|
On January 29 2014 20:27 JustPassingBy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 29 2014 16:59 Dodgin wrote:On January 29 2014 16:57 Lazzi wrote:On January 29 2014 15:53 sixfour wrote:
yes, because sc2 needs even more top heavy payout structures. players will obviously deal anyway The ones who qualifie for this tourny are already top player, you have to be in a final of an IEM Revival and Oz don't even have a team, and looking at their sc2 earnings they're not sitting on piles of cash. They have been on EG for the last year competing in the Proleague and attending many international events. I'm pretty sure that they were better off than a huge majority of players.
EG didn't pay them that well at all, the point is that they're not in such a position that they don't care if they make nothing from a tournament.
|
I tried to look it up on liquipedia, but is there a date announced yet?
|
On January 30 2014 01:13 Teker wrote:Show nested quote +The reason those player can make a living is because of the salary of their team, so whatever opinion you have towards them is totally irrelevant to the prize pool discussion of this tournament imo. So then why are people making such a big deal out of this? If players make their living off of salaries, then why is prize money such a huge issue?
I know right? such contradictory arguments in this thread.
|
On January 28 2014 19:06 KrazyTrumpet wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2014 17:21 Khai wrote:
This is insane but its' already working, just look at the amount of attention garnered already. Personally I am against a winner takes all $100k, that's really disrespectful to the players who might end up with nothing after a lot of hard work, imagine the runner up's feelings...
This will be more about who will be the lucky on form player that day rather than be about skill. How is it disrespectful? Players know what's at stake if they lose. They can throw their hat in for a chance to win 100 grand, or make the decision to sit this one out, it's up to them. What would be disrespectful is suddenly saying on the day of the tournament that it's winner take all, but that's absolutely not the case here. Again, this is one tournament. It's obviously not a format that can become the norm or else the scene overall will die out, but it's ok to have something like this every now and then, imo.
This.
User was warned for this post
|
That's pretty cool. I think IEM after all they did for esports deserves throwing a $100k winner-takes-all event for their 50th event. Great way to celebrate it, cannot wait! <3
|
On January 28 2014 07:50 Mifoi123 wrote:1. The secure source of income for sc2 players is: WCS AM, WCS EU and GSL. Check! 2. IEM creates a new tournament with the best 16 players for the fans to watch. Check! 3. IEM injects $100K in the sc2 scene. Check! 4. IEM tries something new. Check! 5. Everyone is talking about it and that is creating HYPE. Check! 6. Carmac is a genius imo! Check!  7. SC2 fans are unhappy? Wait what? I am HYPED! :D Note: Look at it differently... If this tournament does not happen then nobody would mention the fact that those 16 players get nothing. Now 1 of those 16 players will get $100K, how cool is that! :D
Yup!
|
I sure hope and think the 2 finalists will decide to split, just like in so many fighting games finals.
|
On January 28 2014 04:19 NovaMB wrote:So much money for  herO Damn.
Pretty sure you meant to say HerO 
|
On January 30 2014 09:40 JacobShock wrote:
I tried to look it up on liquipedia, but is there a date announced yet?
According to this it's happening around March.
|
On January 29 2014 12:17 BoZiffer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 29 2014 09:27 CosmicSpiral wrote:On January 29 2014 09:24 donkeykong wrote:On January 29 2014 09:20 chaos021 wrote:On January 29 2014 08:13 shabby wrote:
If you don't play to win, then whats the point anyway, tbh. In most other individual sports 99% of the participants are basically losers, and most have real jobs on the side to be able to support themselves/their family. They do it because they think its fun/they can/they want to become the great or whatever. The Winter Olympics start in 10 days, and the vast majority there will do nothing but show up and lose. Don't see them complaining. Getting there is an achievement in itself.
Don't shit in IEM for trying out something new. Be super thankful that they throw $100k at SC2 in addition to all the other tournaments they run through the year. Name one individual sport that doesn't pay out beyond the winner, and I'll show you a dead/dying sport. I can name many. It is called the Olympics. You spend 15 years of your life and you get a fake gold medal. Almost every sport in the Olympics has multiple events and a farm system that provides financial stability. That may be true for the flagship sports but I would say there are good number of sports that aren't inherently solvent on their own but regardless it isn't really relevant to the topic at hand. I think its kind of an interesting move. Will make for high drama and I will certainly watch because of it.
Infact just last week NPR had a report about an alpine ski jumper who was working in a restaurant to support herself so she can go to sochi.
|
On January 29 2014 09:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On January 29 2014 09:36 CosmicSpiral wrote:On January 29 2014 09:34 donkeykong wrote:On January 29 2014 09:27 CosmicSpiral wrote:On January 29 2014 09:24 donkeykong wrote:On January 29 2014 09:20 chaos021 wrote:On January 29 2014 08:13 shabby wrote:
If you don't play to win, then whats the point anyway, tbh. In most other individual sports 99% of the participants are basically losers, and most have real jobs on the side to be able to support themselves/their family. They do it because they think its fun/they can/they want to become the great or whatever. The Winter Olympics start in 10 days, and the vast majority there will do nothing but show up and lose. Don't see them complaining. Getting there is an achievement in itself.
