Naniwa offers Bounty to whoever beats Revival - Page 17

Post a Reply

Prev 1 15 16 17 18 19 47 Next All

Bagration

United States18282 Posts

October 28 2013 22:22 GMT

#321

This is fun. Good for Naniwa

VillageBC

322 Posts

October 28 2013 22:22 GMT

#322

So when/where does Revival play that affects Naniwa's chances? Because suddenly I have a reason to watch that game. =)

Snusmumriken

Sweden1717 Posts

October 28 2013 22:22 GMT

#323

On October 29 2013 07:13 Waise wrote:

Show nested quote +

On October 29 2013 07:10 Snusmumriken wrote:

On October 29 2013 07:02 Waise wrote:

On October 29 2013 06:58 Snusmumriken wrote:

On October 29 2013 06:53 Waise wrote:

On October 29 2013 06:48 Thieving Magpie wrote:

On October 29 2013 06:45 Waise wrote:

On October 29 2013 06:38 Thieving Magpie wrote:
You literally don't like the idea of good things being done because the perpetrator of said good thing is getting paid.

no, i never said this, nor do i believe it. this is your confusion; you are not correct about what my opinions are.

if you want to tell me that the miscommunication is my fault and that i have poor language skills, feel free to do that. if there's a miscommunication i will try to clarify it, which is what i was doing. you seem to be turning it into some kind of competition about who spoke "correctly," and that's not something i'm interested in. you want to be correct? fine, you are correct, the miscommunication is my fault. but that still doesn't mean that you were ever accurately interpreting my beliefs

On October 29 2013 06:41 Thieving Magpie wrote:

it's unfun because i no longer identify with the players' drive to succeed and show high performance for the sake of good-spirited competition. in that scenario i see the players "motivation"/performance as a result of a cash agreement

All prize money is a cash agreement... Unless you're arguing against the existing of money in all competitions?

i assumed context would make it obvious that "cash agreement" was shorthand for "cash agreement between competitors rather than between the organizer and the placers". maybe it didn't.

So if you don't mind people getting paid to do good things, then what is your problem with Naniwa jokingly commenting about paying people to do good things/compete harder?

first, the premise of this argument is based on other people apparently believing he was serious. if it was a joke then obviously who cares? but there are people sincerely saying "i think he's serious/even if he's serious i think it's cool/good/ok," which is what i'm arguing against

as for what my problem is... i'm reaching a point of not knowing what else to say again. i believe it sets a negative precedent for the way tournaments should be conducted. as a fan, i enjoy tournaments that are conducted with standards of professionalism based on my personal beliefs and preferences. that's why i think it's bad. i do not want players to pay each other for their performance in tournaments. i think that's blizzard's responsibility to do and anything else is tampering with what i consider the purpose of a tournament: to determine the player who is most skilled and most dedicated to refining his or her skill

if someone doesn't want to practice until naniwa gives them money, i don't think they are the deserving party.

if we are going to talk about challenger players not having enough incentive because of WCS structure, that's entirely different and i would even grant it to you. the system probably needs to change. but naniwa screwing with the prize pool isn't a solution to that problem any more than shooting cops would solve a corrupt precinct

But if somebody doesn't want to practice until blizzard gives them money, then its ok?

Your analogy falters by the way. An appropriate analogy would be if a private person stepped in and payed cops because they were underpayed and thus didn't do their jobs correctly. While the problem lies with the state (blizzard) not doing their job, the private person stepping in (naniwa) and possibly increasing the quality of investigations (games) is somehow a bad thing in your world. Woe is me, you make no sense.

no, i don't think that way either. i don't generally cheer for players who admit or are widely believed to be in the game just to make a living. but as i've said before, i acknowledge that certain things are avoidable and other things are unavoidable. in another post i said that it would be great if the best players could all come together and compete with no sponsors and no prizes, but that's simply not realistic. players need compensation for the time they spend, otherwise no one will do it. if those challenger players aren't getting enough, then either they should drop out of the sport or blizzard should change the system. but yes, the private person stepping in is a bad thing because to me that means we're abandoning any sense of credibility for the tournaments blizzard is giving us. at that point, why doesn't naniwa just start his own starcraft league?

(the answer, of course, is that he only wants to give money to people whose wins will make him money later

)

lol.

How is that lessening the credibility? Dont just throw words around. How exactly is increasing skill by increasing incentive abandoning credibility? You actually remind me of squire nortons song:

+ Show Spoiler +

THE child and the old man sat alone
In the quiet, peaceful shade
Of the old green boughs, that had richly grown
In the deep, thick forest glade.
It was a soft and pleasant sound,
That rustling of the oak;
And the gentle breeze played lightly round
As thus the fair boy spoke:--

"Dear father, what can honor be,
Of which I hear men rave?
Field, cell and cloister, land and sea,
The tempest and the grave:--
It lives in all, 'tis sought in each,
'Tis never heard or seen:
Now tell me, father, I beseech,
What can this honor mean?"

