of Legends setting new innovations about creating a standard of competition, eSports financial support (Valve especially here) and backing for their competitors, we can’t help but compare it to that of StarCraft II. The notion of the scene dying is due to the disproportion of players in specific regions and the dropping out of organizations, both big and small. However, these should not be the sole factors to make a basis of the scene’s death and in fact, evidence can claim that the fluctuation of tournaments featuring StarCraft and viewership are not as poor as some describe. When the StarCraft scene compares themselves to other E-Sports, the numbers are lost and the discouraged view of “what could have been” ensues. It’s a common issue where people will compare scenes without taking into circumstances of the separate games’ context and this is amongst the strongest reasons these misplaced ideas propagate into real worries.
“What we can say is that SC2 is not dying. The numbers are not going up, clearly, but they are largely stable. Interest in player streams seems to be getting lower, but WCS and other tournaments seem to easily take up the slack to keep the people watching their favorite game.” – courtesy of Conti and his tremendous work regarding Livestream and StarCraft II! I suggest you read all of the topic as there are showings of StarCraft event viewership declining.
Make no mistake, StarCraft II is still a major eSport title and will be for many months and possibly years to come. But the ideologies of it continuing to lead the pack in terms of trend-setting and ushering the general audience of traditional entertainment to eSports is definitely not in the cards. In terms of tournaments, from August 2012 to 2013, we’re actually seeing steady numbers of prize-pools (300 to 650k) across the region (less for North-American and more for Europe and South Korea – thanks to WCS) as well as inclusion of StarCraft II at multi-game events (20 to 18 more or less). We’re not in quite as dire situation as some may be lead to believe, we are just not leading the pack anymore and this is normal in a growing subculture. New foundations are always made to further up the expectations and pull for larger audiences.
Researched on the 15th of August, so the money is a little outdated (still in favour of the argument however)
eSports Earnings provides a great tool to compare years of tournaments and player earnings. The graphs may feel incomplete, but we’re mainly interested in the prize numbers for 2013 as well as how many multi-game tournaments still include StarCraft II.
What we do see here is less tournament opportunities in place for larger prize-pools by Blizzard Entertainment for each region. So while prize output is good, if not better, the amount of tournaments available for the average competitor is much less. However, without a region lock, we’re seeing a bit of starvation with North-American especially. This starvation of both quantity of major tournaments as well as unlocked regions pushes early retirements for players (fueled by their growing disinterest with the game).
How do we distinguish which is filtered growth and which is true signs of the decline of StarCraft? It’s a matter of context. IGN Pro League’s end and Major League Gaming’s redirection are signs of business: one had bad business practices, as anyone can tell you (though great public presentation), and another saw valuable markets to explore (it could be other aspects as well, there’s never one true reason; just a variety of strong justifications). KeSPA’s restructuring to a more open practice is because of the lack of popularity of StarCraft II in Korea, the WCS format that bottlenecked events and thus the need for that many teams in such a small region (eSF + KeSPA teams all for Proleague and WCS Korea [now OSL & GSL]). These are dissected examples that emphasize context to show which areas are suffering and which are simply moving on.
What I consider to be filtered growth is mostly based on opinion and perception. In 2012, we saw leaps and bounds of major production organization and presentation from the big event organizations. DreamHack always impressed me, but NASL and Turtle Entertainment [IEM/ESL] have also set the notch higher. There is an emphasis on presenters, observers (something Dota 2 hasn’t incorporated yet) and hype. Schedule and time organization have improved and attendance numbers are still very, very high. In essence, while StarCraft is readjusting in their new waistline of competitions and competitors, event organizations are setting new standards of professional work.
Let’s summarize:
Prize-pool numbers: Not any lower than we may think, just not as scattered across multiple games. I would say the lack of WCS regions within China and SEA (including Oceania) are issues, including the lack of a region lock to prevent a complete failure of a particular region. Blizzard’s position should be to keep all regions plump with healthy competition while relying on the organizers they commission for WCS production, to attract new audiences (as IEM does with Gamescom and IEM NY with Comic-Con).
Tournaments: With amount of reserved time WCS takes, to which no other tournament organizers can broadcast simultaneously with, tournament opportunities have shrunk causing many players to reconsider their options; it also causes team organizations to look into new eSports titles that offer a bit more liberty and marketable numbers for their sponsors.
Additionally, with game developers taking the reins of their scenes, they are also delegating responsibilities and excluding other organizations from producing content. Think how restricted NASL was with StarCraft II content because of Blizzard’s partnership with MLG? This is mirrored across the world and does put a hinder on new businesses. League of Legends also suffers similarly from this issue.
Viewership: I find Conti’s consistent work on the subject gives the best evidence. Within this topic, he notes that there are lower viewership numbers, but also that WCS stands on its own successfully. Overall, numbers are stable since Wings of Liberty (more or less) with events still garnering a huge interest (specifically WCS).
In summary, when we saw the strides other eSports titles are hitting, we feel this sense of unaccomplished worth. We compare ourselves to StarCraft of 2009 or StarCraft II of 2011 (Anaheim anyone?) or of Dota 2 and League of Legends. However we never really account for the major flaws of those two games. In many ways, they get things right and take a bigger investment step than Blizzard, but in other forms; the scene still needs growth; similarly with StarCraft. That is not to say that they aren’t doing better than StarCraft, they are just doing things differently and solving areas StarCraft currently suffers from (I’m sure you can think of plenty). Despite this, interest in StarCraft is steady. Declining? At times, but slowly and not looming as near as people may think. It may feel like I’m downplaying the spiraling of this scene, but I rather see it as more of refocusing the factors that matter most and then making note of where we truly stand.
To note, that I realize the exterior factors also resulting in KeSPA's restructuring and various other elements that affect the scene, including the more stable and financially welcoming system of RIOT's LCS and more.
This article isn't meant to downplay the faults of Blizzard Entertainment, but to highlight all aspects of the scene in a fair and arguably neutral light.
Many thanks to the people who proofread it:
Shawn Simon/Sheth Timothy Young/Shindigs Thomas Rigolage Dan Chou/Frodan Robbie Nakamura/GHOSTCLAW I'm also on a new timezone here, so I forget the optimal time to post in EST, ah well.
That is an interesting read and I am glad someone took the time to compare the numbers from 2013 to 2012. It gets rid of a lot of the anecdotal evidence we see out there. Its good to see that the scene is steady and that if Blizzard listens to the community and players for 2014, the numbers could climb again.
Conti's work saves everyone a lot of time thankfully. I chose a full year difference as my comparative point. But if we compared all of 2012 with the nearing of the end with 2013, I think we'd see either a consistent prize-pool number or slightly ahead.
Nonetheless, I feel that StarCraft has its huge flaws, but the interest and enjoyment of it have not faltered as much as we're mislead to believe. People will always move onto new passions after the initial hype and attention of the game has passed. It's normal, the panic that follows as well.
Thanks for commenting Plansix, you've been a consistent reader (:
No problem, there is interesting stuff in there, plus I like to have evidence to use when people claim the sky is falling.
And I think you are right that SC2 and Blizzard have huge flaws. There is part of me that thinks Blizzard is paralyzed by trying to please everyone. That they started listening to the community, but don’t know who to listen to. In the same thread you can find people demanding a more stable game, but also complaining the game is boring with the same thing every time. I really hope they continue to listen, but do what is best for the game and to keep it interesting. HotS is fun because there are new styles of play and they need to keep that going. People should be encouraged to try new things, even if things are a bit unstable because of it. Its what makes games like Dota 2 awesome, that it is always changing.
But we should encourage discussion and pointing out real suggestions to fix things, rather than just telling them Blizzard they suck.
The biggest problem with Blizzard is their misplaced role. They're concerned with viewership numbers rather than the prosperity of regional players, despite the lesser talented pool of competitors. Their goal should be a utilitarian one and let the organizations they delegate the logistics to, handle keeping the audience entertained and tuning into each region.
Secondly, no SEA/China WCS is just beyond ridiculous. I'm sure there is a reason for this, but I don't know if I'd agree with it.
These two factors would certainly elevate the feeling of a dying scene, especially when opportunity feels like a more reaching goal rather than a repeat of 2012 pre-WCS beta (where Koreans would come over to MLG, win and then leave).
SC2's design has inherent flaws. But since players were still finding opportunities to compete and win (or at least join teams to compete), there was more tolerance for these flaws. Now WCS is drying up possible smaller competitions and bottlenecking the prize-pool to a smaller amount without regional locks.
I don’t know about the issues in China, but it is a huge market and there must be a good reason why they do not have their own region. You don’t ignore that many people for no reason. If I were to bet, I would assume that the reasons have more to do with the business relationships in China and that the country is very protectionist in general. It might simply be that they don’t have anyone to work with in China.
I don think that Blizzard has hurt the growth of local players and I have always championed the idea of a minor league that is region based. The NA scene just needs more focus on itself in general, rather than the focus on bringing the Korea stars to the scene. But there is always huge push back on that front, which goes to Blizzard being paralyzed by feed back from the community. It is the problem that Blizzard has, that they don’t know what their role should be. Unlike Riot with the LCS, they cannot just take control of the entire scene without cutting out GOM and OGN. And Valve just deals with Valve and no one else for The International once a year. There is no guide book for Blizzard and they are getting mixed messages from the community.
But these are part of the growing pains of Esports, which we learn as we go. Saying “Blizzard, you need to focus on players and the viewers will take care of themselves” is a more productive discussion than “Blizzard fucked up everything”.
On September 04 2013 04:45 Plansix wrote: I don’t know about the issues in China, but it is a huge market and there must be a good reason why they do not have their own region. You don’t ignore that many people for no reason. If I were to bet, I would assume that the reasons have more to do with the business relationships in China and that the country is very protectionist in general. It might simply be that they don’t have anyone to work with in China.
I don think that Blizzard has hurt the growth of local players and I have always championed the idea of a minor league that is region based. The NA scene just needs more focus on itself in general, rather than the focus on bringing the Korea stars to the scene. But there is always huge push back on that front, which goes to Blizzard being paralyzed by feed back from the community. It is the problem that Blizzard has, that they don’t know what their role should be. Unlike Riot with the LCS, they cannot just take control of the entire scene without cutting out GOM and OGN. And Valve just deals with Valve and no one else for The International once a year. There is no guide book for Blizzard and they are getting mixed messages from the community.
But these are part of the growing pains of Esports, which we learn as we go. Saying “Blizzard, you need to focus on players and the viewers will take care of themselves” is a more productive discussion than “Blizzard fucked up everything”.
I think if they paid GameFY properly (more so than they pay the other partners), then GameFY (the guys who do WC3 and Dota 2) could easily handle this within law.
The only person to make the scene grow from within is Blizzard. Totalbiscuit can do it, MLG can do it; but it isn't a smart business move and there is no "marketing" area of their budget that could make this worthwhile for the long and consistent haul.
I think you overplay how much the community affects SC2 eSports' division decisions. I'd say they're too stubborn on so many grounds to really take what we say seriously. But I might be just exaggerating; I think they're aware, but feel they know more to make an informed decision; albeit lacking the experience to foresee the results. But now we're really getting into conjecture!
What they're doing now is pretty brutal to OGN/GSL. I noted that WCS in Korea resulted in a lot of retiring + the KeSPA sponsoring company issues, but I also feel that OGN/GSL are relying more on LoL because of how much more popular it is + how much more desirable it is for teams. With Blizzard preventing OGN/GSL from creating separate tournaments, they ultimately cut the worth of KR in half and prevent those event companies from prospering.
