|
At this point we just have to agree that koreans have better genetics for stacraft. Trying to get some other part of the world a competitive scene is just racist.
|
Well if this is true. I'll be done with watching SC2 outside of the Korean leagues so I'll have a lot more free time next year
|
seeing all these comments, i think there will be no way blizz is going to continue with this plan. if they would the western sc2 scene would die out faster than a bunch of marines being run down by an ultralisk (and i can say that is pretty fast)
additionally i cant see why they even considered this plan or how they even came up with it. there is absolutely no benefit, neither for the western nor the Korean players/organisations.
|
On December 13 2015 01:05 Kaizor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 00:52 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 00:17 Kaizor wrote:
There are basically 2 camps here.
One believes that forbidding Koreans from participating will lower the quality of foreign tournaments ( Reasonably true ) and thus lower the viewership and interest in SC2 in the foreign scene ( only time can tell on this ).
While the other believes that having a strict region lock will attract newer people into the scene who might not be interested in watching koreans dominate the whole damn time. And there actually is real life proof of it. Let's just look at football ( not the US version ) and Rugby.
First, I would like to praise the length and thought in the post. However this type of example has been beaten to death on these forums. The soccer analogy has been hashed and rehashed for multiple years already. I find the soccer example a bad one that lacks deep perspective. The world qualifying system for the World Cup most likely helped development of soccer in Japan, South Korea, and South Africa. How much have this system really helped the growth of Soccer? China has a terrible soccer team, one that cannot even compete on an Asian qualifying level and one that has disappointed the country so much that it considers it one of its biggest shame. Soccer in China has been relatively unaffected by World Cup interests, if not been negatively influenced by their lack of national results. While the popularity of the sport remains high, the corruption of their domestic league has turned "professional" scene into a joke. Only South Korea and Japan field teams that have a semblance of competitiveness against top tier teams and even then the results are often not exciting. The SK vs Japan game gets way more attention in their countries than their results or lack of results against top tier competition. Soccer's popularity has much more to do with its accessibility than the works of FIFA has done. To play soccer all you need is a ball, in many countries a net is a luxury and most street ball I've played was with 4 hats or rocks to mark the goal. Compare that to how much resource is needed to play rugby, rugby is astronomically more expensive and many do not have access to resources to play it. Actually i wanted to go even longer but that's probably not advisable. One of the points you brought up which i also wanted to discuss was ease of access. So how does ease of access to playing football translate to SC2? The entry bar of playing football is much simpler than playing SC2. Anybody can just kick a ball and play with friends on a court or field. Sure we might not be able to have the skills of professional but that doesn't mean we cant' play football. SC2 as a RTS is already inherently more difficult (i believe) than any genre of competitive esports. There are alot more skills to it, like learning to macro and micro, build orders, scouting, so on and so forth. So it is way less accessible to more popular esports that have a lesser learning curve. Just like Rugby which is also less accessible that Football in various ways. I doubt Blizzard is able or willing to change SC2 so much that it becomes easier for most people. So one of the ways they are trying to get more people to watch is by going the Nation Wars way. Creating storylines other than that of "koreans winning". Does it help in the development of the scene? Probably not. But i would argue that FIFA has no damn interest in developing the football scene of every damn country in the world, but have every interest in making sure that every damn person in the world watches the World Cup. That is what Blizzard is doing as well.
I don't understand what you don't get about the accessibility.
Soccer much easier to pick up = More popular than Rugby
Dota/LoL much easier to pick up = More popular than Sc2
The numbers for Nation Wars wasn't on the same level as a GSL, dHack, ESL, RB last year. If there was actual interest for lower quality games don't you think the viewer numbers would show it?
What is so wrong with Koreans winning that you would put it in quotations like that? The guy that worked the hardest and played the best won, shouldn't we be celebrating that?
So you agree that it doesn't help the scene, only increases viewership? Why would you be in favor of that?
OtherWorld on page 17 puts it in another perspective, perhaps in a better way.
|
On December 13 2015 01:05 Kaizor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 00:52 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 00:17 Kaizor wrote:
There are basically 2 camps here.
One believes that forbidding Koreans from participating will lower the quality of foreign tournaments ( Reasonably true ) and thus lower the viewership and interest in SC2 in the foreign scene ( only time can tell on this ).
While the other believes that having a strict region lock will attract newer people into the scene who might not be interested in watching koreans dominate the whole damn time. And there actually is real life proof of it. Let's just look at football ( not the US version ) and Rugby.