"It is a name -- a name, my child --
It lived in other days,
When men were rude, their passions wild,
Their sport, thick battle-frays.
When, in armor bright, the warrior bold
Knelt to his lady's eyes:
Beneath the abbey pavement old
That warrior's dust now lies.

"The iron hearts of that old day
Have mouldered in the grave;
And chivalry has passed away,
With knights so true and brave;
The honor, which to them was life,
Throbs in no bosom now;
It only gilds the gambler's strife,
Or decks the worthless vow."

Can't be a child forever.

if blizzard isn't able to properly recompense the players for participating in their tournaments, then by my standards they are not a credible organizer. players defying the prize pool system by coming up with their own rewards and systems is a step toward delegitimizing WCS. you may disagree with me if you wish, but my choice of words was fine. please stop being unnecessary hostile as well!

thanks for the lyrics, though; they're quite beautiful and a good read

I'm not hostile, I simply respect you too much to actually believe you could possibly mean what you say you mean.

I agree that the fault lies with blizzard, but you're having it all wrong when you're saying that players adding their own incentive when blizzard provides none causes a delegitimisation of wcs. It has already happened, the added incentive from other sources is just a result from such delegitimisation.

So clearly your beef ought to be 100% with blizzard, and why on earth you would want them to tell naniwa to stop posting such tweets when instead you should tell them to add incentive where there is none so that added incentive isnt needed in the first place. No?

And you still haven't shown how added incentive from other sources than the tournament organizer is a problem. Youre just throwing words around without content. To me it wouldn't matter if blizzard was paying the winner of revival vs jonsnow a billion dollars and naniwa added 500 to the mix, I would never ever mind as long as its added incentive to win

Arghmyliver

United States1077 Posts

October 28 2013 22:25 GMT

#324

On October 29 2013 07:02 Waise wrote:

Show nested quote +

On October 29 2013 06:58 Snusmumriken wrote:

On October 29 2013 06:53 Waise wrote:

On October 29 2013 06:48 Thieving Magpie wrote:

On October 29 2013 06:45 Waise wrote:

On October 29 2013 06:38 Thieving Magpie wrote:
You literally don't like the idea of good things being done because the perpetrator of said good thing is getting paid.

On October 29 2013 06:41 Thieving Magpie wrote:

All prize money is a cash agreement... Unless you're arguing against the existing of money in all competitions?

i assumed context would make it obvious that "cash agreement" was shorthand for "cash agreement between competitors rather than between the organizer and the placers". maybe it didn't.

So if you don't mind people getting paid to do good things, then what is your problem with Naniwa jokingly commenting about paying people to do good things/compete harder?

no, i don't think that way either. i don't generally cheer for players who admit or are widely believed to be in the game just to make a living. but as i've said before, i acknowledge that certain things are avoidable and other things are unavoidable. in another post i said that it would be great if the best players could all come together and compete with no sponsors and no prizes, but that's simply not realistic. players need compensation for the time they spend, otherwise no one will do it. if those challenger players aren't getting enough, then either they should drop out of the sport or blizzard should change the system. but yes, the private person stepping in is a bad thing because to me that means we're abandoning any sense of credibility for the tournaments blizzard is giving us. at that point, why doesn't naniwa just start his own starcraft league?

(the answer, of course, is that he only wants to give money to people whose wins will make him money later

)

Dude - we are all in the game to make a living. Unfortunately humankind has created a system where no one can survive without money - ipso facto people tend to do whatever they can do best to make it. If you are faulting people for trying to survive that's kinda lame buddy. "If you aren't making enough you should quit your job" is not a viable option for the majority of humans on the planet. Also NaNi is offering a bounty of 500 dollars - which is a nice bounty, however, it is not enough money to start your own SC league. Blizzards WCS system this year isn't exactly reputed for its brilliance - he's not calling attention to anything everyone didn't already know. NaNi doesn't have to give his money to anyone but in this case he felt it was worth offering a bounty so yes, he is only offering money to "people whose wins will make him money later" but it's not like thats a big secret you are revealing. He's pretty clear about it. If he offered the money to everyone it wouldn't exactly motivate them would it?

Thieving Magpie

United States6752 Posts

October 28 2013 22:25 GMT

#325

On October 29 2013 07:21 Waise wrote:
anyway, this was fun. contrary to what some people apparently thought, i certainly wasn't trolling. i'm just a fast typist who enjoys debate and had nothing better to do for a while, and a lot of people were asking me for further clarifications, so i had plenty of posts to make

in any case, it's just an opinion, i'm not calling sponsors or starting a petition, so you can just relax and disagree with me if you think i'm wrong. probably done with this thread though! i don't think there's anything about my view i haven't already explained, and i don't want it to get more repetitive than it already is

peace

Got it; so lets stop the debate and on with the Hype!

I'm rooting for Revival to roflstomp everyone so that Naniwa and him have a bo9 tie breaker!