On September 04 2013 04:45 Plansix wrote: I don’t know about the issues in China, but it is a huge market and there must be a good reason why they do not have their own region. You don’t ignore that many people for no reason. If I were to bet, I would assume that the reasons have more to do with the business relationships in China and that the country is very protectionist in general. It might simply be that they don’t have anyone to work with in China.
My first guess would actually be that there was no WCS in China/SEA for 2013 because HotS didn't launch there in time to sync the region up with the rest of the WCS system. You might still be right--but Blizzard found collaborators in 2012, and there's several SC2 leagues in China now, so I'd guess Blizzard has options going into 2014...we'll see!
On September 04 2013 04:45 Plansix wrote: I don’t know about the issues in China, but it is a huge market and there must be a good reason why they do not have their own region. You don’t ignore that many people for no reason. If I were to bet, I would assume that the reasons have more to do with the business relationships in China and that the country is very protectionist in general. It might simply be that they don’t have anyone to work with in China.
My first guess would actually be that there was no WCS in China/SEA for 2013 because HotS didn't launch there in time to sync the region up with the rest of the WCS system. You might still be right--but Blizzard found collaborators in 2012, and there's several SC2 leagues in China now, so I'd guess Blizzard has options going into 2014...we'll see!
Crossing my fingers for this, I think you're spot-on and I can't believe I didn't realize this. Time for bed, here's hoping this discussion prospers :D
You could be right on Blizzard being stubborn. But I work for large companies and they just seem like every other large company I have ever dealt with, slow to change. There is endless second guessing, approvals and people needing to weigh in on the decision to do a specific thing. Add in the fact that they are dealing with OGN and GOM, and you are looking at one of the most protracted processes ever. Without overwhelming evidence of what they should be doing, I think any major changes could be slow to be put into place.
I don’t feel bad for OGN and GOM when it comes to what is going on in Korea. Those companies are at each other all the time and the level of sillyness that goes on is beyond me. Why don’t they have Tasteless and Artosis cast the WCS every season? Pride. Why do we get weird format changes between each season depending on who runs it? Pride. They refuse to get along and Blizzard doesn’t want a fragmented league in Korea. But at the end of the, OGN and GOM don’t own SC2, which is the thing they want to broadcast. It is the endless problem when it comes to dealing with these companies, that they have their own agenda and are as established as Blizzard and in a country that is not the US. There is part of me that wishes we could just run NA and EU leagues and not care about who was king of the world every season. It would solve a lot of problems for both Korea and the other regions. NA and EU are filled with scrappy start ups and Korea is filled with 10 year old institutions. Those two do not normally get along in business and operate very differently.
And I am not super concerned about the retirements from Kespa. It sounds like it has been a long time coming and I bet there was some excess fat from the BW era that might have needed to be trimmed. Its sounds like Kespa is working on a system where players get salaries, so it might a change in the way things are run over there. Its harsh, but players retire a lot and there are big shifts going on with all the broadcasters.
You are right that Blizzard needs to focus on working with in NA partners. NASL is a very good example of a great partner and they run a tight ship. I really want to see more from them and more out of the Esports city they are creating in California
I try not to plagiarize your greatest thoughts, but it's so hard when they're so spot-on
Thank you Cereb & y0su
On September 04 2013 05:10 Plansix wrote: You could be right on Blizzard being stubborn. But I work for large companies and they just seem like every other large company I have ever dealt with, slow to change. There is endless second guessing, approvals and people needing to weigh in on the decision to do a specific thing. Add in the fact that they are dealing with OGN and GOM, and you are looking at one of the most protracted processes ever. Without overwhelming evidence of what they should be doing, I think any major changes could be slow to be put into place.
I don’t feel bad for OGN and GOM when it comes to what is going on in Korea. Those companies are at each other all the time and the level of sillyness that goes on is beyond me. Why don’t they have Tasteless and Artosis cast the WCS every season? Pride. Why do we get weird format changes between each season depending on who runs it? Pride. They refuse to get along and Blizzard doesn’t want a fragmented league in Korea. But at the end of the, OGN and GOM don’t own SC2, which is the thing they want to broadcast. It is the endless problem when it comes to dealing with these companies, that they have their own agenda and are as established as Blizzard and in a country that is not the US. There is part of me that wishes we could just run NA and EU leagues and not care about who was king of the world every season. It would solve a lot of problems for both Korea and the other regions. NA and EU are filled with scrappy start ups and Korea is filled with 10 year old institutions. Those two do not normally get along in business and operate very differently.
And I am not super concerned about the retirements from Kespa. It sounds like it has been a long time coming and I bet there was some excess fat from the BW era that might have needed to be trimmed. Its sounds like Kespa is working on a system where players get salaries, so it might a change in the way things are run over there. Its harsh, but players retire a lot and there are big shifts going on with all the broadcasters.
You are right that Blizzard needs to focus on working with in NA partners. NASL is a very good example of a great partner and they run a tight ship. I really want to see more from them and more out of the Esports city they are creating in California
Ok now bed after this:
Oh god yes, slow to change. You are so right and change comes with needing approval from six other departments, right?
I sincerely hope 2014 actually changes things a lot more. I know 2013 was their test year, but let's hope they got the extra mile, if anything.
I admit that WCS does regulate the bumps of OGN/GOM, but honestly; the trade-off isn't worth it; where they break even and can't break away from the obligations that Blizzard sets in place. I don't know, I see your point a lot though, heavy costs however.
Yeah, long-time coming; true and yeah; excess fat from BW, so true. eSF was filled with a lot B-teamers from BW too, no? Now they're all on similar levels? That's just too much and I believe I wrote that in the article as well (something to that effect, you're spot on).
I remember that in 2011-2012 we rarely got to 100k viewers. We thought 70-80k was huge number for us but now we get more than 100k for the last WCS and we think SC2 is dying. By nature of the game we will never get as big as LoL so I don't think comparing it is really fair. SC2 even get more viewers than Dota2 in non TI tournaments. I think that' good enough but there are certainly a lot of areas to improve.
The figures showed a major decline in WCS stream viewers compared to 2012. Not sure how that can be spun as a positive.
The reality is that going forward there will be less professional SC2 players because it is too hard to make any decent money from it. Only the very select few get deep enough in tournaments to get decent prize money, and the number of players who earn decent salaries is probably shrinking too. We already have a situation where too many teams screw over their players for money owed for wages and costs and also tournaments paying out prize money very late, or not at all.
You could say the market can not support the current number of pro-gamers and it will whittle down the numbers in Darwinian fashion. Without the scene growing then the future looks bleak for many pro-games because their chances of winning money are not improving if the number of tournaments keeps declining. Maybe the scene can grow again, but it's diminishing this past year is not encouraging.
Amazing post, love the insight. I do think there's a significant amount of overstating the decline, and numbers backing up the fact that it may not be everything people are panicking about is very nice to see. This cycle of boom and bust for games is not a fun one to go through, so lets hope the negativity can be minimized in the coming bit of time so we can focus what is really important - enjoying the matches and supporting what we love, be it sc2 or LoL or whatever esport it may be.
On September 04 2013 05:50 KnightOfNi wrote: Amazing post, love the insight. I do think there's a significant amount of overstating the decline, and numbers backing up the fact that it may not be everything people are panicking about is very nice to see. This cycle of boom and bust for games is not a fun one to go through, so lets hope the negativity can be minimized in the coming bit of time so we can focus what is really important - enjoying the matches and supporting what we love, be it sc2 or LoL or whatever esport it may be.
I think that is the most important thing to take out of the article, is that SC2 is holding steady and not contracting. It has an established fan base and people who like what they are getting. Now it is up to Blizzard and their partners to figure out how to pull more people in. This test season showed that a one size fits all system has a lot of flaws and each region has its own issues that need addressing. The rest of this year should be a good time and 2014 could be pretty great as well. Still pushing for my “quality of life” patch for after Blizzcon.
“What we can say is that SC2 is not dying. The numbers are not going up, clearly, but they are largely stable. Interest in player streams seems to be getting lower, but WCS and other tournaments seem to easily take up the slack to keep the people watching their favorite game.” – courtesy of Conti and his tremendous work regarding Livestream and StarCraft II! I suggest you read all of the topic as there are showings of StarCraft event viewership declining.
I do however have a question about this chart. How can you compare stream viewership from WOL to HOTS by month with that chart that says right on the top that pre WOL data is incomplete?
In fact, Conti says "So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything."
There isn't much else to say. If you only look at HOTS, as Conti suggests we do, we note pretty much no decline in overall viewership.
However, Conti also suggests that the pre-HOTS numbers should be higher because they are missing most big tournaments. That says something.
Even if it's not dying, I think people are a bit disappointed to see that StarCraft isn't growing. With e-sports in general becoming more and more popular, I think most people expected Starcraft to continue to ride along in that trend, but it's just not happening that way.
On September 04 2013 05:50 KnightOfNi wrote: Amazing post, love the insight. I do think there's a significant amount of overstating the decline, and numbers backing up the fact that it may not be everything people are panicking about is very nice to see. This cycle of boom and bust for games is not a fun one to go through, so lets hope the negativity can be minimized in the coming bit of time so we can focus what is really important - enjoying the matches and supporting what we love, be it sc2 or LoL or whatever esport it may be.
I think that is the most important thing to take out of the article, is that SC2 is holding steady and not contracting. It has an established fan base and people who like what they are getting. Now it is up to Blizzard and their partners to figure out how to pull more people in. This test season showed that a one size fits all system has a lot of flaws and each region has its own issues that need addressing. The rest of this year should be a good time and 2014 could be pretty great as well. Still pushing for my “quality of life” patch for after Blizzcon.
I think my post ended up sounding different than I meant it to lol. What I meant to say is that the article presents arguments that suggest the "decline" is highly overstated, and it is great to see something such as this use hard evidence to back up that claim.
“What we can say is that SC2 is not dying. The numbers are not going up, clearly, but they are largely stable. Interest in player streams seems to be getting lower, but WCS and other tournaments seem to easily take up the slack to keep the people watching their favorite game.” – courtesy of Conti and his tremendous work regarding Livestream and StarCraft II! I suggest you read all of the topic as there are showings of StarCraft event viewership declining.
I do however have a question about this chart. How can you compare stream viewership from WOL to HOTS by month with that chart that says right on the top that pre WOL data is incomplete?
In fact, Conti says "So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything."
There isn't much else to say. If you only look at HOTS, as Conti suggests we do, we've seen a pretty dramatic viewership decline.
That is literally the exact opposite of what he says. As Conti is the guy who put together the numbers, I think we can take his interpretation at face value. I know you want all the numbers, but he may simply not have all the data and worked with what he had. We can ask him for more numbers or to provide more details, but I don't' think contradicting is really in order just because there is some missing data.
It's probably a little emo to say sc2 is dying, but considering it is the only RTS game currently with a pro scene you would probably think that the game would be doing better, achieving more viewers for major tournaments and such.
Using overall stream viewers is probably not the best way to judge considering game streaming has developed like crazy over the last year or so. I used to visit jtv (now called twitch for games) back in 2010 and early 2011 and people on the front page of the gaming department had like <100 viewers. So I should imagine for every game that has a a somewhat active playerbase the total amount of stream viewers would have risen quite substantially.
On September 04 2013 06:15 BronzeKnee wrote: This article was interesting and a good read.
On September 04 2013 03:52 Torte de Lini wrote:
“What we can say is that SC2 is not dying. The numbers are not going up, clearly, but they are largely stable. Interest in player streams seems to be getting lower, but WCS and other tournaments seem to easily take up the slack to keep the people watching their favorite game.” – courtesy of Conti and his tremendous work regarding Livestream and StarCraft II! I suggest you read all of the topic as there are showings of StarCraft event viewership declining.