First, I would like to praise the length and thought in the post. However this type of example has been beaten to death on these forums. The soccer analogy has been hashed and rehashed for multiple years already. I find the soccer example a bad one that lacks deep perspective. The world qualifying system for the World Cup most likely helped development of soccer in Japan, South Korea, and South Africa. How much have this system really helped the growth of Soccer? China has a terrible soccer team, one that cannot even compete on an Asian qualifying level and one that has disappointed the country so much that it considers it one of its biggest shame. Soccer in China has been relatively unaffected by World Cup interests, if not been negatively influenced by their lack of national results. While the popularity of the sport remains high, the corruption of their domestic league has turned "professional" scene into a joke. Only South Korea and Japan field teams that have a semblance of competitiveness against top tier teams and even then the results are often not exciting. The SK vs Japan game gets way more attention in their countries than their results or lack of results against top tier competition. Soccer's popularity has much more to do with its accessibility than the works of FIFA has done. To play soccer all you need is a ball, in many countries a net is a luxury and most street ball I've played was with 4 hats or rocks to mark the goal. Compare that to how much resource is needed to play rugby, rugby is astronomically more expensive and many do not have access to resources to play it. Actually i wanted to go even longer but that's probably not advisable. One of the points you brought up which i also wanted to discuss was ease of access. So how does ease of access to playing football translate to SC2? The entry bar of playing football is much simpler than playing SC2. Anybody can just kick a ball and play with friends on a court or field. Sure we might not be able to have the skills of professional but that doesn't mean we cant' play football. SC2 as a RTS is already inherently more difficult (i believe) than any genre of competitive esports. There are alot more skills to it, like learning to macro and micro, build orders, scouting, so on and so forth. So it is way less accessible to more popular esports that have a lesser learning curve. Just like Rugby which is also less accessible that Football in various ways. I doubt Blizzard is able or willing to change SC2 so much that it becomes easier for most people. So one of the ways they are trying to get more people to watch is by going the Nation Wars way. Creating storylines other than that of "koreans winning". Does it help in the development of the scene? Probably not. But i would argue that FIFA has no damn interest in developing the football scene of every damn country in the world, but have every interest in making sure that every damn person in the world watches the World Cup. That is what Blizzard is doing as well.
I disagree with you here because everyone and their mother can play starcraft 2. Of course it is in the nature of the game to be more overwhelming in the beginning than other games. But apart from that there isn't anything that hinders me from playing the game on a very low level like in other games as well.
|
I am 100% sure my mother couldn't play SC2.
|
On December 13 2015 01:11 Kaizor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 00:55 Silvana wrote:I think the analogy you used is wrong. The explanation would be basically what OtherWorld here mentioned earlier: On December 12 2015 20:04 OtherWorld wrote:
People have to accept that SC2 is a niche eSport, that it will never have viewer numbers similar to LoL/DotA, that the winner of BlizzCon will never earn 1 million dollars for his win. People - and Blizzard - have to accept that SC2 is not made for mass-viewership - and that's why it's beautiful. And that means catering to the small but strong core of hardcore fans instead of to the chimerical "casual viewer". And that means seeking for tournaments to have the best possible games with the best possible players, independantly of their nationality. (whole post is in page 17) See, thats my point. That is what people on tl forums want. NOT blizzard. It is not in their interest to keep SC2 a niche eSport. Because that doesn't make sense for any business. All companies want to see growth. That's why they want to make changes, they want to see if SC2 can grow to be as popular as other popular esports. And most of our suggestions here are never going to grow the scene in the way Blizzard wants. Is Blizzard's way correct? I don't know and time will tell, but i do know, being niche will not help the scene because if the scene is too small, there is absolutely no reason for Blizzard to stay invested in it. Why pour resources and money into a game that less than a million play and doesn't bring in any money, when let's say hearthstone is bringing in all the dough?? If Blizzard stops having a interest, i do think that would be even worse.
Yes, I understand that Blizzard probably wants Starcraft to not be a niche esport. But my point is that the game itself by design will never catter to the masses again, no matter how much money or region lock Blizzard imposes. That's why I think OW's post is correct, "People - and Blizzard - have to accept that SC2 is not made for mass-viewership"
So in the end it all comes down to whether seeing NA or EU players will bring more viewers or not. Blizzard and some people believe it will, most of the posters in this thread think it will not. But as you said only time will tell!
|
On December 13 2015 01:18 MaCRo.gg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 01:05 Kaizor wrote:On December 13 2015 00:52 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 00:17 Kaizor wrote:
There are basically 2 camps here.
One believes that forbidding Koreans from participating will lower the quality of foreign tournaments ( Reasonably true ) and thus lower the viewership and interest in SC2 in the foreign scene ( only time can tell on this ).
While the other believes that having a strict region lock will attract newer people into the scene who might not be interested in watching koreans dominate the whole damn time. And there actually is real life proof of it. Let's just look at football ( not the US version ) and Rugby.
First, I would like to praise the length and thought in the post. However this type of example has been beaten to death on these forums. The soccer analogy has been hashed and rehashed for multiple years already. I find the soccer example a bad one that lacks deep perspective. The world qualifying system for the World Cup most likely helped development of soccer in Japan, South Korea, and South Africa. How much have this system really helped the growth of Soccer? China has a terrible soccer team, one that cannot even compete on an Asian qualifying level and one that has disappointed the country so much that it considers it one of its biggest shame. Soccer in China has been relatively unaffected by World Cup interests, if not been negatively influenced by their lack of national results. While the popularity of the sport remains high, the corruption of their domestic league has turned "professional" scene into a joke. Only South Korea and Japan field teams that have a semblance of competitiveness against top tier teams and even then the results are often not exciting. The SK vs Japan game gets way more attention in their countries than their results or lack of results against top tier competition. Soccer's popularity has much more to do with its accessibility than the works of FIFA has done. To play soccer all you need is a ball, in many countries a net is a luxury and most street ball I've played was with 4 hats or rocks to mark the goal. Compare that to how much resource is needed to play rugby, rugby is astronomically more expensive and many do not have access to resources to play it. Actually i wanted to go even longer but that's probably not advisable. One of the points you brought up which i also wanted to discuss was ease of access. So how does ease of access to playing football translate to SC2? The entry bar of playing football is much simpler than playing SC2. Anybody can just kick a ball and play with friends on a court or field. Sure we might not be able to have the skills of professional but that doesn't mean we cant' play football. SC2 as a RTS is already inherently more difficult (i believe) than any genre of competitive esports. There are alot more skills to it, like learning to macro and micro, build orders, scouting, so on and so forth. So it is way less accessible to more popular esports that have a lesser learning curve. Just like Rugby which is also less accessible that Football in various ways. I doubt Blizzard is able or willing to change SC2 so much that it becomes easier for most people. So one of the ways they are trying to get more people to watch is by going the Nation Wars way. Creating storylines other than that of "koreans winning". Does it help in the development of the scene? Probably not. But i would argue that FIFA has no damn interest in developing the football scene of every damn country in the world, but have every interest in making sure that every damn person in the world watches the World Cup. That is what Blizzard is doing as well. I don't understand what you don't get about the accessibility. Soccer much easier to pick up = More popular than Rugby Dota/LoL much easier to pick up = More popular than Sc2 The numbers for Nation Wars wasn't on the same level as a GSL, dHack, ESL, RB last year. If there was actual interest for lower quality games don't you think the viewer numbers would show it? What is so wrong with Koreans winning that you would put it in quotations like that? The guy that worked the hardest and played the best won, shouldn't we be celebrating that? So you agree that it doesn't help the scene, only increases viewership? Why would you be in favor of that? OtherWorld on page 17 puts it in another perspective, perhaps in a better way.
Firstly i have nothing against koreans and i actually prefer watching koreans play.
Secondly, precisely because Dota2/LOL are more popular because they are easier to pick up, Blizzard have to try other ways to level the playing field. Attract people to watch even if they don't play the game. I doubt there is any way Blizzard can change SC2 to make it easier to pick up so they have to try other ways if they want to grow the scene.
And lastly, i am in favor of the changes because i believe it is only in the interest of the scene, players/fans if it grows instead of being stagnant/niche. Sure we can allow koreans to take part in foreign tournaments. What if the scene becomes so small that even foreign tournaments start dropping SC2 totally from the lineup and pickup other more popular games instead?
I daresay that is a scenario that is not entirely impossible. Just look at the NA circuit and how it has changed from its early WOL peak.
|
On December 13 2015 01:25 Ansibled wrote:
I am 100% sure my mother couldn't play SC2.
I don't know about playing, but my mum did watch a fair few WCS 2014 VODs with me last year, and she seemed to understand the basic premise - it was quite cool to see 
OT: I was only ever watching GSL, Proleetleague and SSL anyway for the most part this year, I won't be missing much if this truly is the case.
Although it has to be said, BlizzCon will be great just to see the Foreigner bashing.
|
Foreign pros should speak out against this if they have any honor left in them. Never have I ever seen an esports scene where the bad players wanted so many free handouts in place of wanting to actually compete at the highest level possible through hard work and dedication. Such a joke.
|
Great. Now only GSL/SSL/Proleague will be worth watching for me.
I only care about skilled and beautiful games. I don't care about watching trash games and I only really care about foreigners when they try their best against all odds to beat the Koreans. I won't even get that in WE tournaments anymore.
WCS in intention is dead. Blizzard should go further and give up on Blizzcon having the pretention to be the biggest tourney of the year with the top 16 players in the world because obviously no one will believe it with that kind of a system.
I don't know if this is the right or the wrong call from Blizzard but it's just very... sad?...
|
On December 13 2015 01:32 Kaizor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 01:18 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 01:05 Kaizor wrote:On December 13 2015 00:52 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 00:17 Kaizor wrote:
There are basically 2 camps here.
One believes that forbidding Koreans from participating will lower the quality of foreign tournaments ( Reasonably true ) and thus lower the viewership and interest in SC2 in the foreign scene ( only time can tell on this ).
While the other believes that having a strict region lock will attract newer people into the scene who might not be interested in watching koreans dominate the whole damn time. And there actually is real life proof of it. Let's just look at football ( not the US version ) and Rugby.
First, I would like to praise the length and thought in the post. However this type of example has been beaten to death on these forums. The soccer analogy has been hashed and rehashed for multiple years already. I find the soccer example a bad one that lacks deep perspective. The world qualifying system for the World Cup most likely helped development of soccer in Japan, South Korea, and South Africa. How much have this system really helped the growth of Soccer? China has a terrible soccer team, one that cannot even compete on an Asian qualifying level and one that has disappointed the country so much that it considers it one of its biggest shame. Soccer in China has been relatively unaffected by World Cup interests, if not been negatively influenced by their lack of national results. While the popularity of the sport remains high, the corruption of their domestic league has turned "professional" scene into a joke. Only South Korea and Japan field teams that have a semblance of competitiveness against top tier teams and even then the results are often not exciting. The SK vs Japan game gets way more attention in their countries than their results or lack of results against top tier competition. Soccer's popularity has much more to do with its accessibility than the works of FIFA has done. To play soccer all you need is a ball, in many countries a net is a luxury and most street ball I've played was with 4 hats or rocks to mark the goal. Compare that to how much resource is needed to play rugby, rugby is astronomically more expensive and many do not have access to resources to play it. Actually i wanted to go even longer but that's probably not advisable. One of the points you brought up which i also wanted to discuss was ease of access. So how does ease of access to playing football translate to SC2? The entry bar of playing football is much simpler than playing SC2. Anybody can just kick a ball and play with friends on a court or field. Sure we might not be able to have the skills of professional but that doesn't mean we cant' play football. SC2 as a RTS is already inherently more difficult (i believe) than any genre of competitive esports. There are alot more skills to it, like learning to macro and micro, build orders, scouting, so on and so forth. So it is way less accessible to more popular esports that have a lesser learning curve. Just like Rugby which is also less accessible that Football in various ways. I doubt Blizzard is able or willing to change SC2 so much that it becomes easier for most people. So one of the ways they are trying to get more people to watch is by going the Nation Wars way. Creating storylines other than that of "koreans winning". Does it help in the development of the scene? Probably not. But i would argue that FIFA has no damn interest in developing the football scene of every damn country in the world, but have every interest in making sure that every damn person in the world watches the World Cup. That is what Blizzard is doing as well. I don't understand what you don't get about the accessibility. Soccer much easier to pick up = More popular than Rugby Dota/LoL much easier to pick up = More popular than Sc2 The numbers for Nation Wars wasn't on the same level as a GSL, dHack, ESL, RB last year. If there was actual interest for lower quality games don't you think the viewer numbers would show it? What is so wrong with Koreans winning that you would put it in quotations like that? The guy that worked the hardest and played the best won, shouldn't we be celebrating that? So you agree that it doesn't help the scene, only increases viewership? Why would you be in favor of that? OtherWorld on page 17 puts it in another perspective, perhaps in a better way. Secondly, precisely because Dota2/LOL are more popular because they are easier to pick up, Blizzard have to try other ways to level the playing field. Attract people to watch even if they don't play the game. I doubt there is any way Blizzard can change SC2 to make it easier to pick up so they have to try other ways if they want to grow the scene.
Oh I could think of a couple hundred ways how to make the game easier to pick up. But the thing is that the vocal parts of the community dont want the game to be easy. There are people who already think sc2 is too casual.
I believe that the game design of SC2 and the intent of blizzard to push foreigners into top tournament spots contradict each other. Its not like we lack foreign pro players, there are quite a few of them, its just that they dont practice as much as koreans. No matter what you do, you can not make them practice more (well maybe you can, but that aint so easy). But you can lower the skill ceiling so that they dont need to practice more and BAM! foreigners can wind major tournaments.
But who would like that to happen?
|
On December 13 2015 01:11 Kaizor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 00:55 Silvana wrote:I think the analogy you used is wrong. The explanation would be basically what OtherWorld here mentioned earlier: On December 12 2015 20:04 OtherWorld wrote:
People have to accept that SC2 is a niche eSport, that it will never have viewer numbers similar to LoL/DotA, that the winner of BlizzCon will never earn 1 million dollars for his win. People - and Blizzard - have to accept that SC2 is not made for mass-viewership - and that's why it's beautiful. And that means catering to the small but strong core of hardcore fans instead of to the chimerical "casual viewer". And that means seeking for tournaments to have the best possible games with the best possible players, independantly of their nationality. (whole post is in page 17) See, thats my point. That is what people on tl forums want. NOT blizzard. It is not in their interest to keep SC2 a niche eSport. Because that doesn't make sense for any business. All companies want to see growth. That's why they want to make changes, they want to see if SC2 can grow to be as popular as other popular esports. And most of our suggestions here are never going to grow the scene in the way Blizzard wants. Is Blizzard's way correct? I don't know and time will tell, but i do know, being niche will not help the scene because if the scene is too small, there is absolutely no reason for Blizzard to stay invested in it. Why pour resources and money into a game that less than a million play and doesn't bring in any money, when let's say hearthstone is bringing in all the dough?? If Blizzard stops having a interest, i do think that would be even worse.
Well, I don't think anyone's asking Blizzard to stay invested in SC2. All that is asked from Blizzard is to make a good game and then let people with actual skill in scene management do the rest.
|
Fiddler's Green42661 Posts
On December 13 2015 01:32 Kaizor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 01:18 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 01:05 Kaizor wrote:On December 13 2015 00:52 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 00:17 Kaizor wrote:
There are basically 2 camps here.
One believes that forbidding Koreans from participating will lower the quality of foreign tournaments ( Reasonably true ) and thus lower the viewership and interest in SC2 in the foreign scene ( only time can tell on this ).
While the other believes that having a strict region lock will attract newer people into the scene who might not be interested in watching koreans dominate the whole damn time. And there actually is real life proof of it. Let's just look at football ( not the US version ) and Rugby.
First, I would like to praise the length and thought in the post. However this type of example has been beaten to death on these forums. The soccer analogy has been hashed and rehashed for multiple years already. I find the soccer example a bad one that lacks deep perspective. The world qualifying system for the World Cup most likely helped development of soccer in Japan, South Korea, and South Africa. How much have this system really helped the growth of Soccer? China has a terrible soccer team, one that cannot even compete on an Asian qualifying level and one that has disappointed the country so much that it considers it one of its biggest shame. Soccer in China has been relatively unaffected by World Cup interests, if not been negatively influenced by their lack of national results. While the popularity of the sport remains high, the corruption of their domestic league has turned "professional" scene into a joke. Only South Korea and Japan field teams that have a semblance of competitiveness against top tier teams and even then the results are often not exciting. The SK vs Japan game gets way more attention in their countries than their results or lack of results against top tier competition. Soccer's popularity has much more to do with its accessibility than the works of FIFA has done. To play soccer all you need is a ball, in many countries a net is a luxury and most street ball I've played was with 4 hats or rocks to mark the goal. Compare that to how much resource is needed to play rugby, rugby is astronomically more expensive and many do not have access to resources to play it. Actually i wanted to go even longer but that's probably not advisable. One of the points you brought up which i also wanted to discuss was ease of access. So how does ease of access to playing football translate to SC2? The entry bar of playing football is much simpler than playing SC2. Anybody can just kick a ball and play with friends on a court or field. Sure we might not be able to have the skills of professional but that doesn't mean we cant' play football. SC2 as a RTS is already inherently more difficult (i believe) than any genre of competitive esports. There are alot more skills to it, like learning to macro and micro, build orders, scouting, so on and so forth. So it is way less accessible to more popular esports that have a lesser learning curve. Just like Rugby which is also less accessible that Football in various ways. I doubt Blizzard is able or willing to change SC2 so much that it becomes easier for most people. So one of the ways they are trying to get more people to watch is by going the Nation Wars way. Creating storylines other than that of "koreans winning". Does it help in the development of the scene? Probably not. But i would argue that FIFA has no damn interest in developing the football scene of every damn country in the world, but have every interest in making sure that every damn person in the world watches the World Cup. That is what Blizzard is doing as well. I don't understand what you don't get about the accessibility. Soccer much easier to pick up = More popular than Rugby Dota/LoL much easier to pick up = More popular than Sc2 The numbers for Nation Wars wasn't on the same level as a GSL, dHack, ESL, RB last year. If there was actual interest for lower quality games don't you think the viewer numbers would show it? What is so wrong with Koreans winning that you would put it in quotations like that? The guy that worked the hardest and played the best won, shouldn't we be celebrating that? So you agree that it doesn't help the scene, only increases viewership? Why would you be in favor of that? OtherWorld on page 17 puts it in another perspective, perhaps in a better way. Firstly i have nothing against koreans and i actually prefer watching koreans play. Secondly, precisely because Dota2/LOL are more popular because they are easier to pick up, Blizzard have to try other ways to level the playing field. Attract people to watch even if they don't play the game. I doubt there is any way Blizzard can change SC2 to make it easier to pick up so they have to try other ways if they want to grow the scene. And lastly, i am in favor of the changes because i believe it is only in the interest of the scene, players/fans if it grows instead of being stagnant/niche. Sure we can allow koreans to take part in foreign tournaments. What if the scene becomes so small that even foreign tournaments start dropping SC2 totally from the lineup and pickup other more popular games instead? I daresay that is a scenario that is not entirely impossible. Just look at the NA circuit and how it has changed from its early WOL peak.
Beyond WCS, foreigner only tournaments havent had that much in the way of viewers (Red Bulls, LotV DH come to mind). It could be at this point that we've already gone past the point where the game can attract casual viewers (barring Blizzcon) and the hardcore fanbase is now larger than the casual fanbase. (Exception of course being HSC, but I'd argue that the viewers for HSC are all the hardcore fanbase).
In which case this move could alienate the majority of the fanbase that still watches SC2 and also hasten foreign events to cancel SC2 events altogether unless they are paid a sizeable amount by Blizzard.
And even in the case of WCS, the numbers didnt justify the cost (which was why MLG pulled out early on and now ESL). Chasing after a demographic that will have only fleeting interest in the game/competitive scene doesnt seem like the best move.
|
On December 13 2015 01:32 Kaizor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 01:18 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 01:05 Kaizor wrote:On December 13 2015 00:52 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 00:17 Kaizor wrote:
There are basically 2 camps here.
One believes that forbidding Koreans from participating will lower the quality of foreign tournaments ( Reasonably true ) and thus lower the viewership and interest in SC2 in the foreign scene ( only time can tell on this ).
While the other believes that having a strict region lock will attract newer people into the scene who might not be interested in watching koreans dominate the whole damn time. And there actually is real life proof of it. Let's just look at football ( not the US version ) and Rugby.
First, I would like to praise the length and thought in the post. However this type of example has been beaten to death on these forums. The soccer analogy has been hashed and rehashed for multiple years already. I find the soccer example a bad one that lacks deep perspective. The world qualifying system for the World Cup most likely helped development of soccer in Japan, South Korea, and South Africa. How much have this system really helped the growth of Soccer? China has a terrible soccer team, one that cannot even compete on an Asian qualifying level and one that has disappointed the country so much that it considers it one of its biggest shame. Soccer in China has been relatively unaffected by World Cup interests, if not been negatively influenced by their lack of national results. While the popularity of the sport remains high, the corruption of their domestic league has turned "professional" scene into a joke. Only South Korea and Japan field teams that have a semblance of competitiveness against top tier teams and even then the results are often not exciting. The SK vs Japan game gets way more attention in their countries than their results or lack of results against top tier competition. Soccer's popularity has much more to do with its accessibility than the works of FIFA has done. To play soccer all you need is a ball, in many countries a net is a luxury and most street ball I've played was with 4 hats or rocks to mark the goal. Compare that to how much resource is needed to play rugby, rugby is astronomically more expensive and many do not have access to resources to play it. Actually i wanted to go even longer but that's probably not advisable. One of the points you brought up which i also wanted to discuss was ease of access. So how does ease of access to playing football translate to SC2? The entry bar of playing football is much simpler than playing SC2. Anybody can just kick a ball and play with friends on a court or field. Sure we might not be able to have the skills of professional but that doesn't mean we cant' play football. SC2 as a RTS is already inherently more difficult (i believe) than any genre of competitive esports. There are alot more skills to it, like learning to macro and micro, build orders, scouting, so on and so forth. So it is way less accessible to more popular esports that have a lesser learning curve. Just like Rugby which is also less accessible that Football in various ways. I doubt Blizzard is able or willing to change SC2 so much that it becomes easier for most people. So one of the ways they are trying to get more people to watch is by going the Nation Wars way. Creating storylines other than that of "koreans winning". Does it help in the development of the scene? Probably not. But i would argue that FIFA has no damn interest in developing the football scene of every damn country in the world, but have every interest in making sure that every damn person in the world watches the World Cup. That is what Blizzard is doing as well. I don't understand what you don't get about the accessibility. Soccer much easier to pick up = More popular than Rugby Dota/LoL much easier to pick up = More popular than Sc2 The numbers for Nation Wars wasn't on the same level as a GSL, dHack, ESL, RB last year. If there was actual interest for lower quality games don't you think the viewer numbers would show it? What is so wrong with Koreans winning that you would put it in quotations like that? The guy that worked the hardest and played the best won, shouldn't we be celebrating that? So you agree that it doesn't help the scene, only increases viewership? Why would you be in favor of that? OtherWorld on page 17 puts it in another perspective, perhaps in a better way. Firstly i have nothing against koreans and i actually prefer watching koreans play. Secondly, precisely because Dota2/LOL are more popular because they are easier to pick up, Blizzard have to try other ways to level the playing field. Attract people to watch even if they don't play the game. I doubt there is any way Blizzard can change SC2 to make it easier to pick up so they have to try other ways if they want to grow the scene. And lastly, i am in favor of the changes because i believe it is only in the interest of the scene, players/fans if it grows instead of being stagnant/niche. Sure we can allow koreans to take part in foreign tournaments. What if the scene becomes so small that even foreign tournaments start dropping SC2 totally from the lineup and pickup other more popular games instead? I daresay that is a scenario that is not entirely impossible. Just look at the NA circuit and how it has changed from its early WOL peak.
This is divides the two sides, as a player of Sc2 I want to watch the best games played in the best way by the best players so the meta explores the limits of the game. As a viewer of Sc2, I can understand how one would appreciate the narrative more than the product.
However, a scene is suppose to exists for the players, not for the viewers. At the core of the competitive scene is the players, the viewers are by products of the players not the other way around. This is why professional sports has agents and/or associations to represent players like NFLPA. You seem to think the reason for soccer's popularity as a sport is from the popularity of the World Cup, the World Cup is so popular because soccer is played by so many.
|
On December 13 2015 01:58 stuchiu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 01:32 Kaizor wrote:On December 13 2015 01:18 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 01:05 Kaizor wrote:On December 13 2015 00:52 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 00:17 Kaizor wrote:
There are basically 2 camps here.
One believes that forbidding Koreans from participating will lower the quality of foreign tournaments ( Reasonably true ) and thus lower the viewership and interest in SC2 in the foreign scene ( only time can tell on this ).
While the other believes that having a strict region lock will attract newer people into the scene who might not be interested in watching koreans dominate the whole damn time. And there actually is real life proof of it. Let's just look at football ( not the US version ) and Rugby.
First, I would like to praise the length and thought in the post. However this type of example has been beaten to death on these forums. The soccer analogy has been hashed and rehashed for multiple years already. I find the soccer example a bad one that lacks deep perspective. The world qualifying system for the World Cup most likely helped development of soccer in Japan, South Korea, and South Africa. How much have this system really helped the growth of Soccer? China has a terrible soccer team, one that cannot even compete on an Asian qualifying level and one that has disappointed the country so much that it considers it one of its biggest shame. Soccer in China has been relatively unaffected by World Cup interests, if not been negatively influenced by their lack of national results. While the popularity of the sport remains high, the corruption of their domestic league has turned "professional" scene into a joke. Only South Korea and Japan field teams that have a semblance of competitiveness against top tier teams and even then the results are often not exciting. The SK vs Japan game gets way more attention in their countries than their results or lack of results against top tier competition. Soccer's popularity has much more to do with its accessibility than the works of FIFA has done. To play soccer all you need is a ball, in many countries a net is a luxury and most street ball I've played was with 4 hats or rocks to mark the goal. Compare that to how much resource is needed to play rugby, rugby is astronomically more expensive and many do not have access to resources to play it. Actually i wanted to go even longer but that's probably not advisable. One of the points you brought up which i also wanted to discuss was ease of access. So how does ease of access to playing football translate to SC2? The entry bar of playing football is much simpler than playing SC2. Anybody can just kick a ball and play with friends on a court or field. Sure we might not be able to have the skills of professional but that doesn't mean we cant' play football. SC2 as a RTS is already inherently more difficult (i believe) than any genre of competitive esports. There are alot more skills to it, like learning to macro and micro, build orders, scouting, so on and so forth. So it is way less accessible to more popular esports that have a lesser learning curve. Just like Rugby which is also less accessible that Football in various ways. I doubt Blizzard is able or willing to change SC2 so much that it becomes easier for most people. So one of the ways they are trying to get more people to watch is by going the Nation Wars way. Creating storylines other than that of "koreans winning". Does it help in the development of the scene? Probably not. But i would argue that FIFA has no damn interest in developing the football scene of every damn country in the world, but have every interest in making sure that every damn person in the world watches the World Cup. That is what Blizzard is doing as well. I don't understand what you don't get about the accessibility. Soccer much easier to pick up = More popular than Rugby Dota/LoL much easier to pick up = More popular than Sc2 The numbers for Nation Wars wasn't on the same level as a GSL, dHack, ESL, RB last year. If there was actual interest for lower quality games don't you think the viewer numbers would show it? What is so wrong with Koreans winning that you would put it in quotations like that? The guy that worked the hardest and played the best won, shouldn't we be celebrating that? So you agree that it doesn't help the scene, only increases viewership? Why would you be in favor of that? OtherWorld on page 17 puts it in another perspective, perhaps in a better way. Firstly i have nothing against koreans and i actually prefer watching koreans play. Secondly, precisely because Dota2/LOL are more popular because they are easier to pick up, Blizzard have to try other ways to level the playing field. Attract people to watch even if they don't play the game. I doubt there is any way Blizzard can change SC2 to make it easier to pick up so they have to try other ways if they want to grow the scene. And lastly, i am in favor of the changes because i believe it is only in the interest of the scene, players/fans if it grows instead of being stagnant/niche. Sure we can allow koreans to take part in foreign tournaments. What if the scene becomes so small that even foreign tournaments start dropping SC2 totally from the lineup and pickup other more popular games instead? I daresay that is a scenario that is not entirely impossible. Just look at the NA circuit and how it has changed from its early WOL peak. Beyond WCS, foreigner only tournaments havent had that much in the way of viewers (Red Bulls, LotV DH come to mind). It could be at this point that we've already gone past the point where the game can attract casual viewers (barring Blizzcon) and the hardcore fanbase is now larger than the casual fanbase. (Exception of course being HSC, but I'd argue that the viewers for HSC are all the hardcore fanbase). In which case this move could alienate the majority of the fanbase that still watches SC2 and also hasten foreign events to cancel SC2 events altogether unless they are paid a sizeable amount by Blizzard. And even in the case of WCS, the numbers didnt justify the cost (which was why MLG pulled out early on and now ESL). Chasing after a demographic that will have only fleeting interest in the game/competitive scene doesnt seem like the best move.
Foreigner only tournament??
Hmm to be very honest, i can hardly remember the last premier/major tournament that had zero koreans in it.
But i agree it is indeed a very risky gamble by Blizzard, which might cost them a big part of the current fan base and in turn not attract anymore new fans.
But i think Blizzard thinks it is a gamble worth taking.
|
On December 13 2015 01:59 MaCRo.gg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 01:32 Kaizor wrote:On December 13 2015 01:18 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 01:05 Kaizor wrote:On December 13 2015 00:52 MaCRo.gg wrote:On December 13 2015 00:17 Kaizor wrote:
There are basically 2 camps here.
One believes that forbidding Koreans from participating will lower the quality of foreign tournaments ( Reasonably true ) and thus lower the viewership and interest in SC2 in the foreign scene ( only time can tell on this ).
While the other believes that having a strict region lock will attract newer people into the scene who might not be interested in watching koreans dominate the whole damn time. And there actually is real life proof of it. Let's just look at football ( not the US version ) and Rugby.
First, I would like to praise the length and thought in the post. However this type of example has been beaten to death on these forums. The soccer analogy has been hashed and rehashed for multiple years already. I find the soccer example a bad one that lacks deep perspective. The world qualifying system for the World Cup most likely helped development of soccer in Japan, South Korea, and South Africa. How much have this system really helped the growth of Soccer? China has a terrible soccer team, one that cannot even compete on an Asian qualifying level and one that has disappointed the country so much that it considers it one of its biggest shame. Soccer in China has been relatively unaffected by World Cup interests, if not been negatively influenced by their lack of national results. While the popularity of the sport remains high, the corruption of their domestic league has turned "professional" scene into a joke. Only South Korea and Japan field teams that have a semblance of competitiveness against top tier teams and even then the results are often not exciting. The SK vs Japan game gets way more attention in their countries than their results or lack of results against top tier competition. Soccer's popularity has much more to do with its accessibility than the works of FIFA has done. To play soccer all you need is a ball, in many countries a net is a luxury and most street ball I've played was with 4 hats or rocks to mark the goal. Compare that to how much resource is needed to play rugby, rugby is astronomically more expensive and many do not have access to resources to play it. Actually i wanted to go even longer but that's probably not advisable. One of the points you brought up which i also wanted to discuss was ease of access. So how does ease of access to playing football translate to SC2? The entry bar of playing football is much simpler than playing SC2. Anybody can just kick a ball and play with friends on a court or field. Sure we might not be able to have the skills of professional but that doesn't mean we cant' play football. SC2 as a RTS is already inherently more difficult (i believe) than any genre of competitive esports. There are alot more skills to it, like learning to macro and micro, build orders, scouting, so on and so forth. So it is way less accessible to more popular esports that have a lesser learning curve. Just like Rugby which is also less accessible that Football in various ways. I doubt Blizzard is able or willing to change SC2 so much that it becomes easier for most people. So one of the ways they are trying to get more people to watch is by going the Nation Wars way. Creating storylines other than that of "koreans winning". Does it help in the development of the scene? Probably not. But i would argue that FIFA has no damn interest in developing the football scene of every damn country in the world, but have every interest in making sure that every damn person in the world watches the World Cup. That is what Blizzard is doing as well. I don't understand what you don't get about the accessibility. Soccer much easier to pick up = More popular than Rugby Dota/LoL much easier to pick up = More popular than Sc2 The numbers for Nation Wars wasn't on the same level as a GSL, dHack, ESL, RB last year. If there was actual interest for lower quality games don't you think the viewer numbers would show it? What is so wrong with Koreans winning that you would put it in quotations like that? The guy that worked the hardest and played the best won, shouldn't we be celebrating that? So you agree that it doesn't help the scene, only increases viewership? Why would you be in favor of that? OtherWorld on page 17 puts it in another perspective, perhaps in a better way. Firstly i have nothing against koreans and i actually prefer watching koreans play. Secondly, precisely because Dota2/LOL are more popular because they are easier to pick up, Blizzard have to try other ways to level the playing field. Attract people to watch even if they don't play the game. I doubt there is any way Blizzard can change SC2 to make it easier to pick up so they have to try other ways if they want to grow the scene. And lastly, i am in favor of the changes because i believe it is only in the interest of the scene, players/fans if it grows instead of being stagnant/niche. Sure we can allow koreans to take part in foreign tournaments. What if the scene becomes so small that even foreign tournaments start dropping SC2 totally from the lineup and pickup other more popular games instead? I daresay that is a scenario that is not entirely impossible. Just look at the NA circuit and how it has changed from its early WOL peak. However, a scene is suppose to exists for the players, not for the viewers. At the core of the competitive scene is the players, the viewers are by products of the players not the other way around.
I have to respectfully disagree with this point. Without the viewers, there will not be any scene to support the players. There will not be any money to pay the players. Sure the players are important, but a scene will not exist without any viewers. And the more viewers, the more support(money) for the players. Thats why footballers and basketball players are paid so much. There are millions of people around the world watching them play.
I can be the best paper plane thrower in the world, but if there is no people interested in watching me play, then there is no scene and i don't get a single cent.
|
looks like homestory cup is gonna have to end up saving esports
|
On December 13 2015 01:25 Ansibled wrote:
I am 100% sure my mother couldn't play SC2.
one of the project managers who works for my #2 customer is a 46 year old female with limited video game experience. first we started playing 2v2 ladder games together. later she graduated to 1v1 ladder. she has made it into the Gold League during 3 different ladder seasons in 1v1. as a 2v2 team we are #1 in diamond.
she is going to be a grandmother in April.
|
Actually, I thought Blizz gonna ban EVERY Koreans from WCS premier, saving foreign tournaments(IEM, DH etc.) for an intersection between Korean-foreign scene.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