LimeNade

United States2125 Posts

October 28 2013 22:31 GMT

#326

On October 29 2013 03:23 ffadicted wrote:
Oh god here comes the shitstorm...
I'm all for defending stuff in eSports and avoiding drama tbh, but idk about this one haha I guess it's obviously not as awful as offering money to lose, but it's still, it's kind of sketchy territory. On the fence on thsi one, gonna wait for the discussion

To be honest I agree with Naniwa. If anything the people who are playing up against Revival really have zero motivation or reason to win their games. The money for challenger league is garbage and no one in that group needs the maximum of 50 points to actually change their position in WCS standings except for Revival

Fjodorov

5007 Posts

October 28 2013 22:32 GMT

#327

Its a bit annoying that it comes down to a situation where the games mean everything to 1 players but the other 3 might not even show up (taeja forfeiting...). Cant force anyone to play but I think its bad sportsmanship from Taeja if his only reason is that he doesnt feel like playing. Havent seen any specific reason posted though.

Thieving Magpie

United States6752 Posts

October 28 2013 22:36 GMT

#328

Quit with the

and start with the

I'm betting on Select getting the half grand!

LimeNade

United States2125 Posts

October 28 2013 22:38 GMT

#329

On October 29 2013 07:32 Fjodorov wrote:
Its a bit annoying that it comes down to a situation where the games mean everything to 1 players but the other 3 might not even show up (taeja forfeiting...). Cant force anyone to play but I think its bad sportsmanship from Taeja if his only reason is that he doesnt feel like playing. Havent seen any specific reason posted though.

Not really. IMO it is blizzards format that is at fault and a smart move by Taeja. We all know Taeja has had health problems in the past so anything he can do to avoid meaningless games to stay healthy and keep strats hidden is the smartest thing by far to do for the upcoming blizzcon

Eventine

United States307 Posts

October 28 2013 22:38 GMT

#330

On October 29 2013 07:15 Godwrath wrote:

Show nested quote +

The Hyunstoppable legend.

By the way, how can people argue about this 16 pages ? Is there really a problem ? I would dare to say i am a naniwa antifan but i can't really hate on this

Edit - Oh of course, the "this is blizzard's fault". How could i miss that one.
Dumbasses, it happens on every single league.

Don't you know, all the philosophy scholars hang out at tl on their time off

Thieving Magpie

United States6752 Posts

October 28 2013 22:43 GMT

#331

On October 29 2013 07:38 LimeNade wrote:

Show nested quote +

Would a qualifier/code a/code b/challenger format that payed per win instead per placement be better at giving players incentive/help low level players stay afloat until they get enough exposure?

Ace Frehley

2030 Posts

October 28 2013 22:45 GMT

#332

The only way this wouldnt be amazing is if naniwa is not being serious
Just offer the damn cash and dont be a pussy

And I'm not even a fan of his and would rather see revival at blizzcon

MichaelDonovan

United States1453 Posts

October 28 2013 22:51 GMT

#333

On October 29 2013 03:29 autechr3 wrote:
I don't think its unethical, offering 500 dollars to revival to lose would be though. Its probably a joke anyway.

The only possible issue is if Revival would agree to lose to people for half of the bounty.

Complete

United States1864 Posts

October 28 2013 22:52 GMT

#334

haha nice naniwa

Thieving Magpie

United States6752 Posts

October 28 2013 22:52 GMT

#335

On October 29 2013 07:51 MichaelDonovan wrote:

Show nested quote +

The only possible issue is if Revival would agree to lose to people for half of the bounty.

Yeah, but that's not a Naniwa issue.

lookfirewood

1212 Posts

October 28 2013 22:55 GMT

#336

On October 29 2013 07:51 MichaelDonovan wrote:

Show nested quote +

The only possible issue is if Revival would agree to lose to people for half of the bounty.

Which would be stupid since winning vs naniwa grants him 5k instead. Huge difference.

Shai

Canada806 Posts

October 28 2013 22:56 GMT

#337

I dislike Naniwa.

I have no moral issues with what Naniwa has done here.

WonnaPlay

Netherlands912 Posts

October 28 2013 22:58 GMT

#338

I don't understand why there is a fuss about this.
This is awesome.

If Revival loses, Naniwa gets effectively $5000 and for just not having to play for that money, 1/10th of his price goes to the bounty hunter.

I would've done the same. It is awesome.

Mahanaim

Korea (South)1002 Posts

October 28 2013 23:01 GMT

#339

Offering money to lose could certainly be shady, but offering a reward for winning certainly seems more acceptable.

Schelim

Austria11528 Posts

October 28 2013 23:01 GMT

#340

On October 29 2013 07:56 Shai wrote:
I dislike Naniwa.

I have no moral issues with what Naniwa has done here.

agreed 100% with this man. Naniwa's tweet is funny, smart and completely fair. if he was offering Revival money to lose on purpose, that would be an entirely different story (but also the dumbest thing he could do because Revival would just try his best anyways, if he wins he goes to Blizzcon, if he loses he gets monies from Naniwa

). but i see nothing wrong with what he's doing here.

that being said, gogo Revival!!!

Prev 1 15 16 17 18 19 47 Next All

Please or register to reply.

Naniwa offers Bounty to whoever beats Revival - Page 17

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming