|
I can never understand this feeling though. I guess at first I felt it, when casters starting telling everyone "tell your family in friends to watch this tournament" and everyone started babbling about the growth of the scene as if the game's viewership was more important than the game itself. As if we should "crowdsource" the hype instead of letting the promoters and the event organizers build up the hype to get people involved. And while at first it was a genuine way to try to get more people interested, it seems to me like the growth of the scene is now in the hands of the promoters and the devs and indeed it is their job to get people interested.
In the grand scheme of things, people will really get interested in large numbers if there's something to be interested about. And that's why television despite what we might think about it is a massive milestone. Yet I don't think it's not really our place to feel like we should work up to getting SC2 on TV. I think if it ever made it there, it would be a sort of natural progression toward the big boys platform and it will only happen if the promoters and the devs are credible enough to be taken seriously by the TV people, at least while TV is still a relevant factor which will be true for the next few years or decades.
But whatever happens, eSports won't be on TV all that much until people change their views on videogaming. And their views have been changing. So we have to hope that the promoters and devs are doing their jobs!
|
above poster is right, i think my generation is the first to see video games as a recreational hobby and not so much a kids thing, (born in 1980) basically i think by the time im in my 50s and my kids have grown up, its going to be much more accepted . . .and ill be too old to take part . . or so my actual parents tell me . . but my mother sure rocks that pogo site
|
On August 24 2014 04:10 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2014 03:31 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Imperative. I don't think it means what you think it means. Thesaurus much? Imperative - expressive of a command, entreaty, or exhortation. The word is fine.
Ok then as you say; An "expressive of a command, entreaty, or exhortation" feeling to legitimise esports.
Yeah, somehow I don't think whatever intention he had, if he had any, had been expressed in the title by your own interpretation.
Anyhow, I thought it was pretty clear to anybody that ready the post that the whole post was just a meandering pile of undistinct and vague sentences one after the other, where nothing is defined, and everything is written in the manner of an overblown movie. There no information, no ideas, no argument to express or exchange, it's just mostly pomposity bereft of substance, as if like that was the purpose of the post. Mostly, the extravagant language are being used to hide the nature of the vacuous post. I thought my comment was rather apt as it rather neatly wraps up the article and my thoughts in one brief statement. Rather telling that it will be two other posters with a pen and paper icon defending his choice of title. Perhaps you two are sponsoring him or something in gaining these icons; I have no idea how these status symbols are given on TL.
[/QUOTE]
|
On August 24 2014 22:52 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2014 04:10 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 24 2014 03:31 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Imperative. I don't think it means what you think it means. Thesaurus much? Imperative - expressive of a command, entreaty, or exhortation. The word is fine. Ok then as you say; An "expressive of a command, entreaty, or exhortation" feeling to legitimise esports. Yeah, somehow I don't think whatever intention he had, if he had any, had been expressed in the title by your own interpretation. Anyhow, I thought it was pretty clear to anybody that ready the post that the whole post was just a meandering pile of undistinct and vague sentences one after the other, where nothing is defined, and everything is written in the manner of an overblown movie. There no information, no ideas, no argument to express or exchange, it's just mostly pomposity bereft of substance, as if like that was the purpose of the post. Mostly, the extravagant language are being used to hide the nature of the vacuous post. I thought my comment was rather apt as it rather neatly wraps up the article and my thoughts in one brief statement. Rather telling that it will be two other posters with a pen and paper icon defending his choice of title. Perhaps you two are sponsoring him or something in gaining these icons; I have no idea how these status symbols are given on TL.
They're staff, I'm a community member. There's no other relation.
While I welcome criticism, the bolded area is a bit ridiculous considering I did have a point and it is broken down into bullets in the summary section so even though my word-choices may be off or disliked, you can still gather what I'm saying in the summary. I take into account that not everyone enjoys my style writing. Despite so, people are still interested in making conversation and discussion on the topic regardless how the writing makes them feel. They weren't quick to dismiss it because the title didn't suit their reading nor the overall topic's style of wording. I think you come off as very childish and a bit insecure by not only being among the first to comment with little actual input but also be so strangely obsessed with it; going so far as to put the whole thing down without remotely arguing about the whole point.
You are being offensive.
|
You raise some pretty good points. I've been typically against television growth, but after readin your article, I'm not so sure it would be a bad thing, fiscally and for the growth of the scene overall, due to, like you said, being able to connect to tv exclusive sponsors and audiences.
Thanks for writing this!
|
On August 24 2014 03:38 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2014 03:31 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Imperative. I don't think it means what you think it means. Thesaurus much? I welcome grammar and word-choice feedback.
Unless proper nouns, only the first word of a sentence gets an uppercase. Maybe it's different in english, but I doubt that.
Edit : Now that I'm looking, seems like pretty much every title here is formated the way you did. Would be curious as to why it is so...
|
On August 25 2014 00:08 Cynry wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2014 03:38 Torte de Lini wrote:On August 24 2014 03:31 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Imperative. I don't think it means what you think it means. Thesaurus much? I welcome grammar and word-choice feedback. Unless proper nouns, only the first word of a sentence gets an uppercase. Maybe it's different in english, but I doubt that. Edit : Now that I'm looking, seems like pretty much every title here is formated the way you did. Would be curious as to why it is so...
Capitalize the first and the last word.
Capitalize nouns, pronouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, and subordinate conjunctions.
Lowercase articles (a, an, the), coordinating conjunctions, and prepositions.
Lowercase the "to" in an infinitive (I want to play guitar).
Paraphrased from The Chicago Manual of Style: 16 ed. paragraph 8.155
I was taught that you uppercase all major words.
On August 25 2014 00:08 goiflin wrote:
You raise some pretty good points. I've been typically against television growth, but after readin your article, I'm not so sure it would be a bad thing, fiscally and for the growth of the scene overall, due to, like you said, being able to connect to tv exclusive sponsors and audiences.
Thanks for writing this!
Thanks! I can see the difficulty in not only getting eSports on television but also the difficulty in adhering to the format television demands.
|
On August 25 2014 00:16 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 00:08 Cynry wrote:On August 24 2014 03:38 Torte de Lini wrote:On August 24 2014 03:31 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Imperative. I don't think it means what you think it means. Thesaurus much? I welcome grammar and word-choice feedback. Unless proper nouns, only the first word of a sentence gets an uppercase. Maybe it's different in english, but I doubt that. Edit : Now that I'm looking, seems like pretty much every title here is formated the way you did. Would be curious as to why it is so... Show nested quote +Capitalize the first and the last word.
Capitalize nouns, pronouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, and subordinate conjunctions.
Lowercase articles (a, an, the), coordinating conjunctions, and prepositions.
Lowercase the "to" in an infinitive (I want to play guitar).
Paraphrased from The Chicago Manual of Style: 16 ed. paragraph 8.155 I was taught that you uppercase all major words.
Yeah sorry about that, researched a bit and you are absolutely right. Looks very weird as a non english speaker, but hey, this one's on me !
|
On August 24 2014 22:52 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2014 04:10 CosmicSpiral wrote:On August 24 2014 03:31 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Imperative. I don't think it means what you think it means. Thesaurus much? Imperative - expressive of a command, entreaty, or exhortation. The word is fine. Ok then as you say; An "expressive of a command, entreaty, or exhortation" feeling to legitimise esports. Yeah, somehow I don't think whatever intention he had, if he had any, had been expressed in the title by your own interpretation. Anyhow, I thought it was pretty clear to anybody that ready the post that the whole post was just a meandering pile of undistinct and vague sentences one after the other, where nothing is defined, and everything is written in the manner of an overblown movie. There no information, no ideas, no argument to express or exchange, it's just mostly pomposity bereft of substance, as if like that was the purpose of the post. Mostly, the extravagant language are being used to hide the nature of the vacuous post. I thought my comment was rather apt as it rather neatly wraps up the article and my thoughts in one brief statement. Rather telling that it will be two other posters with a pen and paper icon defending his choice of title. Perhaps you two are sponsoring him or something in gaining these icons; I have no idea how these status symbols are given on TL.
I've been part of this forum for a good long while and I've put up with some seriously bad writeups in my time and while OP's choice of words is not always perfect, I think he raises an important issues and makes pertinent comments. Not only that, Torte De Lini has a long and fairly glorious history of involvement in this scene. What have you been up to? Criticizing the choice of words in an article which is perfectly understandable despite its few shortcomings? Feel free, but there's no need to go about it like that.
I recognize the pertinence of criticizing the choice of words, and Torte himself has shown that he's open to criticism. So what's the point of using words like "vacuous" when the post is not "vacuous" by any means? I think that many of us can appreciate Torte's thoughts about eSports and television given that he's a contributing member of this community, but very few of us actually care about your basic contrary opinions about form.
Maybe if you're going to use the word "vacuous" while making a post which requires no intelligence of its own, you should take one for the team and also make some effort to come up with something insightful.
|
Personally I dont get the whole discussion. I love esports and there is more content out there than I can ever consume. If someone else likes it or thinks it is "legitimate" (whatever that means) is entirely irrelevant to me.
|
Mainstream media just looked at this thread. After laughing their asses of for 20 minutes they decided to give more focus to competitive grammar.
|
On August 25 2014 00:45 Redox wrote:
Personally I dont get the whole discussion. I love esports and there is more content out there than I can ever consume. If someone else likes it or thinks it is "legitimate" (whatever that means) is entirely irrelevant to me.
What is there not to understand? Certainly anyone who's given any thought to this question for even a few minutes will realize that there's more to gain from the growth of a competitive activity than the quantity of content that is being created. The quality will improve too.
The first implication would be that people would be more accepting of competitive gaming, an activity which is still scoffed at by the media at least in the West and by a lot of the people who still think gaming is just children fucking around with an Atari.
But also you have to consider that growth means more money, better production value, more players, better players (because there's more of an audience AND more of an incentive to get good). Odds are the level of play would increase. Plus to people like myself who've grown up being fans of a sport like hockey, there's an inherent value to this. Now I don't expect eSports to ever reach that level, but there's something amazing about getting to work in the morning and talking about last night's amazing (or horrible) game with a bunch of coworkers with whom(?) I have nothing else in common. It's cool to get to work and hear about it on the radio.
Korea is often cited as an example because it truly is a good one. There is something to be envious of when I see crowds of thousands crammed into a huge plane hangar, cheering like crazy for the OSL finalists while it's being broadcasted on national television and nearly the entire population of the country is aware that it's a thing.
You may not value those things, but you can hardly deny that they're a big deal.
|
On August 25 2014 01:05 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 00:45 Redox wrote:
Personally I dont get the whole discussion. I love esports and there is more content out there than I can ever consume. If someone else likes it or thinks it is "legitimate" (whatever that means) is entirely irrelevant to me. What is there not to understand? Certainly anyone who's given any thought to this question for even a few minutes will realize that there's more to gain from the growth of a competitive activity than the quantity of content that is being created. The quality will improve too. The first implication would be that people would be more accepting of competitive gaming, an activity which is still scoffed at by the media at least in the West and by a lot of the people who still think gaming is just children fucking around with an Atari. But also you have to consider that growth means more money, better production value, more players, better players (because there's more of an audience AND more of an incentive to get good). Odds are the level of play would increase. Plus to people like myself who've grown up being fans of a sport like hockey, there's an inherent value to this. Now I don't expect eSports to ever reach that level, but there's something amazing about getting to work in the morning and talking about last night's amazing (or horrible) game with a bunch of coworkers with whom(?) I have nothing else in common. It's cool to get to work and hear about it on the radio. Korea is often cited as an example because it truly is a good one. There is something to be envious of when I see crowds of thousands crammed into a huge plane hangar, cheering like crazy for the OSL finalists while it's being broadcasted on national television and nearly the entire population of the country is aware that it's a thing. You may not value those things, but you can hardly deny that they're a big deal.
Level of play is always relative. I enjoyed watching League in s2 when it was comparatively much lower level than now just as much. I enjoyed sc2 more in the beginning stages when it was lower level than I do now. Bw was awesome when Boxer played it even if it was much lower level than later play. People love watching Smash although the pro player base is rather low (which makes me assume the level of play could be way higher).
When it comes to talking about the games, a specific community like the one on TL is completely sufficient to me.
You want a certain minimum size to have a stable pro player base. But beyond that I dont see a correlation between bigger size and greater enjoyment of the game.
|
On August 25 2014 01:51 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 01:05 Djzapz wrote:On August 25 2014 00:45 Redox wrote:
Personally I dont get the whole discussion. I love esports and there is more content out there than I can ever consume. If someone else likes it or thinks it is "legitimate" (whatever that means) is entirely irrelevant to me. What is there not to understand? Certainly anyone who's given any thought to this question for even a few minutes will realize that there's more to gain from the growth of a competitive activity than the quantity of content that is being created. The quality will improve too. The first implication would be that people would be more accepting of competitive gaming, an activity which is still scoffed at by the media at least in the West and by a lot of the people who still think gaming is just children fucking around with an Atari. But also you have to consider that growth means more money, better production value, more players, better players (because there's more of an audience AND more of an incentive to get good). Odds are the level of play would increase. Plus to people like myself who've grown up being fans of a sport like hockey, there's an inherent value to this. Now I don't expect eSports to ever reach that level, but there's something amazing about getting to work in the morning and talking about last night's amazing (or horrible) game with a bunch of coworkers with whom(?) I have nothing else in common. It's cool to get to work and hear about it on the radio. Korea is often cited as an example because it truly is a good one. There is something to be envious of when I see crowds of thousands crammed into a huge plane hangar, cheering like crazy for the OSL finalists while it's being broadcasted on national television and nearly the entire population of the country is aware that it's a thing. You may not value those things, but you can hardly deny that they're a big deal. Level of play is always relative. I enjoyed watching League in s2 when it was comparatively much lower level than now just as much. I enjoyed sc2 more in the beginning stages when it was lower level than I do now. Bw was awesome when Boxer played it even if it was much lower level than later play. People love watching Smash although the pro player base is rather low (which makes me assume the level of play could be way higher). When it comes to talking about the games, a specific community like the one on TL is completely sufficient to me.
Well like I said, it may not be important to you but it's important to many and I'm sure you understand this even though you disagree.
I liked watching in the early days of SCBW but I liked it the most when it was Jaedong/Bisu/Flash. SCBW got better as the plays got more complex, IMO.
|
8748 Posts
Being legitimate doesn't have anything to do with respecting mainstream values or winning public approval.
I see two ways to be legitimate: (1) be an independent and stable business and (2) respect the values of your field. eSports can be legitimate business-wise by being a good participant in the economy and it can be legitimate ethically by being true to its values.
eSports fails on (1) very often. Most events happen at a loss for the investors, by piggybacking off of some other event or by a lot of "volunteer" work (from people who are aspiring to forge a career and would rather be fairly compensated).
I thought it was funny to see so many eSports fans get excited by the prospect of working with ESPN. ESPN is successful and profitable as hell but isn't seen as legitimate itself by a lot of hardcore sports fans because they don't respect the values of their field. Working with ESPN could certainly help eSports achieve (1) but it would almost certainly involve sacrificing (2).
Evaluating legitimacy of (2) becomes trickier when things transform into something else. Does ESPN practice legitimate journalism and reporting of the news? No. But are they sports journalists and sports news reporters? Arguably no, so we shouldn't judge them by those values anymore. They're more like sports news entertainment. eSports could become some kind of "video game entertainment" that appeals to the masses and makes more money but doesn't respect the competitive values it currently holds dear. Its values would change and so it could still be seen as legitimate but it would have transformed into something else without changing its name.
|
On August 25 2014 01:05 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 00:45 Redox wrote:
Personally I dont get the whole discussion. I love esports and there is more content out there than I can ever consume. If someone else likes it or thinks it is "legitimate" (whatever that means) is entirely irrelevant to me. What is there not to understand? Certainly anyone who's given any thought to this question for even a few minutes will realize that there's more to gain from the growth of a competitive activity than the quantity of content that is being created. The quality will improve too. The first implication would be that people would be more accepting of competitive gaming, an activity which is still scoffed at by the media at least in the West and by a lot of the people who still think gaming is just children fucking around with an Atari. But also you have to consider that growth means more money, better production value, more players, better players (because there's more of an audience AND more of an incentive to get good). Odds are the level of play would increase. Plus to people like myself who've grown up being fans of a sport like hockey, there's an inherent value to this. Now I don't expect eSports to ever reach that level, but there's something amazing about getting to work in the morning and talking about last night's amazing (or horrible) game with a bunch of coworkers with whom(?) I have nothing else in common. It's cool to get to work and hear about it on the radio. Korea is often cited as an example because it truly is a good one. There is something to be envious of when I see crowds of thousands crammed into a huge plane hangar, cheering like crazy for the OSL finalists while it's being broadcasted on national television and nearly the entire population of the country is aware that it's a thing. You may not value those things, but you can hardly deny that they're a big deal.
I think what he's saying is that his enjoyment is not influenced by larger idealisms
On August 25 2014 00:51 Broodwurst wrote:
Mainstream media just looked at this thread. After laughing their asses of for 20 minutes they decided to give more focus to competitive grammar.
As compelling as Spelling Bees are, I think they consider other areas for their consideration.
|
On August 25 2014 06:07 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2014 01:05 Djzapz wrote:On August 25 2014 00:45 Redox wrote:
Personally I dont get the whole discussion. I love esports and there is more content out there than I can ever consume. If someone else likes it or thinks it is "legitimate" (whatever that means) is entirely irrelevant to me. What is there not to understand? Certainly anyone who's given any thought to this question for even a few minutes will realize that there's more to gain from the growth of a competitive activity than the quantity of content that is being created. The quality will improve too. The first implication would be that people would be more accepting of competitive gaming, an activity which is still scoffed at by the media at least in the West and by a lot of the people who still think gaming is just children fucking around with an Atari. But also you have to consider that growth means more money, better production value, more players, better players (because there's more of an audience AND more of an incentive to get good). Odds are the level of play would increase. Plus to people like myself who've grown up being fans of a sport like hockey, there's an inherent value to this. Now I don't expect eSports to ever reach that level, but there's something amazing about getting to work in the morning and talking about last night's amazing (or horrible) game with a bunch of coworkers with whom(?) I have nothing else in common. It's cool to get to work and hear about it on the radio. Korea is often cited as an example because it truly is a good one. There is something to be envious of when I see crowds of thousands crammed into a huge plane hangar, cheering like crazy for the OSL finalists while it's being broadcasted on national television and nearly the entire population of the country is aware that it's a thing. You may not value those things, but you can hardly deny that they're a big deal. I think what he's saying is that his enjoyment is not influenced by larger idealisms
I get that, and I thought my response showed that I get that. I'm just saying that you have to look at the big picture and not just your particular opinion. I recognize that some people are fine with eSports being a relatively small thing and I understand that. But there are serious benefits to being a big thing that a lot of people enjoy. Not saying the size of the eSports is what legitimizes it, but yeah.
|
from that title i thought this was gonna be about how it's a bit silly for a regular community member with no aspirations to make money off esports to be so concerned with its "growth". i would've enjoyed that more.
|
I think it's better to grow it steady with the help of the gamers because in some years everybody will be a gamer much like almost all of us like sports and movies etc..
some will always like more some or the others but it's almost a given that the next generations will put games together with sports, fitness, action sports etc.
Keep it with the community and we will grown slowly but honest and legitimate, it's better if we love it then trying to go to far and messing what they allready have
|
For what it's worth, I completely agree with the underlying point; I get excited when I see some new (positive) coverage, new mainstream company sponsorships (Visine, anyone?), and new celebrity enthusiasts. In addition, increased legitimization in the form of professional, legal contracts can help protect players, teams, and organizations from shady and unscrupulous behavior. Increased legitimization through more notable companies' sponsorships circulates more money into the scene, allowing more players to follow their dreams. Finally, increased legitimization through mainstream media coverage brings new players, giving rise to a more vibrant scene and higher general social acceptance.
Regarding the piece itself, I do think it could have made its point even more strongly by properly addressing the other side of the debate. It's very thorough in explaining the benefits of legitimizing eSports, but I don't think you can be fully persuasive without explaining why these benefits outweigh the downsides - that eSports might become overly sanitized, overly commercialized, or even overtly ridiculed (as in Xiphos's story). The diehard "anti-legitimist" might very well read all your points about increasing cultural awareness, business contacts, marketing, and outreach to mainstream consumers yet reply with "I don't want or need all that".
I also have some grammar/usage nitpicks, but perhaps those are best addressed via PM 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
