|
On November 24 2015 08:59 Rehio wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2015 08:56 Apoteosis wrote:On November 24 2015 05:16 ROOTCatZ wrote:On November 24 2015 03:51 Apoteosis wrote:
Hey look, another illuminated thread with the magic formula to solve all the problems SC2 has. And with instant effect. Nah, it's a 10 page article that took 30+ hours to write and it's written by me, not to braggerino, one of the people with the most experience in StarCraft 2 and eSports as a whole in our scene, who also happens to have been a pro-gamer for 5 years and a SC2 competitive player for close to 15 making me very in touch with players wants and needs + owning a team and being a frequenter of forums like TL and reddit keeps me up to date on what our viewership wants. I understand sc2 at a very high level, and I understand everything I talk about and I've been talking about it for 5 years, it's hardly a magic formula, it's just I am more qualified than almost anyone to talk about these things and I do! because I love this game and I want it to succeed, and because the future of SC2 is and has been directly related to my success in eSports. Okay, SC2 is your job and you have personal interest in it; I get it. But why you post your idea here? I mean, your aim is to convince the people who has actual power to modify the game. Not us, the costumers. Have you tried to arrange a meeting with blizzard staff? I think they are willing to hear your proposals... So why don't you give it a try? You really think it's that simple? Just calling up Blizzard and telling them how to do their jobs better? No, this is a far better way to go about things. You put an idea out there, you see if you have support, and you refine it based on feedback. At the same time you give Blizzard the chance to see the results of the discussion and evaluate things based on what they see and what they're considering. Having an open discussion about issues is a good thing, I don't see why you'd want to discourage that.
It is simple. Call the guys and arrange a meeting. Or buy a bunch of Actiblizz stocks and assist to the next board.
The indirect approach was implemented before, and didn't work. Remember the DH 8-10 discussion? Did it work? No. Why? Because TL were targeting the wrong people.
|
WCS points for ladder is great!
Some issues I see:
1. What prevents ppl. from only revealing their barcode identity after the season?
2. Cheating needs to be dealt with.
3. Alot of ppl never will or intend to enter blizzcon anyways. Only offering WCS points to them isn't any incentive to play more ladder or to reveal their identity. If you could swap these excessive WCS points for anything else of value or whatever else, that would work I guess.
(didn't read the full text)
|
On November 24 2015 09:40 NonY wrote:
I don't think the whole anti-barcode thing belonged. It's a personal preference. Some people enjoy having the ego involved and some people don't. For tournaments it's inevitable that everyone's identity is known and it seems pretty selfish for the people who prefer that to want to take over the ladder too. Since ladder is simultaneously practice, not purely a competition like WCS, I think it's reasonable to respect wishes for anonymity. I feel like this argument is CatZ the team owner and esports business guy talking (and maybe his personal preference too) and not necessarily what the majority of players want or what's best for everyone.
As for the servers being imbalanced, even if the NA server improved some because of incentives, the KR server will still be significantly better. Anyone who can tolerate the ping would be better off playing KR. But if they're "forced" to play NA because the incentives are too substantial, then you're really forcing people to get worse practice.
What's harder, asking players to get used to practicing in high latency or setting up a second competitive ladder? I think the latter is such an absurdly difficult thing to do and I really question how hard it is for most NA players to play on KR.
On the barcodes, yes my opinion isn't as a player in this regard, I don't know what most players would want from a purely player perspective, my guess is people would be split on it, but for the viewers, teams, sponsors which is what keeps the game going : it's what's best, and therefore what everyone should want imo.
|
|
|
8751 Posts
I don't think it's obviously better. In general, it should be obvious that we can't justify anything that brings in more viewers or more money just for the sake of more viewers or more money. In order to comprehend what we're asking for, we need an idea of what it'll cost and what we'll get from it. What's the point of writing a long article when it comes down to "trust me, I'm an authority" and "yes there's a conflict of interest, but trust me, I'm being objective."
We share the same concern about NA players (and EU players) needing a good practice environment. I really question whether practice games being exposed for the sake of more ad and sponsor money and more content for viewers is worth it. I think that if we're looking to KeSPA teams as a model of stability and we asked their coaches and managers "Would you like to expose practice games to the community? Sponsors get more views, fans get more content, players get more money, everyone wins!" then they would laugh at the idea.
I think the fact that players are allowed to stream their games without their opponent's consent is already extreme enough. There should be some semblance of privacy reserved for the players who just want to play and not be exposed/exploited by the ones who want to monetize everything they can. Is it really so bad to let the play stand on its own? Do you have to have the opponent's name and do this whole "developing a narrative" thing? (more like fabricating a narrative in most cases)
We've already experienced periods of oversaturation so I'm not sure that more content is always better. I think that people like to watch SC2 already get enough SC2 to watch. Who is really losing out if the scene doesn't grow? If there are no barcodes on ladder and team owners are making their players upload interesting things that happen while playing ladder, then the fans who like behind-the-scenes drama and stories will get more of that. But attracting more viewers with that content will mainly attract viewers that watch it for that kind of content and this can be seriously annoying for the other fans.
Real sports have this issue. Sports reporters have gotten more and more like TMZ. People just absolutely make things up and put "sources say" behind it. Things like fantasy football cut into actual football time in order to please all the viewers who watch primarily because they play fantasy football. There are serious discussions about the word choice and tone players use in interviews, or overheard using in other places, and body language is analyzed and all sorts of shit to try to get at something that isn't actually there. Whatever can reasonably be done to get more viewers is done, without a lot of respect granted to the people who just like the games themselves. And the people who actually like the storylines are often being duped by things that have just been made up by the media and the players let it happen. It's like professional wrestling. Savvy fans have to be cautious as hell before they ever assume something is genuine.
The point is that if you can grow without changing identity, then that's pretty close to a clear improvement. It's not quite a clear improvement, because some people actually like it when the things they like aren't super popular, but let's ignore those people. If you grow without doing anything different, awesome. If you justify doing something different for the sake of growth, you are inevitably going to alienate some existing fans who don't like the change. Maybe they can all quit watching and you get so many new people you still grow but you can't act like it's something purely good.
This is a complex topic even when you don't consider the wellbeing of the players. One way to simplify the hell out of it is to say "I don't care who I'm getting views from or why they're viewing it as long as I'm getting more and more" but then you can't pretend for a second that you've put some thought or care about what's actually good for the existing community.
|
On November 25 2015 07:28 NonY wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I don't think it's obviously better. In general, it should be obvious that we can't justify anything that brings in more viewers or more money just for the sake of more viewers or more money. In order to comprehend what we're asking for, we need an idea of what it'll cost and what we'll get from it. What's the point of writing a long article when it comes down to "trust me, I'm an authority" and "yes there's a conflict of interest, but trust me, I'm being objective."
We share the same concern about NA players (and EU players) needing a good practice environment. I really question whether practice games being exposed for the sake of more ad and sponsor money and more content for viewers is worth it. I think that if we're looking to KeSPA teams as a model of stability and we asked their coaches and managers "Would you like to expose practice games to the community? Sponsors get more views, fans get more content, players get more money, everyone wins!" then they would laugh at the idea.
I don't think this gets to the point. Just because a flawed system has been established over several years in korea doesn't make it the right thing. Just like in real sports where you can't just put on a mask and practice anonymously with the top players. Instead they go on practice camps and practice in private. So it's basicly the decision of the players if they want to expose practice games or not, but no one is forced to.
On November 25 2015 07:28 NonY wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I think the fact that players are allowed to stream their games without their opponent's consent is already extreme enough. There should be some semblance of privacy reserved for the players who just want to play and not be exposed/exploited by the ones who want to monetize everything they can. Is it really so bad to let the play stand on its own? Do you have to have the opponent's name and do this whole "developing a narrative" thing? (more like fabricating a narrative in most cases)
No one is forced to stream if they don't want to, it's the players decision alone. Get some practice partners and battle out a bunch of private games.
But the ladder is a form of public (virtual) place. If you play games on the ladder you can't demand privacy. That are two contrary things.
I think CatZ' proposal for the ladder is trying to get some honesty from the players. Like if you are playing in public, at least take some responsibility for what you do, in both ways good and bad.
If you want some privacy, then stay in private!
But anonymity is not privacy, it's a way of irresponsibility.
On November 25 2015 07:28 NonY wrote:+ Show Spoiler +We've already experienced periods of oversaturation so I'm not sure that more content is always better. I think that people like to watch SC2 already get enough SC2 to watch. Who is really losing out if the scene doesn't grow? If there are no barcodes on ladder and team owners are making their players upload interesting things that happen while playing ladder, then the fans who like behind-the-scenes drama and stories will get more of that. But attracting more viewers with that content will mainly attract viewers that watch it for that kind of content and this can be seriously annoying for the other fans.
Real sports have this issue. Sports reporters have gotten more and more like TMZ. People just absolutely make things up and put "sources say" behind it. Things like fantasy football cut into actual football time in order to please all the viewers who watch primarily because they play fantasy football. There are serious discussions about the word choice and tone players use in interviews, or overheard using in other places, and body language is analyzed and all sorts of shit to try to get at something that isn't actually there. Whatever can reasonably be done to get more viewers is done, without a lot of respect granted to the people who just like the games themselves. And the people who actually like the storylines are often being duped by things that have just been made up by the media and the players let it happen. It's like professional wrestling. Savvy fans have to be cautious as hell before they ever assume something is genuine.
Drama is why most of us are here for, even if some are not willing to accept this. How boring would the scene be when there's no drama? Who remembers some random finals from 2 years ago that maybe had supreme high level play?
But we sure as hell still remember MLG Dallas 2011, Huk vs. IdrA or the NASL sound guy.
The point is there is more to a game than just high level play. And with a healthy community there is no need to make things up, stuff happens all the time.
I agree with you that high level play is substantial for a competitive scene but from the viewer's side it's the characters that make a game even more interesting.
Yes it would be bad if SC2 would only attract drama whores but the game has never been at a point where the drama was more important than the competition, not even close. And I don't see the possibility of it getting there.
On November 25 2015 07:28 NonY wrote:+ Show Spoiler +The point is that if you can grow without changing identity, then that's pretty close to a clear improvement. It's not quite a clear improvement, because some people actually like it when the things they like aren't super popular, but let's ignore those people. If you grow without doing anything different, awesome. If you justify doing something different for the sake of growth, you are inevitably going to alienate some existing fans who don't like the change. Maybe they can all quit watching and you get so many new people you still grow but you can't act like it's something purely good.
This is a complex topic even when you don't consider the wellbeing of the players. One way to simplify the hell out of it is to say "I don't care who I'm getting views from or why they're viewing it as long as I'm getting more and more" but then you can't pretend for a second that you've put some thought or care about what's actually good for the existing community.
Isn't the scene changing all the time? Old players retire, new players come in. Same with the fans. If you balance it out there will be no growth but there will still be change.
CatZ' article was not justifying to do something different for the sake of growth but for the sake of the stability of the community.
In my opinion a healthy community is a sustainable community, doesn't matter if it's small or big. But in the long run anonymity affects it in an unhealthy way.
|
I'm honestly surprised that CatZ doesn't already work for Blizzard in the E-sports dept.
He is a very intelligent man that contributes a lot to the scene. He plays well, consistently provides education resources from his own play, on top of all this- Has passion that can be seen for days. Articulate article with a thought out plan. Love it!? ~smiles~
|
On November 25 2015 07:28 NonY wrote:
I don't think it's obviously better. In general, it should be obvious that we can't justify anything that brings in more viewers or more money just for the sake of more viewers or more money. In order to comprehend what we're asking for, we need an idea of what it'll cost and what we'll get from it. What's the point of writing a long article when it comes down to "trust me, I'm an authority" and "yes there's a conflict of interest, but trust me, I'm being objective."
We share the same concern about NA players (and EU players) needing a good practice environment. I really question whether practice games being exposed for the sake of more ad and sponsor money and more content for viewers is worth it. I think that if we're looking to KeSPA teams as a model of stability and we asked their coaches and managers "Would you like to expose practice games to the community? Sponsors get more views, fans get more content, players get more money, everyone wins!" then they would laugh at the idea.
I think the fact that players are allowed to stream their games without their opponent's consent is already extreme enough. There should be some semblance of privacy reserved for the players who just want to play and not be exposed/exploited by the ones who want to monetize everything they can. Is it really so bad to let the play stand on its own? Do you have to have the opponent's name and do this whole "developing a narrative" thing? (more like fabricating a narrative in most cases)
We've already experienced periods of oversaturation so I'm not sure that more content is always better. I think that people like to watch SC2 already get enough SC2 to watch. Who is really losing out if the scene doesn't grow? If there are no barcodes on ladder and team owners are making their players upload interesting things that happen while playing ladder, then the fans who like behind-the-scenes drama and stories will get more of that. But attracting more viewers with that content will mainly attract viewers that watch it for that kind of content and this can be seriously annoying for the other fans.
Real sports have this issue. Sports reporters have gotten more and more like TMZ. People just absolutely make things up and put "sources say" behind it. Things like fantasy football cut into actual football time in order to please all the viewers who watch primarily because they play fantasy football. There are serious discussions about the word choice and tone players use in interviews, or overheard using in other places, and body language is analyzed and all sorts of shit to try to get at something that isn't actually there. Whatever can reasonably be done to get more viewers is done, without a lot of respect granted to the people who just like the games themselves. And the people who actually like the storylines are often being duped by things that have just been made up by the media and the players let it happen. It's like professional wrestling. Savvy fans have to be cautious as hell before they ever assume something is genuine.
The point is that if you can grow without changing identity, then that's pretty close to a clear improvement. It's not quite a clear improvement, because some people actually like it when the things they like aren't super popular, but let's ignore those people. If you grow without doing anything different, awesome. If you justify doing something different for the sake of growth, you are inevitably going to alienate some existing fans who don't like the change. Maybe they can all quit watching and you get so many new people you still grow but you can't act like it's something purely good.
This is a complex topic even when you don't consider the wellbeing of the players. One way to simplify the hell out of it is to say "I don't care who I'm getting views from or why they're viewing it as long as I'm getting more and more" but then you can't pretend for a second that you've put some thought or care about what's actually good for the existing community.
> I really question whether practice games being exposed for the sake of more ad and sponsor money and more content for viewers is worth it.
Players would be at even grounds, it wouldn't benefit or hurt anyone more than anyone else, and no barcodes doesn't translate into all your builds are public, there are plenty of measures like a private match history option that could be implemented to solve potential 'problems' but I don't really see something that affects everyone equally as a problem, MUCH less when it's completely optional, WCS points are only relevant to a few people who will compete @ Blizzcon, this would discourage barcodes but you're free to play on a barcode if you want to, really, there'd just be a lot less of them. I don't see a large downside and many potential upsides, plus as you pointed out, it's arguable what players want, I know that most players I talked to during the writing of the article would rather there not be barcodes, but we could make a pro-player survey and if the results are heavily in favor of barcodes which would honestly surprise me we could have more of a debate on the topic.
>I think the fact that players are allowed to stream their games without their opponent's consent is already extreme enough.
What?
> Is it really so bad to let the play stand on its own? Do you have to have the opponent's name and do this whole "developing a narrative" thing? (more like fabricating a narrative in most cases)
Yeah for viewership and the growth of the game it is, without a doubt.
> It's like professional wrestling. Savvy fans have to be cautious as hell before they ever assume something is genuine.
Professional wrestling is very real, if you mean WWE stands for World Wrestling Entretainment and it's not ment to be real, it's just an act for show that's public knowledge but idk how it's relevant here at all.
> because some people actually like it when the things they like aren't super popular
That's cool but a lot of the people who like the game and would want to do it as a career will get affected by this, we're talking about competitive gaming, I would think that most people devoting enough time to be good at a game should be rewarded with $ and other incentives for their efforts, that becomes much harder to do if there is no support, so anything to help that benefits most competitive players by proxy, it's not rocket science. I understand where you're coming from - I played broodwar a lot back in the day and never expected to profit from it, I played the game cause I liked it, but if you're playing the game cause you like it then feel free to barcode, no one will force you not to, or make a smurf, no one cares, you just won't get WCS pts from the ladder and won't go to blizzcon, which realistically nor you or me stand much of a chance anyway.
> If you justify doing something different for the sake of growth, you are inevitably going to alienate some existing fans who don't like the change.
I'm sorry but I'd be willing to wager any amount of money that most of our EXISTING fans would much prefer the change, making that argument completely irrelevant if you're looking to cater to our existing fanbase, I'm positive that most people have stopped watching or following or lost interest because barcodes exist than people who would leave because they are discouraged.
> Maybe they can all quit watching and you get so many new people you still grow but you can't act like it's something purely good.
Again I have no idea what possibly would make you think that discouraging barcodes would somehow make us lose identity and any significant percentage of our current viewership. Barcodes were never intended by Blizzard for StarCraft, they have always been a problem that needs fixing as far as Blizzard is concerned, Barcodes was the change that you're talking about, the change that should've never happened and they didn't see coming, and it's just not a good thing. As far as acting like something is purely good you have a point, I normally hate talking in absolutes and if that's how it came across I'm sorry, I am not all-knowing but I do have more experience than most people, and I would be willing to wager that the GREAT majority of people would be FOR getting rid of barcodes, so what I don't get is why discouraging them seems so radical to you. I just think that the positives outweight the negatives by a landslide in the great majority of people's minds players or not.
>This is a complex topic even when you don't consider the wellbeing of the players. One way to simplify the hell out of it is to say "I don't care who I'm getting views from or why they're viewing it as long as I'm getting more and more" but then you can't pretend for a second that you've put some thought or care about what's actually good for the existing community.
So again - players will be on an even play-field as they've always been, and they will have the option to barcode or smurf if that's what they want. As far as our existing community goes, I had a poll at the end of the article and 90% of the people agreed either completely or mostly with the article (as oppossed to being neutral, mostly disagreeing and completely disagreeing) That is our current, niche, hardcore following that's voting in that sort of poll is it not? so don't say their opinion wasn't taken into account, I didn't see an upvoted reddit thread or poll as there usually is when a topic is polarizing, and this is honestly the FIRST time I've seen anyone since the article was released bring up Barcodes being gone as a negative, while I've seen countless of positive comments towards it. I'm very in touch with the community, I frequent reddit and TL every day and I read every single comment pertaining me or my opinions on a subject, I also take the time to answer in detail and justify my opinions to just about anyone.
I'm so confident in what I'm saying that I made a twitter poll and tagged you in it before knowing the results cause I know that the majority thinks barcodes aren't good.
Here:
|
8751 Posts
I don't think this gets to the point. Just because a flawed system has been established over several years in korea doesn't make it the right thing. Just like in real sports where you can't just put on a mask and practice anonymously with the top players. Instead they go on practice camps and practice in private. So it's basicly the decision of the players if they want to expose practice games or not, but no one is forced to.
You are confused because there are two issues going on. One issue is the skill level of non-Koreans. This is an issue because competition without Koreans is not as interesting for viewers who like seeing high level play and it's an issue when non-Koreans play Koreans because the Koreans win too often. If you want to classify viewers into two basic categories: viewers who watch for the games themselves and viewers who watch for the storylines, BOTH kinds of viewers are suffering due to this skill discrepancy. So there are a lot of people trying to figure out ways to raise the skill level of non-Koreans so that the games themselves are more interesting and so that there are more opportunities for storylines and drama and interactions than "oh shit is a non-Korean going to beat a Korean?"
No one is forced to stream if they don't want to, it's the players decision alone. Get some practice partners and battle out a bunch of private games.
But the ladder is a form of public (virtual) place. If you play games on the ladder you can't demand privacy. That are two contrary things.
I think CatZ' proposal for the ladder is trying to get some honesty from the players. Like if you are playing in public, at least take some responsibility for what you do, in both ways good and bad.
If you want some privacy, then stay in private!
But anonymity is not privacy, it's a way of irresponsibility.
You're not forced to stream but you can't stop someone from streaming you. I'm not sure if you're trying to argue for the abandonment of the ladder as a practice tool here, like anyone can do just as well by playing only private games, but the history of successful players certainly doesn't support that. Many successful players have gotten a large portion of their practice from ladder or they practice with people who get a large portion of practice from the ladder. It's nearly impossible to find players who have not directly or indirectly benefited from ladder practice.
The ladder is public so you can't demand any privacy? It doesn't have to be so black and white, as if any public place has zero privacy and any private place has perfect privacy. If you aren't able to think past that then I guess we're at an impasse. Similarly, if you cannot think of any legitimate reason to desire privacy and can only think that of it as an opportunity to be irresponsible, then again we're at an impasse.
Drama is why most of us are here for, even if some are not willing to accept this. How boring would the scene be when there's no drama? Who remembers some random finals from 2 years ago that maybe had supreme high level play?
But we sure as hell still remember MLG Dallas 2011, Huk vs. IdrA or the NASL sound guy.
The point is there is more to a game than just high level play. And with a healthy community there is no need to make things up, stuff happens all the time.
I agree with you that high level play is substantial for a competitive scene but from the viewer's side it's the characters that make a game even more interesting.
Yes it would be bad if SC2 would only attract drama whores but the game has never been at a point where the drama was more important than the competition, not even close. And I don't see the possibility of it getting there.
What is the point of you saying any of this? I already recognized that people like you exist. If you are in the majority and you want to enjoy the tyranny of the majority, then go ahead and continue to marginalize the experiences and interests of anyone who is different than you. I can't stop it if the majority wants to band together and use their leverage to get more things that they want despite what other people want. Keep justifying it with utilitarianism or whatever.
There's no need to make things up? There is a need when people want privacy. But to you privacy only exists for deviants to be irresponsible I guess. When the public doesn't know the full story they fill in the gaps and make assumptions and judgments with what they've got. Then the people who are being judged have a decision to make: give up their privacy to get the truth out there or let the misunderstandings exist and not care what people think (or deal with it however they want). How will this burden help non-Koreans catch up to Koreans? How will it make players more mentally stable and consistent? It seems like a distraction to me. Any time some jackass looking for youtube views can construe a ladder game against you as some kind of dramatic event, you either have to suffer being exploited and misunderstood or you have to waste your time defending yourself to the public.
Anyway, if you can so easily give me a list of interesting things that have happened over the year during tournaments, then do you really need even MORE shit from the ladder? You aren't even at risk of losing drama. You are just concerned that you are missing out on even more drama from the ladder. Is it really so necessary? If you had to choose between non-Koreans being as good as Koreans or having more drama, which would you choose? Maybe that should help guide your desires for the community.
But in the long run anonymity affects it in an unhealthy way.
Were you going to argue for this in some way or just state your opinion to contradict mine?
|
8751 Posts
On November 25 2015 19:52 ROOTCatZ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 07:28 NonY wrote:
I don't think it's obviously better. In general, it should be obvious that we can't justify anything that brings in more viewers or more money just for the sake of more viewers or more money. In order to comprehend what we're asking for, we need an idea of what it'll cost and what we'll get from it. What's the point of writing a long article when it comes down to "trust me, I'm an authority" and "yes there's a conflict of interest, but trust me, I'm being objective."
We share the same concern about NA players (and EU players) needing a good practice environment. I really question whether practice games being exposed for the sake of more ad and sponsor money and more content for viewers is worth it. I think that if we're looking to KeSPA teams as a model of stability and we asked their coaches and managers "Would you like to expose practice games to the community? Sponsors get more views, fans get more content, players get more money, everyone wins!" then they would laugh at the idea.
I think the fact that players are allowed to stream their games without their opponent's consent is already extreme enough. There should be some semblance of privacy reserved for the players who just want to play and not be exposed/exploited by the ones who want to monetize everything they can. Is it really so bad to let the play stand on its own? Do you have to have the opponent's name and do this whole "developing a narrative" thing? (more like fabricating a narrative in most cases)
We've already experienced periods of oversaturation so I'm not sure that more content is always better. I think that people like to watch SC2 already get enough SC2 to watch. Who is really losing out if the scene doesn't grow? If there are no barcodes on ladder and team owners are making their players upload interesting things that happen while playing ladder, then the fans who like behind-the-scenes drama and stories will get more of that. But attracting more viewers with that content will mainly attract viewers that watch it for that kind of content and this can be seriously annoying for the other fans.
Real sports have this issue. Sports reporters have gotten more and more like TMZ. People just absolutely make things up and put "sources say" behind it. Things like fantasy football cut into actual football time in order to please all the viewers who watch primarily because they play fantasy football. There are serious discussions about the word choice and tone players use in interviews, or overheard using in other places, and body language is analyzed and all sorts of shit to try to get at something that isn't actually there. Whatever can reasonably be done to get more viewers is done, without a lot of respect granted to the people who just like the games themselves. And the people who actually like the storylines are often being duped by things that have just been made up by the media and the players let it happen. It's like professional wrestling. Savvy fans have to be cautious as hell before they ever assume something is genuine.
The point is that if you can grow without changing identity, then that's pretty close to a clear improvement. It's not quite a clear improvement, because some people actually like it when the things they like aren't super popular, but let's ignore those people. If you grow without doing anything different, awesome. If you justify doing something different for the sake of growth, you are inevitably going to alienate some existing fans who don't like the change. Maybe they can all quit watching and you get so many new people you still grow but you can't act like it's something purely good.
This is a complex topic even when you don't consider the wellbeing of the players. One way to simplify the hell out of it is to say "I don't care who I'm getting views from or why they're viewing it as long as I'm getting more and more" but then you can't pretend for a second that you've put some thought or care about what's actually good for the existing community. Show nested quote +> I really question whether practice games being exposed for the sake of more ad and sponsor money and more content for viewers is worth it. Players would be at even grounds, it wouldn't benefit or hurt anyone more than anyone else, and no barcodes doesn't translate into all your builds are public, there are plenty of measures like a private match history option that could be implemented to solve potential 'problems' but I don't really see something that affects everyone equally as a problem, MUCH less when it's completely optional, WCS points are only relevant to a few people who will compete @ Blizzcon, this would discourage barcodes but you're free to play on a barcode if you want to, really, there'd just be a lot less of them. I don't see a large downside and many potential upsides, plus as you pointed out, it's arguable what players want, I know that most players I talked to during the writing of the article would rather there not be barcodes, but we could make a pro-player survey and if the results are heavily in favor of barcodes which would honestly surprise me we could have more of a debate on the topic. Show nested quote +>I think the fact that players are allowed to stream their games without their opponent's consent is already extreme enough.
What? Show nested quote +> Is it really so bad to let the play stand on its own? Do you have to have the opponent's name and do this whole "developing a narrative" thing? (more like fabricating a narrative in most cases) Yeah for viewership and the growth of the game it is, without a doubt. Show nested quote +> It's like professional wrestling. Savvy fans have to be cautious as hell before they ever assume something is genuine. Professional wrestling is very real, if you mean WWE stands for World Wrestling Entretainment and it's not ment to be real, it's just an act for show that's public knowledge but idk how it's relevant here at all. Show nested quote +> because some people actually like it when the things they like aren't super popular That's cool but a lot of the people who like the game and would want to do it as a career will get affected by this, we're talking about competitive gaming, I would think that most people devoting enough time to be good at a game should be rewarded with $ and other incentives for their efforts, that becomes much harder to do if there is no support, so anything to help that benefits most competitive players by proxy, it's not rocket science. I understand where you're coming from - I played broodwar a lot back in the day and never expected to profit from it, I played the game cause I liked it, but if you're playing the game cause you like it then feel free to barcode, no one will force you not to, or make a smurf, no one cares, you just won't get WCS pts from the ladder and won't go to blizzcon, which realistically nor you or me stand much of a chance anyway. Show nested quote +> If you justify doing something different for the sake of growth, you are inevitably going to alienate some existing fans who don't like the change.
I'm sorry but I'd be willing to wager any amount of money that most of our EXISTING fans would much prefer the change, making that argument completely irrelevant if you're looking to cater to our existing fanbase, I'm positive that most people have stopped watching or following or lost interest because barcodes exist than people who would leave because they are discouraged. Show nested quote +> Maybe they can all quit watching and you get so many new people you still grow but you can't act like it's something purely good. Again I have no idea what possibly would make you think that discouraging barcodes would somehow make us lose identity and any significant percentage of our current viewership. Barcodes were never intended by Blizzard for StarCraft, they have always been a problem that needs fixing as far as Blizzard is concerned, Barcodes was the change that you're talking about, the change that should've never happened and they didn't see coming, and it's just not a good thing. As far as acting like something is purely good you have a point, I normally hate talking in absolutes and if that's how it came across I'm sorry, I am not all-knowing but I do have more experience than most people, and I would be willing to wager that the GREAT majority of people would be FOR getting rid of barcodes, so what I don't get is why discouraging them seems so radical to you. I just think that the positives outweight the negatives by a landslide in the great majority of people's minds players or not. Show nested quote +>This is a complex topic even when you don't consider the wellbeing of the players. One way to simplify the hell out of it is to say "I don't care who I'm getting views from or why they're viewing it as long as I'm getting more and more" but then you can't pretend for a second that you've put some thought or care about what's actually good for the existing community. So again - players will be on an even play-field as they've always been, and they will have the option to barcode or smurf if that's what they want. As far as our existing community goes, I had a poll at the end of the article and 90% of the people agreed either completely or mostly with the article (as oppossed to being neutral, mostly disagreeing and completely disagreeing) That is our current, niche, hardcore following that's voting in that sort of poll is it not? so don't say their opinion wasn't taken into account, I didn't see an upvoted reddit thread or poll as there usually is when a topic is polarizing, and this is honestly the FIRST time I've seen anyone since the article was released bring up Barcodes being gone as a negative, while I've seen countless of positive comments towards it. I'm very in touch with the community, I frequent reddit and TL every day and I read every single comment pertaining me or my opinions on a subject, I also take the time to answer in detail and justify my opinions to just about anyone. I'm so confident in what I'm saying that I made a twitter poll and tagged you in it before knowing the results cause I know that the majority thinks barcodes aren't good. Here: https://twitter.com/ROOTCatZ/status/669468372615196672
I honestly don't know if you're this stupid or you just know that you aren't actually trying to teach me something but rather trying to convince everyone else who is reading this that you're right. What a waste of time.
|
On November 25 2015 18:36 UR.Solo wrote:
I'm honestly surprised that CatZ doesn't already work for Blizzard in the E-sports dept.
He is a very intelligent man that contributes a lot to the scene. He plays well, consistently provides education resources from his own play, on top of all this- Has passion that can be seen for days. Articulate article with a thought out plan. Love it!? ~smiles~
wow thanks man <3
|
On November 26 2015 05:44 NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 19:52 ROOTCatZ wrote:On November 25 2015 07:28 NonY wrote:
I don't think it's obviously better. In general, it should be obvious that we can't justify anything that brings in more viewers or more money just for the sake of more viewers or more money. In order to comprehend what we're asking for, we need an idea of what it'll cost and what we'll get from it. What's the point of writing a long article when it comes down to "trust me, I'm an authority" and "yes there's a conflict of interest, but trust me, I'm being objective."
We share the same concern about NA players (and EU players) needing a good practice environment. I really question whether practice games being exposed for the sake of more ad and sponsor money and more content for viewers is worth it. I think that if we're looking to KeSPA teams as a model of stability and we asked their coaches and managers "Would you like to expose practice games to the community? Sponsors get more views, fans get more content, players get more money, everyone wins!" then they would laugh at the idea.
I think the fact that players are allowed to stream their games without their opponent's consent is already extreme enough. There should be some semblance of privacy reserved for the players who just want to play and not be exposed/exploited by the ones who want to monetize everything they can. Is it really so bad to let the play stand on its own? Do you have to have the opponent's name and do this whole "developing a narrative" thing? (more like fabricating a narrative in most cases)
We've already experienced periods of oversaturation so I'm not sure that more content is always better. I think that people like to watch SC2 already get enough SC2 to watch. Who is really losing out if the scene doesn't grow? If there are no barcodes on ladder and team owners are making their players upload interesting things that happen while playing ladder, then the fans who like behind-the-scenes drama and stories will get more of that. But attracting more viewers with that content will mainly attract viewers that watch it for that kind of content and this can be seriously annoying for the other fans.
Real sports have this issue. Sports reporters have gotten more and more like TMZ. People just absolutely make things up and put "sources say" behind it. Things like fantasy football cut into actual football time in order to please all the viewers who watch primarily because they play fantasy football. There are serious discussions about the word choice and tone players use in interviews, or overheard using in other places, and body language is analyzed and all sorts of shit to try to get at something that isn't actually there. Whatever can reasonably be done to get more viewers is done, without a lot of respect granted to the people who just like the games themselves. And the people who actually like the storylines are often being duped by things that have just been made up by the media and the players let it happen. It's like professional wrestling. Savvy fans have to be cautious as hell before they ever assume something is genuine.
The point is that if you can grow without changing identity, then that's pretty close to a clear improvement. It's not quite a clear improvement, because some people actually like it when the things they like aren't super popular, but let's ignore those people. If you grow without doing anything different, awesome. If you justify doing something different for the sake of growth, you are inevitably going to alienate some existing fans who don't like the change. Maybe they can all quit watching and you get so many new people you still grow but you can't act like it's something purely good.
This is a complex topic even when you don't consider the wellbeing of the players. One way to simplify the hell out of it is to say "I don't care who I'm getting views from or why they're viewing it as long as I'm getting more and more" but then you can't pretend for a second that you've put some thought or care about what's actually good for the existing community. > I really question whether practice games being exposed for the sake of more ad and sponsor money and more content for viewers is worth it. Players would be at even grounds, it wouldn't benefit or hurt anyone more than anyone else, and no barcodes doesn't translate into all your builds are public, there are plenty of measures like a private match history option that could be implemented to solve potential 'problems' but I don't really see something that affects everyone equally as a problem, MUCH less when it's completely optional, WCS points are only relevant to a few people who will compete @ Blizzcon, this would discourage barcodes but you're free to play on a barcode if you want to, really, there'd just be a lot less of them. I don't see a large downside and many potential upsides, plus as you pointed out, it's arguable what players want, I know that most players I talked to during the writing of the article would rather there not be barcodes, but we could make a pro-player survey and if the results are heavily in favor of barcodes which would honestly surprise me we could have more of a debate on the topic. >I think the fact that players are allowed to stream their games without their opponent's consent is already extreme enough.
What? > Is it really so bad to let the play stand on its own? Do you have to have the opponent's name and do this whole "developing a narrative" thing? (more like fabricating a narrative in most cases) Yeah for viewership and the growth of the game it is, without a doubt. > It's like professional wrestling. Savvy fans have to be cautious as hell before they ever assume something is genuine. Professional wrestling is very real, if you mean WWE stands for World Wrestling Entretainment and it's not ment to be real, it's just an act for show that's public knowledge but idk how it's relevant here at all. > because some people actually like it when the things they like aren't super popular That's cool but a lot of the people who like the game and would want to do it as a career will get affected by this, we're talking about competitive gaming, I would think that most people devoting enough time to be good at a game should be rewarded with $ and other incentives for their efforts, that becomes much harder to do if there is no support, so anything to help that benefits most competitive players by proxy, it's not rocket science. I understand where you're coming from - I played broodwar a lot back in the day and never expected to profit from it, I played the game cause I liked it, but if you're playing the game cause you like it then feel free to barcode, no one will force you not to, or make a smurf, no one cares, you just won't get WCS pts from the ladder and won't go to blizzcon, which realistically nor you or me stand much of a chance anyway. > If you justify doing something different for the sake of growth, you are inevitably going to alienate some existing fans who don't like the change.
I'm sorry but I'd be willing to wager any amount of money that most of our EXISTING fans would much prefer the change, making that argument completely irrelevant if you're looking to cater to our existing fanbase, I'm positive that most people have stopped watching or following or lost interest because barcodes exist than people who would leave because they are discouraged. > Maybe they can all quit watching and you get so many new people you still grow but you can't act like it's something purely good. Again I have no idea what possibly would make you think that discouraging barcodes would somehow make us lose identity and any significant percentage of our current viewership. Barcodes were never intended by Blizzard for StarCraft, they have always been a problem that needs fixing as far as Blizzard is concerned, Barcodes was the change that you're talking about, the change that should've never happened and they didn't see coming, and it's just not a good thing. As far as acting like something is purely good you have a point, I normally hate talking in absolutes and if that's how it came across I'm sorry, I am not all-knowing but I do have more experience than most people, and I would be willing to wager that the GREAT majority of people would be FOR getting rid of barcodes, so what I don't get is why discouraging them seems so radical to you. I just think that the positives outweight the negatives by a landslide in the great majority of people's minds players or not. >This is a complex topic even when you don't consider the wellbeing of the players. One way to simplify the hell out of it is to say "I don't care who I'm getting views from or why they're viewing it as long as I'm getting more and more" but then you can't pretend for a second that you've put some thought or care about what's actually good for the existing community. So again - players will be on an even play-field as they've always been, and they will have the option to barcode or smurf if that's what they want. As far as our existing community goes, I had a poll at the end of the article and 90% of the people agreed either completely or mostly with the article (as oppossed to being neutral, mostly disagreeing and completely disagreeing) That is our current, niche, hardcore following that's voting in that sort of poll is it not? so don't say their opinion wasn't taken into account, I didn't see an upvoted reddit thread or poll as there usually is when a topic is polarizing, and this is honestly the FIRST time I've seen anyone since the article was released bring up Barcodes being gone as a negative, while I've seen countless of positive comments towards it. I'm very in touch with the community, I frequent reddit and TL every day and I read every single comment pertaining me or my opinions on a subject, I also take the time to answer in detail and justify my opinions to just about anyone. I'm so confident in what I'm saying that I made a twitter poll and tagged you in it before knowing the results cause I know that the majority thinks barcodes aren't good. Here: https://twitter.com/ROOTCatZ/status/669468372615196672 I honestly don't know if you're this stupid or you just know that you aren't actually trying to teach me something but rather trying to convince everyone else who is reading this that you're right. What a waste of time.
Solid, Chill, answer NonY!
But yeah you're right, I don't care about your opinion or winning a debate or argument against you. If you wanted to argue privately you could've DM'd but if you chose to write a long winded post on a public forum, being a public figure, you naturally have to account for the fact that your opinion WILL influence people reading it one way or another, that's why you wrote your post in the first place, right? or did you think you were writing in your e-diary but posted on TL by mistake?
And seriously, did you ever think you were gonna convince me to change my view on this topic? is that why you responded? I would hope not, as you seem to think you're a smart man.
My opinion is rooted as deeply as yours probably is, and happens to be what most people agree with, so yes - I wasn't trying to convince you, I was trying to convince other people reading that your opinion lacks a solid base, and to side with me because I care about the bigger picture and as I and you both already pointed out, I am not concerned with your opinion, you're not someone I respect enough to make me second guess myself on something that I feel strongly about. Great job though, you must've been watching a bunch of Sherlock.
I understand why your answer would be to call me stupid instead of arguing against my points or for yours, but hey you know what they say,
"Fucking up is part of it. If you can't fail, you have to always win. And I don't think you can always win." Elliott Smith
|
region locking removes opportuinities for really good korean players to play on the biggest tournaments, i would rather have a korean then to have that performance lilbow gave in wcs =/
|
Katowice25012 Posts
We're all friends here let's keep it relaxed : - )
|
I don't see why barcode and ladder WCS points would not work together. As long as the player can clearly show his account is at the required level to the officials of the tournament that's good enough. But that would go against the viewer experience because people will want to know how well the players are doing on the ladder if it grants WCS points. So it would be good for competition but it's bad for viewer-ship.
For streaming, well it's a game in which everything you do does not belong to you, it belongs to blizzard, you are not entitled to any privacy once you are on battle.net (other than personnal IRL information), read up the terms of agreement (i don't pretend I always do, i did once for the lolz and it's in there xD).
So nobody should give a fuck about showing someone else play through their stream without their approval.
But another thing that I would use to argue against ladder granting WCS is that you should not earn points for a Bo1 free for all format when the thing you are qualifying for is a Bo3 bests in the world championship format with several rounds. That's why it would also be stupid to see players receive WCS points from proleague; it's two different play modes that should not be related to each other.
Using ladder for qualification only works for code B because you gotta start somewhere. And even then it only lets you participate into an actual qualifier tournament to really qualify and get to code B.
|
On November 24 2015 01:29 MonkeyBot wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2015 00:58 showstealer1829 wrote:
I have no doubt the idea is sound. After the Lilbow debacle though I stand by there only being one solution: End the Region Lock Lilbow wasn't a debacle. It was one player managing his PR badly and showing some bravado to cover his loss of hope. Sure it shouldn't have happened, but what was the resulting harm - one series that was one-sided vs the second best player in the world? It certainly shouldn't weigh in on how the whole system is designed.
You're right, it wasn't just a debacle. It was also an embarrassment, a farce, a complete waste of everyones time and a slap in the face of every foreign player who actually gives a damn about the game as well the Korean who missed out on Blizzcon because Lilbow got everything handed to him on a silver platter thanks to the stupid region lock.