Don't shit in IEM for trying out something new. Be super thankful that they throw $100k at SC2 in addition to all the other tournaments they run through the year. Name one individual sport that doesn't pay out beyond the winner, and I'll show you a dead/dying sport. I can name many. It is called the Olympics. You spend 15 years of your life and you get a fake gold medal. Almost every sport in the Olympics has multiple events and a farm system that provides financial stability. They do not get paid a single $1. All they get is a fake gold medal for spending their whole lives practising and sacrificing for. It is called glory. If you want to call it a farm system, I can also call them team houses. Okay dude. Your vast knowledge of international sports is clearly showing. I think he is right, no? You get something from your country, but i don't think you get price money for winning there
The Olympics is not IEM though. IEM is a tournament that players who play this game to live compete in. These tournaments are part of their livelihoods. The Olympics aren't meant to be something that you make a living participating in.
The analogy is completely wrong.
|
On January 29 2014 16:18 Master Blaster wrote:Show nested quote +On January 29 2014 11:07 imrusty269 wrote:On January 29 2014 10:25 donkeykong wrote:On January 29 2014 10:07 imrusty269 wrote:On January 29 2014 10:00 donkeykong wrote:On January 29 2014 09:36 CosmicSpiral wrote:On January 29 2014 09:34 donkeykong wrote:On January 29 2014 09:27 CosmicSpiral wrote:On January 29 2014 09:24 donkeykong wrote:On January 29 2014 09:20 chaos021 wrote:
[quote]
Name one individual sport that doesn't pay out beyond the winner, and I'll show you a dead/dying sport. I can name many. It is called the Olympics. You spend 15 years of your life and you get a fake gold medal. Almost every sport in the Olympics has multiple events and a farm system that provides financial stability. They do not get paid a single $1. All they get is a fake gold medal for spending their whole lives practising and sacrificing for. It is called glory. If you want to call it a farm system, I can also call them team houses. Okay dude. Your vast knowledge of international sports is clearly showing. Don't be so condescending and get off your high horse. That stupid pen icon does not make you intelligent, nor well read, nor even close to being right. There have been countless olympians who have sacrificed everything for just that gold medal. No monetary reward. Just glory is sufficient. Don't be so proud of yourself since your analogy isn't so smart either. Besides gold medals, there're guess what silver medals and bronze medals. If olympics paid winner $100K and nothing to other players I'm sure many people will have a problem with that. A fake silver medal and a geniune bronze medal. They all get nothing. Not a single $1. How old are you people who are arguing against this point? I guess not old enough to remember the amateur days. Look in the dictionary what amateur means and come back to me. Now go sit in the ignorant corner. Point is you failed to provide a popular sport event that payout only to the winner. The Olympics doesn't pay anybody at all, hence it is not a counter example. GG. Commonwealth Games (google it) is another example. What about the special Olympics? There are heaps of examples where participation and pride are all you get. They should be happy to be there. Winner takes all. Get over it you prima donnas. Who's the worlds best badminton player and what did they earn last tourney? Exactly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BWF_Super_Series
$350,000 to $500,000? Seems like quite a bit.
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Global/Issues/2012/09/20/Marketing-and-Sponsorship/Badminton.aspx
Badminton player signing a $7.4 million deal? I don't even know who the best player is, if any of them are making that much I'd kinda assume there's a pretty significant backing. Note this is all separate from the Olympics, and a way that players can earn a living.
EDIT: Sorry for 2x post
|
On January 30 2014 09:10 Dodgin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 29 2014 20:27 JustPassingBy wrote:On January 29 2014 16:59 Dodgin wrote:On January 29 2014 16:57 Lazzi wrote:On January 29 2014 15:53 sixfour wrote:
yes, because sc2 needs even more top heavy payout structures. players will obviously deal anyway The ones who qualifie for this tourny are already top player, you have to be in a final of an IEM Revival and Oz don't even have a team, and looking at their sc2 earnings they're not sitting on piles of cash. They have been on EG for the last year competing in the Proleague and attending many international events. I'm pretty sure that they were better off than a huge majority of players. EG didn't pay them that well at all, the point is that they're not in such a position that they don't care if they make nothing from a tournament.
Is anybody ever in that situation that they don't care if they don't make money?
|
On January 31 2014 17:00 JustPassingBy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 09:10 Dodgin wrote:On January 29 2014 20:27 JustPassingBy wrote:On January 29 2014 16:59 Dodgin wrote:On January 29 2014 16:57 Lazzi wrote:On January 29 2014 15:53 sixfour wrote:
yes, because sc2 needs even more top heavy payout structures. players will obviously deal anyway The ones who qualifie for this tourny are already top player, you have to be in a final of an IEM Revival and Oz don't even have a team, and looking at their sc2 earnings they're not sitting on piles of cash. They have been on EG for the last year competing in the Proleague and attending many international events. I'm pretty sure that they were better off than a huge majority of players. EG didn't pay them that well at all, the point is that they're not in such a position that they don't care if they make nothing from a tournament. Is anybody ever in that situation that they don't care if they don't make money?
I guess when you already have enough money for a good living, there'd be people who'd rather play risky for a lot of money than play safe for just some money and thus they wouldn't care if they didn't make money.
Though Oz and Revival don't seem to be that secure financially.
|
On January 31 2014 03:16 Noobity wrote:Show nested quote +On January 29 2014 09:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:On January 29 2014 09:36 CosmicSpiral wrote:On January 29 2014 09:34 donkeykong wrote:On January 29 2014 09:27 CosmicSpiral wrote:On January 29 2014 09:24 donkeykong wrote:On January 29 2014 09:20 chaos021 wrote:On January 29 2014 08:13 shabby wrote:
If you don't play to win, then whats the point anyway, tbh. In most other individual sports 99% of the participants are basically losers, and most have real jobs on the side to be able to support themselves/their family. They do it because they think its fun/they can/they want to become the great or whatever. The Winter Olympics start in 10 days, and the vast majority there will do nothing but show up and lose. Don't see them complaining. Getting there is an achievement in itself.
Don't shit in IEM for trying out something new. Be super thankful that they throw $100k at SC2 in addition to all the other tournaments they run through the year. Name one individual sport that doesn't pay out beyond the winner, and I'll show you a dead/dying sport. I can name many. It is called the Olympics. You spend 15 years of your life and you get a fake gold medal. Almost every sport in the Olympics has multiple events and a farm system that provides financial stability. They do not get paid a single $1. All they get is a fake gold medal for spending their whole lives practising and sacrificing for. It is called glory. If you want to call it a farm system, I can also call them team houses. Okay dude. Your vast knowledge of international sports is clearly showing. I think he is right, no? You get something from your country, but i don't think you get price money for winning there The Olympics is not IEM though. IEM is a tournament that players who play this game to live compete in. These tournaments are part of their livelihoods. The Olympics aren't meant to be something that you make a living participating in. The analogy is completely wrong.
And so are all the other IEM's that happen this year / last year, but THIS tournament isn't meant for that either, the arguments are completely wrong.
|
On January 30 2014 22:20 Salteador Neo wrote:
I sure hope and think the 2 finalists will decide to split, just like in so many fighting games finals.
Yes. I think the ESL people are underestimating how LIKELY it is that the final prize will be secretly be split between #1 and #2.
I mean, it would be so stupid NOT to split. You can't expect reasonable people not to split the main prize.
|
On January 31 2014 19:36 dizzy101 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 22:20 Salteador Neo wrote:
I sure hope and think the 2 finalists will decide to split, just like in so many fighting games finals. Yes. I think the ESL people are underestimating how LIKELY it is that the final prize will be secretly be split between #1 and #2. I mean, it would be so stupid NOT to split. You can't expect reasonable people not to split the main prize.
Or maybe they don't necessarily care about that aspect? ^^
|
On January 31 2014 19:36 dizzy101 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 22:20 Salteador Neo wrote:
I sure hope and think the 2 finalists will decide to split, just like in so many fighting games finals. Yes. I think the ESL people are underestimating how LIKELY it is that the final prize will be secretly be split between #1 and #2. I mean, it would be so stupid NOT to split. You can't expect reasonable people not to split the main prize.
Why can't you? Split or not split, two completely valid choices, and I don't really care much either way, since I will have watched the games and will know who won. Actually I belive that a reasonable person wouldn't just split the money because everyone says to do it but rather think it through and make an informed and concious desicion, no matter the outcome.
|
On January 31 2014 19:37 MasterOfPuppets wrote:
Or maybe they don't necessarily care about that aspect? ^^
Sure, that would be fine.
But from what I've gathered, they do care. They just think it's unlikely that it will be split.
If you listened to Kennigit on Unfiltered a couple of days ago, he said that the ESL people (including him, Carmac and others) think that there are plenty of possible finalists who wouldn't split the prize. But I think they're wrong.
If I were in charge of a team, I would have been in touch with other teamowners already, to show a willingness to split the prize money.
|
Splitting the prize money seems kinda wrong to me though... Takes the whole point away from actually winning/bringing your A game
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