I do however have a question about this chart. How can you compare stream viewership from WOL to HOTS by month with that chart that says right on the top that pre WOL data is incomplete?
In fact, Conti says "So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything."
There isn't much else to say. If you only look at HOTS, as Conti suggests we do, we've seen a pretty dramatic viewership decline.
That is literally the exact opposite of what he says. As Conti is the guy who put together the numbers, I think we can take his interpretation at face value. I know you want all the numbers, but he may simply not have all the data and worked with what he had. We can ask him for more numbers or to provide more details, but I don't' think contradicting is really in order just because there is some missing data.
I don't want to go too deep into this, but Conti compared the last months of WOL to HOTS and concludes the game isn't shrinking. Which may be true over that period, even though his data is incomplete.
But in April 2012, SC2 already had shrunk so much from it's peek in 2011.
So is SC2 in decline? In terms of viewership, who knows? But what matters is if companies can make a buck with E-Sports. MLG just told us they could not. And Blizzard taking a lead role investing in tournaments is also telling. So while viewership may not be decreasing, the content is. That signals decline, at least for the moment.
And thus, we are left with the issue that if SC2 isn't growing, is it self sufficient? Does SC2 bring in enough money to pay all the involved parties (players, coaches, leagues, ect) and still attract talented people to the sport?
On September 04 2013 06:15 BronzeKnee wrote: This article was interesting and a good read.
On September 04 2013 03:52 Torte de Lini wrote:
“What we can say is that SC2 is not dying. The numbers are not going up, clearly, but they are largely stable. Interest in player streams seems to be getting lower, but WCS and other tournaments seem to easily take up the slack to keep the people watching their favorite game.” – courtesy of Conti and his tremendous work regarding Livestream and StarCraft II! I suggest you read all of the topic as there are showings of StarCraft event viewership declining.
I do however have a question about this chart. How can you compare stream viewership from WOL to HOTS by month with that chart that says right on the top that pre WOL data is incomplete?
In fact, Conti says "So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything."
There isn't much else to say. If you only look at HOTS, as Conti suggests we do, we've seen a pretty dramatic viewership decline.
That is literally the exact opposite of what he says. As Conti is the guy who put together the numbers, I think we can take his interpretation at face value. I know you want all the numbers, but he may simply not have all the data and worked with what he had. We can ask him for more numbers or to provide more details, but I don't' think contradicting is really in order just because there is some missing data.
I don't want to go too deep into this, but Conti compared the last months of WOL to HOTS and concludes the game isn't shrinking. Which may be true over that period, even though his data is incomplete.
But in April 2012, SC2 already had shrunk so much from it's peek in 2011.
So is SC2 in decline? In terms of viewership, who knows? But what matters is if companies can make a buck with E-Sports. MLG just told us they could not. So while viewership may not be decreasing, the content is. That signals decline, at least for the moment.
And thus, we are left with the issue that if SC2 isn't growing, is it self sufficient? Does SC2 bring in enough money to pay all the involved parties (players, coaches, leagues, ect) and still attract talented people to the sport?
That is the real question.
MLG did not say that. They have said several times that the only reason SC2 is not at their coming event is due to the event being run by Redbull. It has nothing to do with the viewer numbers beyond the fact that they didn't want to compete for viewers with Redbull(or shit on red bulls event). NASL is still doing fine and Redbull is running events.
As TB said a long time ago, Husky's early videos from beta got insane views that he will never get again. Viewership changes. Constantly looking to the past and saying "It must be dying, that number was higher back in 201X" isn't a discussion worth having.
Edit: I think the April 2012 numbers do not include GOM or the GSL. I think that was before they started using Twitch an no one knew their numbers.
Great article, thank you, I think I'll bookmark this and use it as a counter every time I see idiots just mindlessly spew out doomsday regarding SC2.
I think I probably fall into the category of people that are a bit sad SC2 isn't growing more, I consider it an awesome game, sure it has its flaws but at the end of the day its probably the best RTS we have now, its arguably harder to master and more punishing since you and you alone are to blame, but at the same time feels like the purest of competition since its a 1 vs 1.
Unfortunately the leader of the pack role seems to be out of reach, at least for now, I wish it weren't so but I am glad the scene isn't "dying" as some people put it.
On September 04 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote: MLG did not say that. They have said several times that the only reason SC2 is not at their coming event is due to the event being run by Redbull. It has nothing to do with the viewer numbers beyond the fact that they didn't want to compete for viewers with Redbull(or shit on red bulls event). NASL is still doing fine and Redbull is running events.
As TB said a long time ago, Husky's early videos from beta got insane views that he will never get again. Viewership changes. Constantly looking to the past and saying "It must be dying, that number was higher back in 201X" isn't a discussion worth having.
Edit: I think the April 2012 numbers do not include GOM or the GSL. I think that was before they started using Twitch an no one knew their numbers.
MLG never said anything about it, literally. But what we do know is they never requested a license, not that Redbull requested one first! Obviously if MLG wasn't going to request a license, then Redbull would have been first no matter what, so we don't know if they were planning an event. Furthermore, we know that Blizzard gave an a nonexclusive license for that weekend to Redbull for an 8 man tournament, and MLG still was not interested in running anything. We also know that MLG had that date for that weekend long before Redbull announced their tournament. Thus, MLG knew it was going to host an event, but didn't ask for license for SC2 in advance, suggesting at least some trepidation about running a SC2 event.
So let's think about this for a moment from MLG's marketing perspective. Is it smart to for MLG to say "SC2 isn't viable anymore and we dropped it" to fans? Or is it better to be say "Redbull has a license for a tiny event that weekend, so let's use that as our excuse to why we didn't want a license!" Of course the former is idiotic, it might cost MLG fans that might watch other games. So they went with the latter, which was the smart choice. And in doing so, they pulled the wool over your eyes. Heck, if Redbull hadn't asked for a license but Playhem had, we'd still probably having this conversation. MLG dropped SC2, and they lucked out with a good excuse, which they didn't even admitted to, only subtlety hinted at.
You and I will never agree on much, but thankfully time will answer this question for us. If MLG runs another SC2 event at their next big tournament after Columbus or at Columbus itself, I'll PM you saying I was wrong and you were right and be on cloud nine (MLG Open Bracket SC2 is my favorite thing in the world). But sadly, I expect to PM you saying I was right and looking for you to say you were wrong.
The second, Conti made the incomplete graph i knew, it will be "missused" without the important info he brought with it.
I never included a similar graph to the one above including all SC2 stream numbers, simply because back when I started gathering data, all the big tournaments (MLG, IPL, GSL, etc.) did not provide live viewer numbers and, if at all, only published them later on (usually in a widely exaggerated manner, giving out unique instead of concurrent viewers and so on. Hello, MLG!). But that has changed. MLG and IPL are gone, and GSL streams on twitch now. Dreamhack has always offered live viewership numbers, because they're cool that way, so practically every premier tournament these days offers these numbers.
So I now can provide these numbers. Awesome. So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything. I only leave them in to give you a rough idea, but what's important here are the months since HotS came out.
So no, we cannot say that HotS numbers are better than WoL numbers overall, even if it looks like that. It's likely that it is true nonetheless, but without all the data, there's no way of saying for sure.
It is - basically - a edcated guess to say, that HOTS numbers > WoL. If you go facts only, you should argue, that there is no actualy way to know, without all the data.
On September 04 2013 07:17 Crytash wrote: The second, Conti made the incomplete graph i knew, it will be "missused" without the important info he brought with it.
I never included a similar graph to the one above including all SC2 stream numbers, simply because back when I started gathering data, all the big tournaments (MLG, IPL, GSL, etc.) did not provide live viewer numbers and, if at all, only published them later on (usually in a widely exaggerated manner, giving out unique instead of concurrent viewers and so on. Hello, MLG!). But that has changed. MLG and IPL are gone, and GSL streams on twitch now. Dreamhack has always offered live viewership numbers, because they're cool that way, so practically every premier tournament these days offers these numbers.
So I now can provide these numbers. Awesome. So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything. I only leave them in to give you a rough idea, but what's important here are the months since HotS came out.
So no, we cannot say that HotS numbers are better than WoL numbers overall, even if it looks like that. It's likely that it is true nonetheless, but without all the data, there's no way of saying for sure.
It is - basically - a edcated guess to say, that HOTS numbers > WoL. If you go facts only, you should argue, that there is no actualy way to know, without all the data.
Bingo, exactly why I was asking why the chart was used.
On September 04 2013 06:15 BronzeKnee wrote: This article was interesting and a good read.
On September 04 2013 03:52 Torte de Lini wrote:
“What we can say is that SC2 is not dying. The numbers are not going up, clearly, but they are largely stable. Interest in player streams seems to be getting lower, but WCS and other tournaments seem to easily take up the slack to keep the people watching their favorite game.” – courtesy of Conti and his tremendous work regarding Livestream and StarCraft II! I suggest you read all of the topic as there are showings of StarCraft event viewership declining.
I do however have a question about this chart. How can you compare stream viewership from WOL to HOTS by month with that chart that says right on the top that pre WOL data is incomplete?
In fact, Conti says "So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything."
There isn't much else to say. If you only look at HOTS, as Conti suggests we do, we've seen a pretty dramatic viewership decline.
That is literally the exact opposite of what he says. As Conti is the guy who put together the numbers, I think we can take his interpretation at face value. I know you want all the numbers, but he may simply not have all the data and worked with what he had. We can ask him for more numbers or to provide more details, but I don't' think contradicting is really in order just because there is some missing data.
I don't want to go too deep into this, but Conti compared the last months of WOL to HOTS and concludes the game isn't shrinking. Which may be true over that period, even though his data is incomplete.
But in April 2012, SC2 already had shrunk so much from it's peek in 2011.
So is SC2 in decline? In terms of viewership, who knows? But what matters is if companies can make a buck with E-Sports. MLG just told us they could not. And Blizzard taking a lead role investing in tournaments is also telling. So while viewership may not be decreasing, the content is. That signals decline, at least for the moment.
And thus, we are left with the issue that if SC2 isn't growing, is it self sufficient? Does SC2 bring in enough money to pay all the involved parties (players, coaches, leagues, ect) and still attract talented people to the sport?
That is the real question.
I don't think it has at all lol. If anything, it was bigger in 2012 because 2011 was such a good state of the game balance/player wise. Very late 2012/2013 is when some unsustainable organizations fell apart.
Also I don't think it has shrunk by much in terms of viewers
On September 04 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote: MLG did not say that. They have said several times that the only reason SC2 is not at their coming event is due to the event being run by Redbull. It has nothing to do with the viewer numbers beyond the fact that they didn't want to compete for viewers with Redbull(or shit on red bulls event). NASL is still doing fine and Redbull is running events.
As TB said a long time ago, Husky's early videos from beta got insane views that he will never get again. Viewership changes. Constantly looking to the past and saying "It must be dying, that number was higher back in 201X" isn't a discussion worth having.
Edit: I think the April 2012 numbers do not include GOM or the GSL. I think that was before they started using Twitch an no one knew their numbers.
MLG never said anything about it, literally. But what we do know is they never requested a license, not that Redbull requested one first! Obviously if MLG wasn't going to request a license, then Redbull would have been first no matter what, so we don't know if they were planning an event. Furthermore, we know that Blizzard gave an a nonexclusive license for that weekend to Redbull for an 8 man tournament, and MLG still was not interested in running anything. We also know that MLG had that date for that weekend long before Redbull announced their tournament. Thus, MLG knew it was going to host an event, but didn't ask for license for SC2 in advance, suggesting at least some trepidation about running a SC2 event.