In short, I stand by my original statement, to end the farce that was Lilbow at Blizzcon, the only solution is to end the farce that is the region lock.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On November 26 2015 05:35 NonY wrote:
You are confused because there are two issues going on. One issue is the skill level of non-Koreans. This is an issue because competition without Koreans is not as interesting for viewers who like seeing high level play and it's an issue when non-Koreans play Koreans because the Koreans win too often. If you want to classify viewers into two basic categories: viewers who watch for the games themselves and viewers who watch for the storylines, BOTH kinds of viewers are suffering due to this skill discrepancy. So there are a lot of people trying to figure out ways to raise the skill level of non-Koreans so that the games themselves are more interesting and so that there are more opportunities for storylines and drama and interactions than "oh shit is a non-Korean going to beat a Korean?"
I am confused, but because of the fact that you address a different topic than you quoted. However I agree with you that there are people trying to raise the skill level of non-koreans and in my opinion that can only be positive for the global competition. How is your opinion on that?
+ Show Spoiler +On November 26 2015 05:35 NonY wrote:
You're not forced to stream but you can't stop someone from streaming you. I'm not sure if you're trying to argue for the abandonment of the ladder as a practice tool here, like anyone can do just as well by playing only private games, but the history of successful players certainly doesn't support that. Many successful players have gotten a large portion of their practice from ladder or they practice with people who get a large portion of practice from the ladder. It's nearly impossible to find players who have not directly or indirectly benefited from ladder practice.
The ladder is public so you can't demand any privacy? It doesn't have to be so black and white, as if any public place has zero privacy and any private place has perfect privacy. If you aren't able to think past that then I guess we're at an impasse. Similarly, if you cannot think of any legitimate reason to desire privacy and can only think that of it as an opportunity to be irresponsible, then again we're at an impasse.
Actually I was arguing on the exact opposite. The ladder can be even a better practice tool if players don't hide behind barcodes. This would even promote sportsmanship which is something that most people in competitive online communities lost.
Anonymity is a very young phenomenon introduced with the internet. With the time it became more and more a habituation on a day-to-day basis and people grew familiar with the idea of anonymity being a normal thing. But it is not. Anonymity is not normal nor natural, because it destroys a sense of resposibility.
Please don't confuse anonymity with privacy. Everyone has a right for privacy, especially people who stand in the spotlights of the public, metaphorically speaken. And you can get all the privacy you want but not by abusing a system which was meant to be used otherwise.
+ Show Spoiler +On November 26 2015 05:35 NonY wrote:
What is the point of you saying any of this? I already recognized that people like you exist. If you are in the majority and you want to enjoy the tyranny of the majority, then go ahead and continue to marginalize the experiences and interests of anyone who is different than you. I can't stop it if the majority wants to band together and use their leverage to get more things that they want despite what other people want. Keep justifying it with utilitarianism or whatever.
Just a bit above you wrote that things are seldom purely black and white, right? So isn't it possible for people like me who like drama and people like you who like pure high level play to both enjoy a game that can deliver both at the same time? Surely there are even more groups of people with other interests who can also pull the things they enjoy from this game simultaneously.
So no, the interests of one group does not automatically marginalize the interests of another group (but there are overlaps) . There is enough room for everyone.
+ Show Spoiler +On November 26 2015 05:35 NonY wrote:
There's no need to make things up? There is a need when people want privacy. But to you privacy only exists for deviants to be irresponsible I guess. When the public doesn't know the full story they fill in the gaps and make assumptions and judgments with what they've got. Then the people who are being judged have a decision to make: give up their privacy to get the truth out there or let the misunderstandings exist and not care what people think (or deal with it however they want). How will this burden help non-Koreans catch up to Koreans? How will it make players more mentally stable and consistent? It seems like a distraction to me. Any time some jackass looking for youtube views can construe a ladder game against you as some kind of dramatic event, you either have to suffer being exploited and misunderstood or you have to waste your time defending yourself to the public.
I really don't get how a random ladder game could possibly blow up to a public drama fest as long as you act like a reasonable human being. Maybe you can exlain your thought process here.
If you don't want to share private topics with the public then don't write about private topics on ladder games. Isn't it simple?
+ Show Spoiler +On November 26 2015 05:35 NonY wrote:
Anyway, if you can so easily give me a list of interesting things that have happened over the year during tournaments, then do you really need even MORE shit from the ladder? You aren't even at risk of losing drama. You are just concerned that you are missing out on even more drama from the ladder. Is it really so necessary? If you had to choose between non-Koreans being as good as Koreans or having more drama, which would you choose? Maybe that should help guide your desires for the community.
I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, I'm not personally interested in possible drama happening on the ladder without barcodes. I'm interested in a healthier community competing with each other on a higher level without the need of anonymity. (people are of course still anonymous to some degree because of their nicknames)
On the other hand there are players who will create drama even on the ladder and that is okay because it's their character and there will be people who like to watch streams like this as well as people who like to watch streams for learning purposes, like yours for example. (see my argument above)
+ Show Spoiler +On November 26 2015 05:35 NonY wrote:
Were you going to argue for this in some way or just state your opinion to contradict mine?
I thought this would be self-explaining for anyone with a bit of general knowledge but sure.
Let's take a closer look at other games with higher degrees of anonymity.
An extreme example would be free casual games. The players don't care for other players. They don't care what happens with the game or the community. Maybe because they rarely interact with each other, maybe because they don't want to interact, maybe because they think it is useless to interact with a random stranger which they most likely will never meet again in the game. As a result this games have a really short lifespan and practically no online community.
What about more competitive games like Call of Duty? The player base underlies a fast exchange because not many players stick with the game longer than a couple of months, maybe even weeks. This also results in a higher degree of anonymity. I hope you don't need examples on how players usually interact with eatch other in these games online. There is some sense of online community but mostly everyone just cares about himself.
An opposite example would be MMOs like world of warcraft. You have to stick with a character that has a permanent name. As a result most people that want to achieve something or want to compete with others act reasonable and thoughtful, they try to play a role in the community and still can compete with others without the fear of getting exploited in the public.
How is this possible? Because everyone has to play under the same rules.
Of course there other factors like age, popularity, different genre, etc. which makes it not comparable 1:1 but you get the idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