So let's think about this for a moment from MLG's marketing perspective. Is it smart to for MLG to say "SC2 isn't viable anymore and we dropped it" to fans? Or is it better to be say "Redbull has a license for a tiny event that weekend, so let's use that as our excuse to why we didn't want a license!" Of course the former is idiotic, it might cost MLG fans that might watch other games. So they went with the latter, which was the smart choice. And in doing so, they pulled the wool over your eyes. Heck, if Redbull hadn't asked for a license but Playhem had, we'd still probably having this conversation. MLG dropped SC2, and they lucked out with a good excuse, which they didn't even admitted to, only subtlety hinted at.
You and I will never agree on much, but thankfully time will answer this question for us. If MLG runs another SC2 event at their next big tournament after Columbus or at Columbus itself, I'll PM you saying I was wrong and you were right and be on cloud nine (MLG Open Bracket SC2 is my favorite thing in the world). But sadly, I expect to PM you saying I was right and looking for you to say you were wrong.
They have said several things on the subject, including that they did not request a licence after they found out that Redbull had an event that weekend:
On August 28 2013 05:27 MLG_Adam wrote: Plansix is not lying.
I speak to Rob quite a bit and I would consider him a great friend in this space (and outside of it). The events colliding was a complete over sight by both of us and unfortunately at the stage both parties were at, venue arrangements could not be changed. Redbull's event was (is) planned to be heavy Sc2, it did not make sense to run against them, especially as both events would be in the same time zone.
There is no crazy story to attach to this one guys, and we will support/help/etc. Redbull any way we can. In fact, I spoke to Rob this morning about ways to synergize. This event will be amazing, I hope you guys enjoy it.
On August 28 2013 02:37 theking1 wrote: Hmmm 8 players for 50k means a lot of money for some players.In a way I like this lineup it reminds me of the ppv streams mlg used to do when with 8 invited players.The matches betwen drg and marine king were awsome back then.I will definetly watch the event.The other players that really need inviting are Naniwa,Scarllet and definately Jaedong.Maybe even innovation now that he is with acer or a well know kespa player like maru,rain.
Also please stop with the redbull being the reason mlg dropped sc2.Mlg dropped sc2 because it was in conflict with blizzard and also because they picked up dota2,Sc2 will not be neither at fullsail nor at the next mlg in Orlando or god knows where it will be.There were enough threads about this.Redbull hosting this tournament had nothing to do with mlg decision.Although it seems a bit stupid that 2 major tournaments could not find a free date all year round so that they do not collide.
This event is the reasons MLG did not run SC2 that weekend. MLG Adam said it directly several times, including to me. It is fact. They schedule these venues in advance and you can’t just “switch the dates”. Don't tell people to stop saying things that are true.
So we do know that MLG intended to run SC2 at Columbus, but decided not to after an event they found out RedBull was running their own event. There is no topic secret agenda of them dropping SC2, it was just a conflict of schedules for that weekend. Nothing more.
Ofc it's not dying.It's just growing slightly.Many fans including myself want to see starcraft at the top of esports but games like dota and LoL which are much more casual to play and much more well known between friends are gonna be more popular.Despite it's small community compared to LoL,sc2 gets some big numbers which rly shows the passion the fans have for this game
I have posted this point on another similar topic on Reddit before about decline and downsizing.
Both are completely normal and in some cases, healthy. But consider this: The region with the best performing players, KR, is suffering the most from the huge oversaturation and a lack in popularity in the game. Even BW legends such as Flash/JD didn't attract nearly as much audience as any of us expected in PL (Which was supposed to be the prestige tournament) JD asked the fans to come so that it won't feel so empty (from an interview during PL) Flash mentioned the game just doesn't have the excitment to play in front of the huge crowd (from the recent interview, and yes, he meant BW popularity there.)
Lack of popularity will just lead to more loss in interest for the game. How many pros were inspired to become a progamer due to them watching Boxer? There will be less talents coming in from KR, where the players skill level is generally high and therefore consistent supply of higher skilled players compared to other regions.
The rate that these downsizing is happening too fast. The game reached its peak popularity point too quickly and starts to stablise too early and who knows, maybe we are just living on the time lag between the effect of team disbanding/players retiring and the actual effect, maybe the decline is just around the corner.
I really dislike using the stats picture that Conti provided to prove a point when it shouldn't even be tried to be used as it. I also don't quite understand the tournament earnings sheet your provide, for me it looks like a lot of tournaments are left out and some are placed wrongly in the 2012 section when they were held in 2012 0o.
Can't say I enjoyed reading it as it used a very dirty way of showing off statistics that in some cases are 100% wrong.. For some events SC2 is doing worse than the year before and some is doing much better. Thats the true and real story of it, in the end I even believe that the total numbers from 2013 will match 2012, if we could do it..
When I get the time I'll add up all the different "doomsday" blogs/articles only to see how many different ways you can say: "SC2 is not booming anymore but settling down, thats fine!"
On September 04 2013 06:15 BronzeKnee wrote: This article was interesting and a good read.
On September 04 2013 03:52 Torte de Lini wrote:
“What we can say is that SC2 is not dying. The numbers are not going up, clearly, but they are largely stable. Interest in player streams seems to be getting lower, but WCS and other tournaments seem to easily take up the slack to keep the people watching their favorite game.” – courtesy of Conti and his tremendous work regarding Livestream and StarCraft II! I suggest you read all of the topic as there are showings of StarCraft event viewership declining.
I do however have a question about this chart. How can you compare stream viewership from WOL to HOTS by month with that chart that says right on the top that pre WOL data is incomplete?
In fact, Conti says "So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything."
There isn't much else to say. If you only look at HOTS, as Conti suggests we do, we've seen a pretty dramatic viewership decline.
That is literally the exact opposite of what he says. As Conti is the guy who put together the numbers, I think we can take his interpretation at face value. I know you want all the numbers, but he may simply not have all the data and worked with what he had. We can ask him for more numbers or to provide more details, but I don't' think contradicting is really in order just because there is some missing data.
I don't want to go too deep into this, but Conti compared the last months of WOL to HOTS and concludes the game isn't shrinking. Which may be true over that period, even though his data is incomplete.
But in April 2012, SC2 already had shrunk so much from it's peek in 2011.
So is SC2 in decline? In terms of viewership, who knows? But what matters is if companies can make a buck with E-Sports. MLG just told us they could not. And Blizzard taking a lead role investing in tournaments is also telling. So while viewership may not be decreasing, the content is. That signals decline, at least for the moment.
And thus, we are left with the issue that if SC2 isn't growing, is it self sufficient? Does SC2 bring in enough money to pay all the involved parties (players, coaches, leagues, ect) and still attract talented people to the sport?
On September 04 2013 07:17 Crytash wrote: The second, Conti made the incomplete graph i knew, it will be "missused" without the important info he brought with it.
I never included a similar graph to the one above including all SC2 stream numbers, simply because back when I started gathering data, all the big tournaments (MLG, IPL, GSL, etc.) did not provide live viewer numbers and, if at all, only published them later on (usually in a widely exaggerated manner, giving out unique instead of concurrent viewers and so on. Hello, MLG!). But that has changed. MLG and IPL are gone, and GSL streams on twitch now. Dreamhack has always offered live viewership numbers, because they're cool that way, so practically every premier tournament these days offers these numbers.
So I now can provide these numbers. Awesome. So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything. I only leave them in to give you a rough idea, but what's important here are the months since HotS came out.
So no, we cannot say that HotS numbers are better than WoL numbers overall, even if it looks like that. It's likely that it is true nonetheless, but without all the data, there's no way of saying for sure.
It is - basically - a edcated guess to say, that HOTS numbers > WoL. If you go facts only, you should argue, that there is no actualy way to know, without all the data.
Bingo, exactly why I was asking why the chart was used.
The chart is used on a month-to-month comparison, not as a comparative one to WOL (I never reference WOL in my article whatsoever). I acknowledge the dip of less viewers, but not as a result of anything more than a normal decline of interest (as all games who age generally expect to do so). The chart is to display that in terms of viewership, we haven't fallen that far in recent months; despite the large retiring of players.
Nothing more or less.
(in fact, I nearly explicitly try to avoid comparisons beyond tournaments and earnings, because the context is so vastly different.)
My humble opinion here in all this "SC2 is dying" trend, is that SC2 was the lead of the pack in 2010 and 2011. And a big chunck of the community became proud of it, even to the point of being elitist. I can remember one interview in the MLG where they asked a random viewer from each of the games their thoughts about their community and the other games ones.
Each one of them (except the guy from SC2) said that the SC2 community was elitist, and that we thought we were the center of the E-sport universe.
Now that we are not the center anymore, just another game like Halo, CoD, CSGO or SSFIV, suddenly SC2 is dying blah blah blah.
Maybe I don't play as much as I played before, maybe I don't watch tournaments as much as before. But SC2 is the ONLY game I have that I have played since I bought it at least once in a week. And I will keep playing.
PS: please, 10.000 average games at any time in B.net.... compare that with the mere 50 or 60 games you can find to other RTS titles... at prime time!!
I dunno about elitist, some people hold too high regards to StarCraft and such, but I dunno if said elitism played a role in the overall feeling of StarCraft's pace of decline.
I wouldn’t use the word elitism either. But I think there is an argument to be made that the reverence for BW does have a habit of derailing all balance discussions and generally overtaking most talks about the game. It also provides a lot of unearned authority to argument that normally might not gain a lot of traction. Most debates about how to update or change the game degrade into a debate about which aspects of BW should be copied and why those aspects are the best. The focus is never around SC2 itself, except that it is inferior to BW. Its leads to a lot of the same ideas being thrown around all the time. It also brings the cloud of negativity, since everyone looks to the BW “glory days” with rose colored glasses. I think a lot of discussions would be more positive and productive if they were not done while constantly referencing shadow of BW.
On September 04 2013 06:15 BronzeKnee wrote: This article was interesting and a good read.
On September 04 2013 03:52 Torte de Lini wrote:
“What we can say is that SC2 is not dying. The numbers are not going up, clearly, but they are largely stable. Interest in player streams seems to be getting lower, but WCS and other tournaments seem to easily take up the slack to keep the people watching their favorite game.” – courtesy of Conti and his tremendous work regarding Livestream and StarCraft II! I suggest you read all of the topic as there are showings of StarCraft event viewership declining.
I do however have a question about this chart. How can you compare stream viewership from WOL to HOTS by month with that chart that says right on the top that pre WOL data is incomplete?
In fact, Conti says "So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything."
There isn't much else to say. If you only look at HOTS, as Conti suggests we do, we've seen a pretty dramatic viewership decline.
That is literally the exact opposite of what he says. As Conti is the guy who put together the numbers, I think we can take his interpretation at face value. I know you want all the numbers, but he may simply not have all the data and worked with what he had. We can ask him for more numbers or to provide more details, but I don't' think contradicting is really in order just because there is some missing data.
I don't want to go too deep into this, but Conti compared the last months of WOL to HOTS and concludes the game isn't shrinking. Which may be true over that period, even though his data is incomplete.
But in April 2012, SC2 already had shrunk so much from it's peek in 2011.
So is SC2 in decline? In terms of viewership, who knows? But what matters is if companies can make a buck with E-Sports. MLG just told us they could not. And Blizzard taking a lead role investing in tournaments is also telling. So while viewership may not be decreasing, the content is. That signals decline, at least for the moment.
And thus, we are left with the issue that if SC2 isn't growing, is it self sufficient? Does SC2 bring in enough money to pay all the involved parties (players, coaches, leagues, ect) and still attract talented people to the sport?
That is the real question.
No eSport title is self-sufficient.
And right there I think is the big thing that people have been forgetting for a long time. It was easy to think in 2011/early 2012 that SC2 must be profitable for people since everyone and their grandma was starting a show/tournament/team. People were trying to outdo each other all on the promise or hope of a financial return. I'm sure not everyone was so optimistic and those who have lasted probably were very shrewd and careful in their planning, but I think a lot of people saw growth as profit and made some very bad decisions. (At least from my very-far outsider perspective that is what it has seemed like to me).
As a result, some decline is inevitable and probably much needed. I do worry that the talk of the 'death' of SC2 starts to become a self fulfilling prophesy (at least to a limited extent). For a small number of people it will rally their support to the game they love, but to new viewers they may not think to give SC2 a chance because why jump on board a ship people tell you is sinking? It doesn't matter if it is really sinking or not, but perceptions can really rule the day.
Anyways - I really appreciate the level-headed thought out post Torte. Your articles are always a pleasure to read and bring some good insight.
On September 04 2013 06:15 BronzeKnee wrote: This article was interesting and a good read.
On September 04 2013 03:52 Torte de Lini wrote:
“What we can say is that SC2 is not dying. The numbers are not going up, clearly, but they are largely stable. Interest in player streams seems to be getting lower, but WCS and other tournaments seem to easily take up the slack to keep the people watching their favorite game.” – courtesy of Conti and his tremendous work regarding Livestream and StarCraft II! I suggest you read all of the topic as there are showings of StarCraft event viewership declining.
I do however have a question about this chart. How can you compare stream viewership from WOL to HOTS by month with that chart that says right on the top that pre WOL data is incomplete?
In fact, Conti says "So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything."
There isn't much else to say. If you only look at HOTS, as Conti suggests we do, we've seen a pretty dramatic viewership decline.
That is literally the exact opposite of what he says. As Conti is the guy who put together the numbers, I think we can take his interpretation at face value. I know you want all the numbers, but he may simply not have all the data and worked with what he had. We can ask him for more numbers or to provide more details, but I don't' think contradicting is really in order just because there is some missing data.
I don't want to go too deep into this, but Conti compared the last months of WOL to HOTS and concludes the game isn't shrinking. Which may be true over that period, even though his data is incomplete.
But in April 2012, SC2 already had shrunk so much from it's peek in 2011.
So is SC2 in decline? In terms of viewership, who knows? But what matters is if companies can make a buck with E-Sports. MLG just told us they could not. And Blizzard taking a lead role investing in tournaments is also telling. So while viewership may not be decreasing, the content is. That signals decline, at least for the moment.
And thus, we are left with the issue that if SC2 isn't growing, is it self sufficient? Does SC2 bring in enough money to pay all the involved parties (players, coaches, leagues, ect) and still attract talented people to the sport?
That is the real question.
No eSport title is self-sufficient.
And right there I think is the big thing that people have been forgetting for a long time. It was easy to think in 2011/early 2012 that SC2 must be profitable for people since everyone and their grandma was starting a show/tournament/team. People were trying to outdo each other all on the promise or hope of a financial return. I'm sure not everyone was so optimistic and those who have lasted probably were very shrewd and careful in their planning, but I think a lot of people saw growth as profit and made some very bad decisions. (At least from my very-far outsider perspective that is what it has seemed like to me).
As a result, some decline is inevitable and probably much needed. I do worry that the talk of the 'death' of SC2 starts to become a self fulfilling prophesy (at least to a limited extent). For a small number of people it will rally their support to the game they love, but to new viewers they may not think to give SC2 a chance because why jump on board a ship people tell you is sinking? It doesn't matter if it is really sinking or not, but perceptions can really rule the day.
Anyways - I really appreciate the level-headed thought out post Torte. Your articles are always a pleasure to read and bring some good insight.
You pretty much said what most of us have been saying in those threads about SC II dying. It isn't dying. It is just at it's normal viewership levels. There is always going to be hype at the start. But that dies down. People get busy with other things, or bored with what is being shown. The market for esports is tough, because for the most part your viewers are going to be the people who play it. But that isn't always the case. CoD black ops 2 has tons of players and CoD streams don't reflect the number of players. I think as we move forward. Just working on refining tournament broadcasts, and hyping up players and conveying to the viewer why we should care will get more growth.
On September 04 2013 23:24 HeeroFX wrote: You pretty much said what most of us have been saying in those threads about SC II dying. It isn't dying. It is just at it's normal viewership levels. There is always going to be hype at the start. But that dies down. People get busy with other things, or bored with what is being shown. The market for esports is tough, because for the most part your viewers are going to be the people who play it. But that isn't always the case. CoD black ops 2 has tons of players and CoD streams don't reflect the number of players. I think as we move forward. Just working on refining tournament broadcasts, and hyping up players and conveying to the viewer why we should care will get more growth.
On September 04 2013 06:15 BronzeKnee wrote: This article was interesting and a good read.
On September 04 2013 03:52 Torte de Lini wrote:
“What we can say is that SC2 is not dying. The numbers are not going up, clearly, but they are largely stable. Interest in player streams seems to be getting lower, but WCS and other tournaments seem to easily take up the slack to keep the people watching their favorite game.” – courtesy of Conti and his tremendous work regarding Livestream and StarCraft II! I suggest you read all of the topic as there are showings of StarCraft event viewership declining.
I do however have a question about this chart. How can you compare stream viewership from WOL to HOTS by month with that chart that says right on the top that pre WOL data is incomplete?
In fact, Conti says "So I created the same graph as above, just with all SC2 related streams. But, again, note that all pre-HotS numbers are incomplete and are missing most big tournaments. So do not compare these with anything."
There isn't much else to say. If you only look at HOTS, as Conti suggests we do, we've seen a pretty dramatic viewership decline.
That is literally the exact opposite of what he says. As Conti is the guy who put together the numbers, I think we can take his interpretation at face value. I know you want all the numbers, but he may simply not have all the data and worked with what he had. We can ask him for more numbers or to provide more details, but I don't' think contradicting is really in order just because there is some missing data.
I don't want to go too deep into this, but Conti compared the last months of WOL to HOTS and concludes the game isn't shrinking. Which may be true over that period, even though his data is incomplete.
But in April 2012, SC2 already had shrunk so much from it's peek in 2011.
So is SC2 in decline? In terms of viewership, who knows? But what matters is if companies can make a buck with E-Sports. MLG just told us they could not. And Blizzard taking a lead role investing in tournaments is also telling. So while viewership may not be decreasing, the content is. That signals decline, at least for the moment.
And thus, we are left with the issue that if SC2 isn't growing, is it self sufficient? Does SC2 bring in enough money to pay all the involved parties (players, coaches, leagues, ect) and still attract talented people to the sport?
That is the real question.
No eSport title is self-sufficient.
sour grapes?
eSports is continuing to grow like crazy while the SC2 scene stagnates and/or regresses.
Live events a la WWE, UFC, and Boxing are the solution.
The future of esports is in the far east and MAYBE the west coast of NA on the shore of the pacific ocean.
With any other "fringe sport" a Vince Mcmahon/Don King type of genius promoter takes it to the next level. It will happen in a country like China, Japan or Korea. and an esports title will become self sufficient.
in the future it is possible, but not in North America. North America is irrelevant. Blizzcon is not an esports event. Do not try to sell hockey in Trinidad. The home base of esports will always be somewhere in the far east due to cultural tendencies.
It will take a game publisher with the balls bigger than Andy Kaufman to hand over the promotion of their esport game to one of these types of promoters.
no, reality of spending and return (short-term and long-term). WWE, UFC work on a different earnings system than eSports, especially through traditional media.
On September 04 2013 23:52 Torte de Lini wrote: no, reality of spending and return (short-term and long-term). WWE, UFC work on a different earnings system than eSports, especially through traditional media.
Self sufficient is a weird phrase when it comes to entertainment based industries, since they are creating a product with the intention of providing ad space. They can be profitable, but they are always working with third parties to obtain income. Its not like manufacturing or running a corner store, where spending vs income equation is less complex.
Even via sponsors, it's very rare that it is self-sufficient beyond either breaking even (of that particular event), especially for PC games (consoles are generally what advertisers like).
but now we're getting an area I'm becoming less familiar with
On September 04 2013 23:52 Torte de Lini wrote: no, reality of spending and return (short-term and long-term). WWE, UFC work on a different earnings system than eSports, especially through traditional media.
lots of live events are profitable. and an esports event is just another form of live event. esports is continuing to grow by leaps and bounds so it'll happen. an esport will become self sufficient due to live event sales in the same way the NHL, UFC and WWE are right now.
On September 05 2013 00:11 Torte de Lini wrote: Even via sponsors, it's very rare that it is self-sufficient beyond either breaking even (of that particular event), especially for PC games (consoles are generally what advertisers like).
but now we're getting an area I'm becoming less familiar with
I think it is why a lot of sports work on a revenue sharing system for team sports and individual sports work with a deep prize pool. Team sports keep the lights on with stadiums, with high priced beer, drinks and food. Golf and tennis are highly sustainable with ads revenue and basic income from their venues(major golf courses cost a mint to play on). Its why I think the global nature of SC2 and our obsession with live events has really hurt the scenes growth. At least in EU they focused on Germany and Sweden for large events. But in NA, we never doubled down and got a studio or made an Esports City that everyone needed to move to. But without a way for the leagues to directly make money off of the people viewing, they will always be dependent on ads and sponsors. I would love to get away from that and focus more on making money directly from the people who want to see the events(live, not through PPV)
It does feel like things have leveled out. I feel like the upcoming blizzcon tournament is of huge importance to the SC2 scene. It really needs to be a big success, SC2 needs a massive tournament like that again. I'm a little concerned how having 16 Koreans there would impact things (Naniwa looked like the most likely foreigner to make it but now he's probably out of the running).
I think the scene still has a lot of room for growth but changes need to be made. This first year of WCS was always going to cause problems within the scene. It was very rushed and completely changed how things ran in the SC2 world. Firstly because it started so late everything had to be rushed. As a result we have had almost complete saturation with WCS since it started. This has caused less people to tune into players streams but it has also limited how much other SC2 content we get. Basically there is just no room to run other tournaments.
Going forward these tournaments need to be spaced out more and we need to know WAY in advance when other tournaments can be run. Blizzard need to go to MLG, dreamhack, redbull, IEM and all the big players and find out what suits them. If we're going to have a WCS format where other tournaments can't overlap then there needs to be more organization to let other tournaments a chance to run.
WCS style formats are cool for creating an ongoing narrative but i feel like the SC2 scene was built on the back of big LAN tournaments and fans are craving that. I having nothing against the WCS format so long as there is room for the big LANs we are used to. The NA scene imo either needs the WCS to be region locked or it needs more big and small tournaments outside of WCS. A WCS filled with Koreans simply won't grow the scene.
As for the Korean scene i've thought from the start that this whole swapping thing with GSL/OSL is a terrible idea. Basically SC2 is already tiny compared to LoL and then we make it so they can only run every 2nd tournament. It just feels like this gives so little incentive for either of them to really push the game. They both need regular income and this just won't cut it. Honestly we need to find a way for them both to be able to run their own content. I just don't see this being a long term solution. It has also really cut into the total prize pool on offer in Korea which i really doubt is helping.
Beyond this the WCS needs to expand. Personally i think there needs to be either an SEA or Chinese region (makes sense anyway 4 players from each region for finals). I think we also need to find a way to get smaller regions involved. That was one of the great things about the first WCS.
Then of course there is the game itself. This is a complex issue and i'm not sure anyone agrees on what needs to be done but i'll give my thoughts.
-Variety. Games like LoL and dota2 have a huge number of characters and potential strategies. They are also constantly changing and this helps keep people interested. Right now SC2 lacks here, the number of strategies is seriously limited and this is something that needs to change (like making mech viable, come on blizzard!). I feel like they are TOO cautious and are afraid to make big changes or add too many new things. I'd rather see them go a little crazy (even if it's just on ptr) and see what happens. Bring back reavers and lurkers, buff some units completely change certain units or mechanics. Despite all the balance whining that will happen it will create more interest amongst the fans simply because things are actually changing.
Map pools are another important point here and one of the areas where we can change things up where for example MOBA's can't (they don't need to). In those games the huge variety of characters provides the variation we need. In SC2 changing maps can completely change the game. When KESPA first came over they tried some crazy things, sure they may not have worked that well but at least it was different. I really feel like we need to make some COMPLETELY different maps, encourage the community to get involved even. Right now they are all so similar and they rarely change. I feel like if the map pool was constantly changing a lot of the complaints about the game being stagnant would go away.
-Focus on the arcade and the community. We need a built in stream in the game, similar to what DOTA2 has. We need to have a way of holding custom tournaments online. People love running their own tournaments and i feel like this has SO much potential. You could even add the betting features like in the OBS custom games. Make the arcade more accessible and try to bring back the community feel of BW. BW was never played so long because of its 1v1 (as good as it was). It was the custom games that kept everything so strong.
-F2P. Many will disagree and say it's either too late or won't work, they may be right too. I just think that this is the way forward for any game hoping to be an esport (in general in the PC environment i feel like it's going to become more standard). They could still sell the SP campaign on it's own, just make the MP free. Let people pay to make custom tournaments or ladders (i would kill for a macro/micro ladder). Let people buy outfits for their units, i'd pay a high price to have zealots with chefs hats. In team games you could go a bit more crazy and give them really weird outfits.
Personally one thing that i would love to see is something similar to what DOTA2 did with the international. The compendium was a brilliant idea. It's a simple way to really expand the prize pool and it really got the fans involved (i know people who tuned in just because of that reason and they don't really like DOTA2). I think blizzard could do something similar with WCS and it would be a nice way to increase the prize pools (which lets face it are pretty modest).
I hope blizzard eventually starts making the required changes. The game will never be as big as LoL but that doesn't mean we can't see more growth. I'm just not sure blizzard is up to it or even values SC2 enough as a franchise to put in the effort.
On September 05 2013 00:11 Torte de Lini wrote: Even via sponsors, it's very rare that it is self-sufficient beyond either breaking even (of that particular event), especially for PC games (consoles are generally what advertisers like).
but now we're getting an area I'm becoming less familiar with
I think it is why a lot of sports work on a revenue sharing system for team sports and individual sports work with a deep prize pool. Team sports keep the lights on with stadiums, with high priced beer, drinks and food. Golf and tennis are highly sustainable with ads revenue and basic income from their venues(major golf courses cost a mint to play on). Its why I think the global nature of SC2 and our obsession with live events has really hurt the scenes growth. At least in EU they focused on Germany and Sweden for large events. But in NA, we never doubled down and got a studio or made an Esports City that everyone needed to move to. But without a way for the leagues to directly make money off of the people viewing, they will always be dependent on ads and sponsors. I would love to get away from that and focus more on making money directly from the people who want to see the events(live, not through PPV)
This would be really cool to focus on an area and have a GSL style studio. With the NASL involved and blizzard buying up the IPL infrastructure i feel like they could make it happen.
On September 05 2013 00:11 Torte de Lini wrote: Even via sponsors, it's very rare that it is self-sufficient beyond either breaking even (of that particular event), especially for PC games (consoles are generally what advertisers like).
but now we're getting an area I'm becoming less familiar with
I think it is why a lot of sports work on a revenue sharing system for team sports and individual sports work with a deep prize pool. Team sports keep the lights on with stadiums, with high priced beer, drinks and food. Golf and tennis are highly sustainable with ads revenue and basic income from their venues(major golf courses cost a mint to play on). Its why I think the global nature of SC2 and our obsession with live events has really hurt the scenes growth. At least in EU they focused on Germany and Sweden for large events. But in NA, we never doubled down and got a studio or made an Esports City that everyone needed to move to. But without a way for the leagues to directly make money off of the people viewing, they will always be dependent on ads and sponsors. I would love to get away from that and focus more on making money directly from the people who want to see the events(live, not through PPV)
Without live events, there wouldn't be as much appeal for eSports than there would. Despite the game being online, the offline portion is definitely the most extravageant and endearing part for dedicated fans and probably players as well. I never thought too much about it beyond using it as a medium to convince the general audience how serious the scene is and to bring out the socialistic tendency of an otherwise stigmatized anti-social group, but now that you think about it; without the component of an offline event: the prominence of progaming as told in a story-form wouldn't sound as enthralling (players travel from around all the world to play at a packed stadium in bla bla bla bla)
This is what happens when you only focus on the 1v1 aspect of the game, as a community, and trivialize the team component and what it means for a game that wants to compete with budding team vs team eSports.
People are easily bored and even more easily discouraged by hitting a ceiling, nowadays. The moment the game feels boring they move on to something else (even a game that is shit by comparison - or even a game that is a completely different genre). I don't feel like Blizzard has done much to improve the player experience from a longevity standpoint for SC2. This is what happens when single-player is like pulling off a band-aid, and in today's market, it's what happens when you focus all of your support purely on balance and bug-fix.
SC2 suffers from a lack of fresh content, and the expansion really didn't bring that much to the table for people who aren't interested in 1v1 online ladder. Spawning caused an influx of new people for a little while, but what it gives for free is just a tease, and people feel like they're entitled to a whole lot more for nothing these days. You need to deliver magic if you're going to charge 40-60 bucks an expansion, and new players will dry up eventually. Potential players will also stop following something that they've given up on for whatever reason, so adding shit after a game has been out for a few years is hit / miss.
EDIT: All games are dying once they stop growing. That is what we face right now.
On September 04 2013 22:43 Plansix wrote: I wouldn’t use the word elitism either. But I think there is an argument to be made that the reverence for BW does have a habit of derailing all balance discussions and generally overtaking most talks about the game. It also provides a lot of unearned authority to argument that normally might not gain a lot of traction. Most debates about how to update or change the game degrade into a debate about which aspects of BW should be copied and why those aspects are the best. The focus is never around SC2 itself, except that it is inferior to BW. Its leads to a lot of the same ideas being thrown around all the time. It also brings the cloud of negativity, since everyone looks to the BW “glory days” with rose colored glasses. I think a lot of discussions would be more positive and productive if they were not done while constantly referencing shadow of BW.
Yes, that is true. What is even more interesting is that many of the people who talk about BW don't appear to have played it or really watched it - if their comments are anything to go by. Now, I only played SC1 and BW between 1998 - 1999/2000 on LANS and had no idea of what became of the game after that - both in terms of development of play and as a spectator sport. But, I have read comments from people who obviously did play BW and did follow the scene and I think it puts the lie to many other comments about BW from other people. In this sense, BW has become the ultimate footnote in design discussion on TL.
Edit/ Love your work, Torte. I'm reading it now and will finish reading the rest before I start work.
I played WarCraft III during Brood War and DotA, so I try to avoid using BW under any arguments given the lack of personal experience and understanding.
On September 05 2013 03:52 dUTtrOACh wrote: EDIT: All games are dying once they stop growing. That is what we face right now.
that has always been true.
SC2 is a great game in a very narrow niche... people got a little wide eyed in 2011 when IPL and all these other start ups took a run at running an SC2 event.
the good news is guys like Mike Morhaime and Jon van Caneghem, and Randy Patchford.. i mean.. some real industry giants still believe in investing in RTS. as long as guys like that are investing their time, money and energy into the genre everything is fine.
if we start to see these types of guys pulling out then its panic time.
No offense to David Ting and Sundance and guys like that ... but really they are irrelevant.
Yes, someone mentioned I should have put an argument that SC2 has a good hold on the RTS genre. David Ting and Sundance aren't irrelevant they put a good face on new businesses and help frame eSports and the people involved as charismatic and good PR people.
On September 04 2013 22:43 Plansix wrote: I wouldn’t use the word elitism either. But I think there is an argument to be made that the reverence for BW does have a habit of derailing all balance discussions and generally overtaking most talks about the game. It also provides a lot of unearned authority to argument that normally might not gain a lot of traction. Most debates about how to update or change the game degrade into a debate about which aspects of BW should be copied and why those aspects are the best. The focus is never around SC2 itself, except that it is inferior to BW. Its leads to a lot of the same ideas being thrown around all the time. It also brings the cloud of negativity, since everyone looks to the BW “glory days” with rose colored glasses. I think a lot of discussions would be more positive and productive if they were not done while constantly referencing shadow of BW.
Your post misses the point entirely.
There are certain aspects in which no RTS has ever surpassed Brood War. It's true that there's a big big chance other games *could have*, if they were ever played and explored and exploited as meticulously as the Korean progaming scene has done with Brood War, but as it stands, Brood War is the only game with that sheer amount of depth. To not try to take things away in terms of design from it is foolish. To dismiss all of these claims as "looking to the glory days with rose colored glasses" even more so.
Through an unlikely combination of game design, mapmakers' efforts, players' efforts, coaches' efforts and even the economical situation of South Korea at the time, Brood War has become the epitome of competitive RTS gaming. It's the game that other games should strive to best. While it was mostly a matter of luck that it managed to realize its full potential instead of other games, it did. It is therefore only reasonable that the only RTS game to make a big splash in recent years (the only relevant RTS game to be released recently, some might say) would be compared to what is considered the epitome of the genre.
There will be nostalgic people. But by dismissing all of these suggestions and theories as nothing more than nostalgia with disregard for the underlying notions of game design is infinitely more damaging. The reason they keep getting brought up is because they are such simple and elegant solutions to the problems SC2 faces, once you sit down and analyze them and their implications. It's not about making it like BW, it's about making it good, and BW is only the best possible example. It wouldn't be hard to bring up examples from other RTS games that might suffice, but I guarantee you 99.9% of people here would go "wtf i've never heard of that game". And so the best example is chosen instead.
On September 04 2013 22:43 Plansix wrote: I wouldn’t use the word elitism either. But I think there is an argument to be made that the reverence for BW does have a habit of derailing all balance discussions and generally overtaking most talks about the game. It also provides a lot of unearned authority to argument that normally might not gain a lot of traction. Most debates about how to update or change the game degrade into a debate about which aspects of BW should be copied and why those aspects are the best. The focus is never around SC2 itself, except that it is inferior to BW. Its leads to a lot of the same ideas being thrown around all the time. It also brings the cloud of negativity, since everyone looks to the BW “glory days” with rose colored glasses. I think a lot of discussions would be more positive and productive if they were not done while constantly referencing shadow of BW.
I fail to understand your logic. Why refering and looking up to some succesful game is wrong? When people create new model of car they don't throw away old concepts, contrary they take it as base and enhance it. And why sc2 should be a totally new game. Does EA make new Fifa every year? No, they use what they have and make it better.
We can't fix all sc2 problems by looking at BW, but atleast we could take the best from BW.
Vultures, arbiters, reavers and defilers were such iconic units. Both exciting and skill-dependant. Dustin Browder threw them away and put helions, voidrays, colossi and infestors. Pretty much all fail.
From my point of view too many people think they have a clue about game design and balance and are not willing to take one step back in order to enjoy the game and let people develop it. I am not saying that Bliizard did a perfect job with this game but people like to force Developers to find a solution nowadays. Same with Tournaments/Stream etc....you are not allowed to find your own way...everything has to be perfect.
I know that some Companies are doing pretty good moves in order to achieve that...and i am often impressed by the work they put into events like Dreamhack etc...but i miss that non-perfect days there everybody could smile about minor mistakes. Today money is involved and nobody wants to see mistakes anymore...
On September 08 2013 21:46 cutler wrote: From my point of view too many people think they have a clue about game design and balance and are not willing to take one step back in order to enjoy the game and let people develop it. I am not saying that Bliizard did a perfect job with this game but people like to force Developers to find a solution nowadays. Same with Tournaments/Stream etc....you are not allowed to find your own way...everything has to be perfect.
Wrong. People developed Brood War because they were willing to try things out (that's why there have also been some retardedly crazy maps used in tournaments). Blizzard aren't willing to think outside of the box that they created for themselves. They see something that is objectively better and refuse to at least incorporate some elements into it, regardless of whether they copy it outright or put their own spin on it. And it is the combination of their approach to monetization ("oh we can't implement such game-redefining changes before the next expansion [which is probably 3 years off]) and humongous pride/ego when it comes to admitting their mistakes.
Everything doesn't have to be perfect. Nothing can be perfect. But when you are unwilling to listen to people who have a different approach, even though theirs has been tested as being better and isn't just some theory/fantasy/what have you, that's when people are right to be frustrated with you.
This "normal decline in interest after the hype from release was over" is so cynical. Dota and lol all predate sc2 and are still growing. Brood war kept growing for a decade. Why should the scene be declining if so much of the infrastructure has improved? If the game has supposedly improved after all the patches and the expansion. Isn't esports still growing? Then why shouldn't we be very alarmed at the state of sc2?
On September 08 2013 21:46 cutler wrote: From my point of view too many people think they have a clue about game design and balance and are not willing to take one step back in order to enjoy the game and let people develop it. I am not saying that Bliizard did a perfect job with this game but people like to force Developers to find a solution nowadays. Same with Tournaments/Stream etc....you are not allowed to find your own way...everything has to be perfect.
Wrong. People developed Brood War because they were willing to try things out (that's why there have also been some retardedly crazy maps used in tournaments). Blizzard aren't willing to think outside of the box that they created for themselves. They see something that is objectively better and refuse to at least incorporate some elements into it, regardless of whether they copy it outright or put their own spin on it. And it is the combination of their approach to monetization ("oh we can't implement such game-redefining changes before the next expansion [which is probably 3 years off]) and humongous pride/ego when it comes to admitting their mistakes.
Everything doesn't have to be perfect. Nothing can be perfect. But when you are unwilling to listen to people who have a different approach, even though theirs has been tested as being better and isn't just some theory/fantasy/what have you, that's when people are right to be frustrated with you.
Not sure what you mean when you say has been tested as being better? Can you clarify what you mean? Also what do you mean when you say something is objectively better? I think you mean subjectively better.
On September 08 2013 22:12 Grumbels wrote: This "normal decline in interest after the hype from release was over" is so cynical. Dota and lol all predate sc2 and are still growing. Brood war kept growing for a decade. Why should the scene be declining if so much of the infrastructure has improved? If the game has supposedly improved after all the patches and the expansion. Isn't esports still growing? Then why shouldn't we be very alarmed at the state of sc2?
An interesting thing to note, as I've pointed out in a different thread a few days ago, is that DotA 2 and LoL are both multiplayer-centric games. Meanwhile, SC2 is very much the opposite. Most of the people who buy SC2 do so only for the campaign and never touch the multiplayer, and if they do, many of them get bored and move on to a different game.
So what's saddest of all is that we shouldn't even be expecting Blizzard to compete in the eSports scene, considering they make money off of selling people games and expansions, unlike Valve and Riot's business models with their MOBA games. Still, they do compete, and so they're open to criticism all the same.
On September 08 2013 21:46 cutler wrote: From my point of view too many people think they have a clue about game design and balance and are not willing to take one step back in order to enjoy the game and let people develop it. I am not saying that Bliizard did a perfect job with this game but people like to force Developers to find a solution nowadays. Same with Tournaments/Stream etc....you are not allowed to find your own way...everything has to be perfect.
Wrong. People developed Brood War because they were willing to try things out (that's why there have also been some retardedly crazy maps used in tournaments). Blizzard aren't willing to think outside of the box that they created for themselves. They see something that is objectively better and refuse to at least incorporate some elements into it, regardless of whether they copy it outright or put their own spin on it. And it is the combination of their approach to monetization ("oh we can't implement such game-redefining changes before the next expansion [which is probably 3 years off]) and humongous pride/ego when it comes to admitting their mistakes.
Everything doesn't have to be perfect. Nothing can be perfect. But when you are unwilling to listen to people who have a different approach, even though theirs has been tested as being better and isn't just some theory/fantasy/what have you, that's when people are right to be frustrated with you.
Not sure what you mean when you say has been tested as being better? Can you clarify what you mean? Also what do you mean when you say something is objectively better? I think you mean subjectively better.
Game design and depth (in terms of how much more you can do than what may be initially apparent, or how many more factors are involved in something than one may notice at first) are actually not subjective. Viewer enjoyment is, player enjoyment is, and both are proportional to how well a game is designed.
Yeah, don't think that Plansix have any idea how BW is being played out and only joined in subsequently SC2's release. For him, this is his first RTS e-Sport experience and so that why he is vehemently defending SC2 at all cost because of being uninformed on the predecessor's intricate designs.
they "sold" RTS eSports in a meaningless market: North America. it never was "self sustaining" as you've noted. eSports growth locations are in the far east.
On September 05 2013 14:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yes, someone mentioned I should have put an argument that SC2 has a good hold on the RTS genre. David Ting and Sundance aren't irrelevant they put a good face on new businesses and help frame eSports and the people involved as charismatic and good PR people.
are they? Sundance came off as a carnival barker by dropping SC2 with a tweet. For all of David Ting's "leadership" IPL still has not paid their prize winners. A real leader and event promoter threatens to resign when his guys don't get paid.
Check out what Don King does when the money behind the event does not pay up.
Don King looks like a genius compared to these guys.
David Ting is a coverted engineer. He may be a great engineer with many talents. He is a lousy live event promoter relative to any one who has done it professionally.
A real live event promoter who really knows what they're doing would not go near SC2 in North America... they would not touch it with a 100 foot pole.
CONTEXT: as i've stated in earlier posts. eSports is sustainable when live events bring in millions in revenue from ticket sales.
On September 08 2013 23:33 lamprey1 wrote: they "sold" RTS eSports in a meaningless market: North America. it never was "self sustaining" as you've noted. eSports growth locations are in the far east.
On September 05 2013 14:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yes, someone mentioned I should have put an argument that SC2 has a good hold on the RTS genre. David Ting and Sundance aren't irrelevant they put a good face on new businesses and help frame eSports and the people involved as charismatic and good PR people.
are they? Sundance came off as a carnival barker by dropping SC2 with a tweet. For all of David Ting's "leadership" IPL still has not paid their prize winners. A real leader and event promoter threatens to resign when his guys don't get paid.
Check out what Don King does when the money behind the event does not pay up.
Don King looks like a genius compared to these guys.
David Ting is a coverted engineer. He may be a great engineer with many talents. He is a lousy live event promoter relative to any one who has done it professionally.
I am sorry, I can't take any argument seriously that suggests the folks running Esports events should be more like Don King. No matter what positive traits he has, his flaws smoother them a thousand times over.
On September 08 2013 23:33 lamprey1 wrote: they "sold" RTS eSports in a meaningless market: North America. it never was "self sustaining" as you've noted. eSports growth locations are in the far east.
On September 05 2013 14:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yes, someone mentioned I should have put an argument that SC2 has a good hold on the RTS genre. David Ting and Sundance aren't irrelevant they put a good face on new businesses and help frame eSports and the people involved as charismatic and good PR people.
are they? Sundance came off as a carnival barker by dropping SC2 with a tweet. For all of David Ting's "leadership" IPL still has not paid their prize winners. A real leader and event promoter threatens to resign when his guys don't get paid.
Check out what Don King does when the money behind the event does not pay up.
Don King looks like a genius compared to these guys.
David Ting is a coverted engineer. He may be a great engineer with many talents. He is a lousy live event promoter relative to any one who has done it professionally.
I am sorry, I can't take any argument seriously that suggests the folks running Esports events should be more like Don King.
dont worry. a promoter of Don King's calibre would not go any where near an SC2 live event in NA.
King , Mcmahon, Zuffa, are all 1000000000X better at putting on, promoting, and profiting from a live event than the chicken outfits that ran SC2 events in NA. maingly, Sundance and Ting.
with NASL in TO , Blizzard is the client paying for the event.
talented promoters are motivated by 1 thing : $$$. and there is none of it in the NA SC2 scene.
On September 08 2013 23:33 lamprey1 wrote: they "sold" RTS eSports in a meaningless market: North America. it never was "self sustaining" as you've noted. eSports growth locations are in the far east.
On September 05 2013 14:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yes, someone mentioned I should have put an argument that SC2 has a good hold on the RTS genre. David Ting and Sundance aren't irrelevant they put a good face on new businesses and help frame eSports and the people involved as charismatic and good PR people.
are they? Sundance came off as a carnival barker by dropping SC2 with a tweet. For all of David Ting's "leadership" IPL still has not paid their prize winners. A real leader and event promoter threatens to resign when his guys don't get paid.
Check out what Don King does when the money behind the event does not pay up.
Don King looks like a genius compared to these guys.
David Ting is a coverted engineer. He may be a great engineer with many talents. He is a lousy live event promoter relative to any one who has done it professionally.
A real live event promoter who really knows what they're doing would not go near SC2 in North America... they would not touch it with a 100 foot pole.
CONTEXT: as i've stated in earlier posts. eSports is sustainable when live events bring in millions in revenue from ticket sales.
They're all at a strangehold in general right now. I wouldn't call the far East as marketable as the West in recent times. There are way worse businessmen than David Ting and Sundance. It's just not public and it certainly isn't talked about.
On September 08 2013 23:33 lamprey1 wrote: they "sold" RTS eSports in a meaningless market: North America. it never was "self sustaining" as you've noted. eSports growth locations are in the far east.
On September 05 2013 14:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yes, someone mentioned I should have put an argument that SC2 has a good hold on the RTS genre. David Ting and Sundance aren't irrelevant they put a good face on new businesses and help frame eSports and the people involved as charismatic and good PR people.
are they? Sundance came off as a carnival barker by dropping SC2 with a tweet. For all of David Ting's "leadership" IPL still has not paid their prize winners. A real leader and event promoter threatens to resign when his guys don't get paid.
Check out what Don King does when the money behind the event does not pay up.
Don King looks like a genius compared to these guys.
David Ting is a coverted engineer. He may be a great engineer with many talents. He is a lousy live event promoter relative to any one who has done it professionally.
A real live event promoter who really knows what they're doing would not go near SC2 in North America... they would not touch it with a 100 foot pole.
CONTEXT: as i've stated in earlier posts. eSports is sustainable when live events bring in millions in revenue from ticket sales.
They're all at a strangehold in general right now. I wouldn't call the far East as marketable as the West in recent times. There are way worse businessmen than David Ting and Sundance. It's just not public and it certainly isn't talked about.
A business man never would've tried to make IPL work financially. it was bleeding red from day 1. claiming there is "someone worse" is hardly an endorsement.
i consider Mike Morhaime to be one of the best game designers in the history of the industry. that sets a high standard. thus, i want a live event held to an equally high standard or have no live event.
based on the quality of Blizzcon events i'd say Blizzard upper management agrees. and i'm more than willing to pay for high quality.... Video games as a hobby is dirt cheap.
On September 08 2013 23:33 lamprey1 wrote: they "sold" RTS eSports in a meaningless market: North America. it never was "self sustaining" as you've noted. eSports growth locations are in the far east.
On September 05 2013 14:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yes, someone mentioned I should have put an argument that SC2 has a good hold on the RTS genre. David Ting and Sundance aren't irrelevant they put a good face on new businesses and help frame eSports and the people involved as charismatic and good PR people.
are they? Sundance came off as a carnival barker by dropping SC2 with a tweet. For all of David Ting's "leadership" IPL still has not paid their prize winners. A real leader and event promoter threatens to resign when his guys don't get paid.
Check out what Don King does when the money behind the event does not pay up.
Don King looks like a genius compared to these guys.
David Ting is a coverted engineer. He may be a great engineer with many talents. He is a lousy live event promoter relative to any one who has done it professionally.
A real live event promoter who really knows what they're doing would not go near SC2 in North America... they would not touch it with a 100 foot pole.
CONTEXT: as i've stated in earlier posts. eSports is sustainable when live events bring in millions in revenue from ticket sales.
They're all at a strangehold in general right now. I wouldn't call the far East as marketable as the West in recent times. There are way worse businessmen than David Ting and Sundance. It's just not public and it certainly isn't talked about.
A business man never would've tried to make IPL work financially. it was bleeding red from day 1. claiming there is "someone worse" is hardly an endorsement.
i consider Mike Morhaime to be one of the best game designers in the history of the industry. that sets a high standard. thus, i want a live event held to an equally high standard or have no live event.
based on the quality of Blizzcon events i'd say Blizzard upper management agrees. and i'm more than willing to pay for high quality.... Video games as a hobby is dirt cheap.
Ha, true! Agree that IPL was bad for them from the start, but the press and publicity he personally got and the scene got was definitely an upside. He spent huge and it made things look more legitimate and grandiose than they really were.
I think I mentioned something alluding to that in my entry, how we mistaken grandeur with actual progression. If not, definitely something to criticize about the scene.
On September 08 2013 23:33 lamprey1 wrote: they "sold" RTS eSports in a meaningless market: North America. it never was "self sustaining" as you've noted. eSports growth locations are in the far east.
On September 05 2013 14:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yes, someone mentioned I should have put an argument that SC2 has a good hold on the RTS genre. David Ting and Sundance aren't irrelevant they put a good face on new businesses and help frame eSports and the people involved as charismatic and good PR people.
are they? Sundance came off as a carnival barker by dropping SC2 with a tweet. For all of David Ting's "leadership" IPL still has not paid their prize winners. A real leader and event promoter threatens to resign when his guys don't get paid.
Check out what Don King does when the money behind the event does not pay up.
Don King looks like a genius compared to these guys.
David Ting is a coverted engineer. He may be a great engineer with many talents. He is a lousy live event promoter relative to any one who has done it professionally.
I am sorry, I can't take any argument seriously that suggests the folks running Esports events should be more like Don King. No matter what positive traits he has, his flaws smoother them a thousand times over.
Don King is a better promoter than David Ting... does that even need to be said? Are you living under a rock?!
Ting could shell out a quarter mil to King for about an hour of consulting time..if he wasn't booked!
On September 08 2013 23:33 lamprey1 wrote: they "sold" RTS eSports in a meaningless market: North America. it never was "self sustaining" as you've noted. eSports growth locations are in the far east.
On September 05 2013 14:56 Torte de Lini wrote: Yes, someone mentioned I should have put an argument that SC2 has a good hold on the RTS genre. David Ting and Sundance aren't irrelevant they put a good face on new businesses and help frame eSports and the people involved as charismatic and good PR people.
are they? Sundance came off as a carnival barker by dropping SC2 with a tweet. For all of David Ting's "leadership" IPL still has not paid their prize winners. A real leader and event promoter threatens to resign when his guys don't get paid.
Check out what Don King does when the money behind the event does not pay up.
Don King looks like a genius compared to these guys.
David Ting is a coverted engineer. He may be a great engineer with many talents. He is a lousy live event promoter relative to any one who has done it professionally.
I am sorry, I can't take any argument seriously that suggests the folks running Esports events should be more like Don King. No matter what positive traits he has, his flaws smoother them a thousand times over.
Don King is a better promoter than David Ting... does that even need to be said? Are you living under a rock?!
Ting could shell out a quarter mil to King for about an hour of consulting time..if he wasn't booked!
It's a bit silly comparing Don King and David Ting. King is promoting boxing which is a hugely popular sport. TV revenues or PPV are massive for boxing, this allows the player's prizes or purse to be huge. If Don King was promoting SC2, it is not going to change the prize pool simply because SC2 does not have the popularity of boxing, which is what drives the prize pool.
I wouldn't read to much into it. He is 23 years old and we can't really know what he is thinking. People retire for all sorts of reasons, family, money, injury or otherwise. He could return to become a coach later in life.
You guys really should stop comparing sc2 as esport to dota and lol. Dota and LoL both are "FREE TO PLAY!!!" games that matters whole a lot more than you guys can actually grasp apparently. And no the starter edition kinda stuff is just doesn't work. Also the second factor is developers of Starcraft are not as active as Valve or Riot. Riot doesn't even get scared of spending thousands of dollars just for a simple hunch just to catch the timing window of making their game more popular knowing that i might not work at all.
The new ecosystem of e-sports gaming is whole a lot different than what Blizzard is actually doing with their e-sports games. They are still like old fashioned dads who still think delphi is still the best programming language. Blizzard doesn't like to change things up or add stuff over a course of a month like other games just to make the game more friendly or more approachable by new players that are eager to learn a thing or two so that they are gonna watch events. SC2 is too unforgiving and not as much fun compared to Dota and Lol that is simple as that and it won't change since blizzard won't change. But even if they change and make some shiny things to make the game more approachable i fear it might be too late to make the game less unforgiving for the beginners. Hell people even say dota is too unforgiving compared to lol think about that and here we want to talk about why no new players coming into the scene or even casuals are declining.
So unless we get to the Lotv and Blizzard done with making money by selling games from Starcraft and decide to make the game f2p and actually change their model, don't compare the games and don't expect anything more...
On September 09 2013 22:32 Torte de Lini wrote: No one's comparing.
How come? There are many people comparing. I actually see the point of this thread is kinda meaningless too. I mean it is too easy to see the game will decline at this point and figuring out why is easy too. I mean what is there to discuss really?
E-sports system changed big time. Old e-sport (BW time or WC3 time) systems or approach won't work anymore cuz it can't compete with the new one. Blizzard insisting on using the old one so the game is being treated as just another game you buy, finish campaign and move on style by the players and not even talking about multiplayer part being too unfriendly for newcomers if they want to compete with the big hitters. It is what it is.
On September 09 2013 22:32 Torte de Lini wrote: No one's comparing.
How come? There are many people comparing. I actually see the point of this thread is kinda meaningless too. I mean it is too easy to see the game will decline at this point and figuring out why is easy too. I mean what is there to discuss really?
E-sports system changed big time. Old e-sport (BW time or WC3 time) systems or approach won't work anymore cuz it can't compete with the new one. Blizzard insisting on using the old one so the game is being treated as just another game you buy, finish campaign and move on style by the players and not even talking about multiplayer part being too unfriendly for newcomers if they want to compete with the big hitters. It is what it is.
Because thats not what the discussion is about. Its about SC2 and its growth unto itself. The other games have different models on almost every level, including broadcasting. Its is hard to compare any of them on such a broad topic as "growth" and "viewership" unless you focus down on specific events.
On September 09 2013 17:22 Torte de Lini wrote: Bisu retiring definitely makes this article look a bit too optimistic haha
the article is just a "soft denial" that the SC2 esports scene is on the precipice of doom. with lots of waffling and double negatives mixed in.
i wouldn't really call it "optimistic".
the SC2 esports is declining the only real question is.. how quickly.
I think it is normalizing. I really do. Right now the people who watch WCS every night or people who play the game or love to watch it. The launch hype is gone.
On September 09 2013 00:32 revel8 wrote: It's a bit silly comparing Don King and David Ting. King is promoting boxing which is a hugely popular sport. TV revenues or PPV are massive for boxing, this allows the player's prizes or purse to be huge. If Don King was promoting SC2, it is not going to change the prize pool simply because SC2 does not have the popularity of boxing, which is what drives the prize pool.
prize pools sky rocketed in Boxing preciselyBECAUSEof Don King. he had the balls to take boxing off of network national US tv.
talk about balls beyond belief man. PPV's first break through as a revenue stream was because of Don King.
On September 09 2013 17:22 Torte de Lini wrote: Bisu retiring definitely makes this article look a bit too optimistic haha
the article is just a "soft denial" that the SC2 esports scene is on the precipice of doom. with lots of waffling and double negatives mixed in.
i wouldn't really call it "optimistic".
the SC2 esports is declining the only real question is.. how quickly.
Yes, exactlyyyyyyyyy
You get it :D
its not like Brood War went on a straight up growth path from March 1999 onward.
SC2 still has a small, but reasonable chance of rebounding and growing in countries that are a natural fit for esports... places like China, Korea, and maybe Germany.
what korean promoters did with Brood War was promotional genius. that kind of promotional brilliance is what is needed for SC2.
"the television producers have masterminded the creation of a star system.. "
On September 04 2013 04:05 Plansix wrote: That is an interesting read and I am glad someone took the time to compare the numbers from 2013 to 2012. It gets rid of a lot of the anecdotal evidence we see out there. Its good to see that the scene is steady and that if Blizzard listens to the community and players for 2014, the numbers could climb again.
All things we already knew and I think it's sad that people have to write articles with regards to it because people proclaim the sky is falling when it isn't. My advice to them is focus on the positives and stop worrying about what everyone else thinks. The only opinion that matters is your own. With that mindset you will find more enjoyment in what you do.
On September 04 2013 04:05 Plansix wrote: That is an interesting read and I am glad someone took the time to compare the numbers from 2013 to 2012. It gets rid of a lot of the anecdotal evidence we see out there. Its good to see that the scene is steady and that if Blizzard listens to the community and players for 2014, the numbers could climb again.
All things we already knew and I think it's sad that people have to write articles with regards to it because people proclaim the sky is falling when it isn't. My advice to them is focus on the positives and stop worrying about what everyone else thinks. The only opinion that matters is your own. With that mindset you will find more enjoyment in what you do.
The part that is most irksome is that the argument never seems to end. I feel that the discussion will be rekindled every time the Dota International comes up or LCS has it’s grand finals. Even when tons of evidences is provided to show that SC2 is moving along just fine, the argument will morph into something else. Once the off season arrives, the sky starts falling all over again. And heaven help us when a pro retires for whatever reason.
ya well, if you're an RTS fan there isn't much to hope for. so i can sympathize with their despair.
CoH2 was a complete bomb. C&C has so much input lag its more like "observe and conquer"...as a TL.Net poster astutely observed. Rome2 really isn't targeted to become a competitive multiplayer experience.
we should thank the baby-jesus that Starcraft is Billionaire Mike's favourite game because Blizzard's continued investment in the genre makes no financial sense.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kwkQa.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nIdi2FV.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1HWO8Iz.png)
