There’s been a lot of discussion recently about all sorts of topics - WCS, decreasing talent pool in Korea, even casting in general. What I want to address in this article is a foundation to these arguments that I think is very important to understand where a lot of people are coming from and what their arguments suggest.
I’m going to attempt to split the SC2 community in two categories: those mainly looking for fun and those interested in the highest level competition. For the sake of this argument, consider the extreme forms of these two categories mutually exclusive. Keep in mind that I’m not going to argue for or against either side in this article. This argument can be applied to every sport and esport, as Richard Lewis for example talked about in a recent article (article here). This will be about the SC2 community only, however. I will NOT be taking into consideration issues such as marketing and monetarization of SC2, whether or not different systems are sustainable, etc. These are separate issues that don’t necessarily factor into the division I’m talking about. I'm purely talking about the different types of viewers in these conflicts.
To start, I’ll explain how I define these two categories.
THE ARCHETYPES
1) The fun-oriented spectator:
The way I see it, the “mainstream” audience largely falls into this category. This is the category I would put viewers in who are primarily entertained by things such as flashy production, funny interviews and commentary, local heroes winning, trashtalk, that sort of thing. I think you can catch my train of thought on this. This category is what is commonly and perhaps a bit unfairly referred to as the “casual” community.
2) The competition-oriented spectator:
This, to me, is the part of the community that finds entertainment in watching the best players in the world play the game at the highest level, regardless of their likability outside the game. This is the part of the community that is interested in absolute, sometimes rigorous fairness, pure skill, the highest level of play, informative commentary tailored to specifically analyse the game at a high level. Commonly referred to as the “hardcore” community.
Again, these are very rough images of two general approaches I’ve perceived in the community. Don’t take these as literal definitions, let them instead give you an overall feeling of the two different "archetypes" of spectators I’m basing this entire argument on.
THE CONFLICT
The reason why I think this distinction is important is because everyone arguing about these topics I named above can generally be categorized this way and the arguments made are almost entirely based on their answers to this simple question: “Why do you follow SC2?” You will generally get only two types of answers - fun and competition.
This entire recent conflict in our community can be reduced to this. These are the two main parties in these debates, if you will. I am not an expert on this subject, so correct me if I’m wrong, but the following is how I feel this alienation came about. Throughout the history of SC2 and even BW before it, a large part of the community, especially on TeamLiquid, grew around the Korean scene. Following its players, becoming fans of different high-level playstyles, etc. Through this, they also became fans of players - they bridged the gap in language and culture as they originally followed players not for their personality, but their skill or playstyle at a high level.
Since then however, esports and with it SC2 have reached a broader, more mainstream audience. This happened when international tournaments were already taking place. Koreans as well as foreigners participated there. This part of the community did not grow up with the Korean scene. It did not have that time to closely follow the Korean scene and get to know its players despite the cultural barriers. Naturally, this more “casual” audience was more interested in players they could immediately identify with - local heroes, foreigners who spoke their language. But not just that, “fun” personalities like MC and PartinG who made an effort to interact with a foreign audience were also welcomed with open arms.
And this is exactly where I think the conflict began.
APPLIED TO WCS
Now, keep in mind what I’ve established so far. We now have two general “movements” that are looking for two different things - in one community. The reason why this discussion is happening now of all times should be clear as day then. WCS 2016 has introduced changes that massively cater to one of these categories as opposed to the other. By essentially banning Korean players from international tournaments, Blizzard caters to the part of the community that’s interested in the former - fun, local heroes, all that. Reminder: I am not arguing for or against this.
The Korean landscape on the other hand has two fewer tournaments, making the scene extremely unforgiving. Two bad days and a player can be sidelined from individual competition for essentially half a year. This has already happened to Blizzcon champion sOs, for example. It’s about to happen to either Maru or Zest, as those two face each other in Code A and have been eliminated from SSL. Looking at the international scene, it’s nowhere near as rough. International events happen in more regular intervals and prize money is spread more than it used to be. The same is the case in Korea by the way, but the Korean scene also has less tournaments and more top end players competing for prize money. Surely you can see where the frustration of competition-oriented spectators is coming from, whether you agree with it or not.
This exact same division also causes arguments about casting quite frequently. There are those that would like nothing more than having every match cast by two professional players of the races involved. And then there are others that enjoy a more free-flowing, entertaining cast that incorporates jokes, memes and a generally more fun approach. Both are perfectly fine and have their own value. What’s causing these arguments recently however is that WCS, casting in general, show production, all these things, are beginning to lean more and more towards the “casual”, fun oriented part of the community.
A recent example is the cast for this match:
A lot of people loved the cast for this match. A lot of people absolutely hated it. The casting was really funny, fast paced, exciting. It was however, not at all informative. And a lot of people I’ve talked to about it while doing research for this article told me that in a deciding game 5, especially a game that’s as unique and incredible as this one, they would much rather have had a serious, informative cast to properly understand what was going on in such a wild game. Both arguments are perfectly fine and I am absolutely not writing this to tell anyone what they should or shouldn’t be entertained by. But this example again shows how difficult it is to satisfy both of these spectator categories.
BLIZZCON AND PUNDITS
I think going forward, this is going to be the biggest issue to figure out for event organizers, casters and personalities. What do “the fans” want, considering there’s two essentially opposing archetypes of spectators? Who is it you’re catering to? What is my tournament supposed to be? It cannot be a solution to claim that BlizzCon crowns the best player in the world, when we all know that the player pool would look entirely different if everyone in the world was given the same chances. You’re roping in both categories of people with that promotion, which means you’re bound to disappoint one of the two “divisions” of the community.
It cannot be a solution to present BlizzCon as the epitome of SC2 as a competitive sport, and then have pundits on a couch that aren’t aware of the players’ achievements over the year - the exact achievements that qualified them for BlizzCon. I was extremely disappointed when I was told that Classic was “not a top tier protoss” and that “he didn’t do as well as others” by casters at BlizzCon, when all it takes to refute that statement is a quick look at his Liquipedia page. This would have been perfectly ignorable in a less “professional” setting, but on a stage that supposedly epitomizes and celebrates the game’s highest level competition? I’m not cool with that. If you’re building BlizzCon up to be SC2’s World Cup Final the way it’s held in “real” sports - which is the feeling I got from the way it was built up and promoted by Blizzard - then do it that way. But I have to say that in a real World Cup final, poorly informed pundits would not be tolerated for a second. That’s not their job in that setting. Their job is to inform.
OUTLOOK
Now, don’t take all this as me shoving my opinions down your throat - I'm not trying to and I apologize if you feel that way. I’ve been vocal about not liking WCS in its current format, and most of you who know me will know quite clearly that I’m part of the category that enjoys high level play more than anything else. I am merely trying to put these recent conflicts into perspective and hoping that both fans and tournament organizers, as well as casters, personalities, etc. can keep this in mind when participating in arguments. This is where it all comes from, this is what it’s all fundamentally based on. Neither side is in the right or wrong here - but understanding the core of these discussions may ultimately prove key in solving them.
The ideal goal now is to find a way to walk the fine line and keep both sub-communities happy. This is what made HomestoryCup so great. It was a casual, friendly, extremely fun tournament and gave an alternative to hardcore competition. But imagine - if every tournament were like HSC, a lot of people would be unhappy about the lack of tough, "professional" tournaments. There's a place for both in our community, and it's of the utmost importance that we cater not only to one crowd. If we lean too far in either direction, large parts of our community will feel alienated.
So the solution, however difficult, should be to accommodate both. I am not an expert on how to do this, however fascinating this area may be, it's not my field of work. This is where organizers, casters, the community itself comes into play and has to take initiative to improve and figure out how to reach this common goal. But one thing is clear - we're not doing enough right now.
I think this conflict started since Stephano retirement. Stephano (especially his first year) was (one of) the most pleased guy for both archetypes you described.
Agreed, absurdly difficult to please either camp. I usually find myself in the middle. I prefer seeing Koreans plays, but I am also getting used to seeing foreigners play.
What I think is really cool are the rare times a foreigner crosses from being just a local hero to a legitimate threat to the top Koreans.
I object to the use of the word "fun" to describe only what the casuals are looking for. "Hardcore" fans are also interested in fun, they just get it in other ways. I technicality i know, but maybe the better word to describe the casuals would have been "hype" or "drama"
since both 'camps' have very different goals, outlooks and take very different things into consideration, you cannot in good conscience expect them to form a truce of any sort, especially in this age of anonymous internet where you can smear shit all over somebody just because he doesn't like things you do. also, the way you formed that split makes the assumption of mutual exclusiveness invalid; the real division is between players pursuing high standards of play, regardless of whether they understand what it is that they are attempting, and 'players', who don't want to invest in their abilities and prefer to concentrate on all things meta. both sides are afraid of the higher authority shifting its focus from them, as if it spelled doom for their ability to continue to do whatever they do to avoid enjoying themselves.
i might not have put it precisely as i see it, but one thing's for sure: if we really want people to realize what's up, sugar coating won't help.
On February 02 2016 00:18 Ansibled wrote: I think a lot of the problems are in how WCS changes were communicated. I mean we still don't really know much about upcoming tournaments right?
According to WCS rules, there must be 11 WCS tournaments this year before Blizzcon. We only had WCS DH Leipzig. IEM Taipeh doesn't count.
See, I don't see that as the divide at all. Personally, I derived enjoyment from SC2 in seeing people try new and interesting things regardless of whether or not they worked. That's why, back in the day when I actually watched, Kiwikaki was one of my favorite players. The Mothership rush backed up by mass blink stalker was one of my favorites. So technically, I fall into your "fun" category because I don't give a shit that his macro was so immaculate he had 1 extra marine at 2:34 in the game, but I do find a person building a Mothership to be highly entertaining.
That said, I don't give a shit about production, I think interviews are 100% a waste of time, trashtalk is superfluous, and I really don't much care how the players are in their personal lives. I do care about local heroes winning because that makes the game more interesting for everyone regardless of competition, because then you can't just tell who's going to win by who has the South Korean flag next to their name.
While it may be because I mostly hang out on TL and haven't been on SC2 reddit in years, I've never seen anyone you defined as "casual" in the community at all. That said, I think that the real divide is whether people are OK with watching nearly exclusively Korean competition or whether or not they want some regional diversity at the expense of the highest level competition, which (honestly) at this point isn't a huge gap.
I don't agree with your point. You make it seems like it's black or white. The highest level of play if in Korea, but it is there because of the ecosystem. What Blizzard tries to achieve is improving the foreign ecosystem.
You said in intro that you wanted to adress the hardcore vs casual division, not the sustainability and marketability of the game, well. Any decent starcraft fan watch korean leagues anyway, because they love the players, the sense of high competition and the game displayed.
The fracture in the community is because the so-called "hardcore" fan don't give a single shit about foreigners. They are feeling good with korean leagues because that's all they know and all they enjoy. Knowing the color of the underwear of every korean and not be able to name a good game in WCS last year won't make you an hardcore fan.
Noone is hardcore if they don't know/care about anything outside korea. They are maybe "purists" but not hardcore. Same in any sport, one watch only champions league other watch and get informed about a lot more stuff. Because you watch only champions league don't make you the biggest fan of the fans. The other way around I would say.
To think about the casting. You take this game as an example of the casual casting, what the wild crowd would like to see, versus what should be an hardcore casting. This is nonsence because it was just a fun moment (which I did not really like) but will never be the norm. As in any sport, one must lead the flow of the game, and another must be more analytical. This particular game was not representative at all of what you think a casual casting is. To me this point has just no sense. Because it is not linked at all with the division of the community. The casting has always be fine and worked more or less well depending on the alchemy and mood of the casters, plus the importance of the game.
The solution should be accomodate both? But I don't know any "casual" fan that know PtitDrogo and Snute, but don't know who Maru / MMA / Life / herO / etc.... are.
That is why I think your article is nonsense. Casual tend to follow the biggest level of play, so called korean level.
The obsession with entertaining foreigners comes from nowhere. They are entertaining sometimes, tournaments such as Nation Wars were really fun. It is just a fact. People are not casual and here just for the fun like you think. They take the fun when it shows up. That's all. Don't make them an archetype.
For the sake of this argument, consider the two mutually exclusive.
Very simplistic way of seeing things, and an already biased way of describing people's opinion about the WCS system. I don't think you can get anything relevant from this starting point.
Thinking that the opinion people have about WCS is just about this artificial "fun vs high skill" categorization is a cliche and can only lead to a cliche conclusion.
Now, don’t take all this as me shoving my opinions down your throat - I'm not trying to and I apologize if you feel that way. I’ve been vocal about not liking WCS in its current format, and most of you who know me will know quite clearly that I’m part of the category that enjoys high level play more than anything else.
And bam! Your biased starting point end up in a biased conclusion. You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide. You locked into your "foreigner = funny low skill guys vs Koreans = superior skilled players which can only be appreciated by people like me".
Reallisticly, the core of your opinion may just be conservatism and lack of long term view, and not the "love of high level play" (that, quite franckly, everybody has)
Don't go for simplistic categorization, they always end up being wrong. Above all, don't think other's opinion is different that yours because they're not educated enough in elite sc2 play.
Dividing fans into those in it for fun and those for competition (which as article suggests is only the tournaments having Koreans) is wrong, I mean can I be both? Because I am
For the sake of this argument, consider the two mutually exclusive.
Very simplistic way of seeing things, and an already biased way of describing people's opinion about the WCS system. I don't think you can get anything relevant from this starting point.
Thinking that the opinion people have about WCS is just about this artificial "fun vs high skill" categorization is a cliche and can only lead to a cliche conclusion.
Now, don’t take all this as me shoving my opinions down your throat - I'm not trying to and I apologize if you feel that way. I’ve been vocal about not liking WCS in its current format, and most of you who know me will know quite clearly that I’m part of the category that enjoys high level play more than anything else.
And bam! Your biased starting point end up in a biased conclusion. You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide. You locked into your "foreigner = funny low skill guys vs Koreans = superior skilled players which can only be appreciated by people like me".
Reallisticly, the core of your opinion may just be conservatism and lack of long term view, and not the "love of high level play" (that, quite franckly, everybody has)
Don't go for simplistic categorization, they always end up being wrong. Above all, don't think other's opinion is different that yours because they're not educated enough in elite sc2 play.
You seem to have completely missed the message of the article because you got hung up on something I said in the introduction. That's quite ironic considering it's exactly what you're accusing me of.
What you quoted is not my conclusion. My conclusion is that there needs to be compromise to accommodate as many in the community as possible and not drive them out. If that's what you call black and white, sure? Can't say I agree with you though.
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
Surprising topic and surprised about being DarkLordOlli who wrote it... When are we gonna get a PvP special? You need to teach people to enjoy the actions that build up to the stage of Disruptor wars!
Could it be that the two "divisions" also have different tastes on the type of games and players they enjoy more? I suspect casuals probably enjoy watching Maru, and hardcores enjoy the beauty of sOs' mind; although sOs is so badass that he's probably conquering the casuals hearts too! and you can't be hardcode enough to resist Maru's cuteness...
When I saw it I really liked it. But I saw it more as a joke. As a caricature of fake hyped casters. Am I the only one who got that impression?
In generel I like analytic casts. But once in a while, the hype cast can be fun. If what Nate and Kaelaris did that game was standard, I would watch with sound off for sure. It would annoy me in the long run.
I don't think the casual vs hard-core dichotomy is artificial.
Take Blizzcon. Would you rather have a stronger region-lock system which ensures diversity of players and storylines like 2016 (casual) or a stronger meritocracy system which features only the best players like 2015 (hard-core)?
Imagine if you only had 5 hours of free time this week to watch SC2 (maybe your wife/girlfriend imposed a quota). Would you rather watch DH Leipzig (casual) or GSL (hard-core)?
Yes, you can be both a casual and hard-core fan. But ultimately, one type is stronger in you than the other. And so the dichotomy, even though not strictly mutually exclusive, is real and matters for the future of SC2.
On February 02 2016 00:42 Mozdk wrote: About that game 5 of TLO and Snute.
When I saw it I really liked it. But I saw it more as a joke. As a caricature of fake hyped casters. Am I the only one who got that impression?
In generel I like analytic casts. But once in a while, the hype cast can be fun. If what Nate and Kaelaris did that game was standard, I would watch with sound off for sure. It would annoy me in the long run.
It was joke fake hype, which was really frickin annoying, especially in an actually hype game.
People enjoy SC2 for a lot of different reasons. To try and lump them all together into two polarizing groups like this is naive at best. This isn't an "us vs them" issue and treating it as such is only going to sow division among all community members.
That said, we've had 7 years of things the way they were, yet the numbers aren't going to lie. Players have had less and less interest in watching Starcraft 2 as an eSport. Blizzard has recognized that something needs to change if they hope to sustain SC2 as a relevant fixture in eSports from the perspective of players and spectators. They have also recognized that diversity is something that SC2 has been lacking, as well as something that people have long been asking for.
Long term, stirring the pot like this can only be a good thing for the future of Starcraft 2 fans across the board.
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
How do few tournament losses bring foreigners closer to the level Koreans represent? I doubt that tournament games have as much of an impact on player level than tons of stressless practice games.
This was the most ridiculous cast I ever watched. There is obviously acting in it, and this screaming for 5min over irrelevant shit. This should not be tolerated. If you want a community to sustain you need to keep high standard.
On February 02 2016 00:46 RKC wrote: Yes, you can be both a casual and hard-core fan. But ultimately, one type is stronger in you than the other. And so the dichotomy, even though not strictly mutually exclusive, is real and matters for the future of SC2.
This is the key part. The traits of each category are not exclusive (I like fun and bizarre games and I also like clinic execution of builds), but what puts a person in on category or the other is which of these traits are more important or enjoyed most for said person.
On February 02 2016 00:50 iFU.pauline wrote: This was the most ridiculous cast I ever watched. There is obviously acting in it, and this screaming for 5min over irrelevant shit. This should not be tolerated. If you want a community to sustain you need to keep high standard.
That's a very extreme opinion, but it does somewhat prove my point.
Some people think like you, in a lot of ways I am like that as well. But there are a lot of others who aren't, and that's fine. I can't blame them for their opinion. Still, the fact that both these tendencies exist in the community is something that's been evident time and time again, and needs to be kept in mind imo.
Had a much longer post, but our local internet gets demolished, err upgraded these weeks. Some thoughts:
This is at best only half the story and lacks shades of grey (couldn't resist - sorry). Virtually every viewer is as well former player, casual player or hardcore player. And large parts of the community seem to have a very hard time understanding the difference. If you watch code S, the game gets designed for you, only if you play it, it gets also balanced for you.
This is not necessarily important for content producers such as GSL or Dreamhack, but it adds a very nasty layer of difficulty for Blizzard when designing, balancing, patching the game. And very much when trying to monetize it.
Mediocre local heroes, no matter how colorful they are, contributing to the long term health of the product seems a questionable premise. Idra ragequitting or Naniwa being Naniwa may create headlines, the people coming back to see more of it are however not an audience you can rely on. But then the past success of some of these players (streaming, fan clubs) may very well suggest I have no clue what I'm talking about.
On February 02 2016 00:50 iFU.pauline wrote: This was the most ridiculous cast I ever watched. There is obviously acting in it, and this screaming for 5min over irrelevant shit. This should not be tolerated. If you want a community to sustain you need to keep high standard.
That's a very extreme opinion, but it does somewhat prove my point.
Some people think like you, in a lot of ways I am like that as well. But there are a lot of others who aren't, and that's fine. I can't blame them for their opinion. Still, the fact that both these tendencies exist in the community is something that's been evident time and time again, and needs to be kept in mind imo.
Honestly, though, I think the point is that it's not so much casual v. hardcore as hardcore v. extremely hardcore. To use an American political example: Instead of fans being split into Democrats and Republicans, they're all Republicans, but some are moderate and some are Trump supporters.
On February 02 2016 00:50 iFU.pauline wrote: This was the most ridiculous cast I ever watched. There is obviously acting in it, and this screaming for 5min over irrelevant shit. This should not be tolerated. If you want a community to sustain you need to keep high standard.
That's a very extreme opinion, but it does somewhat prove my point.
Some people think like you, in a lot of ways I am like that as well. But there are a lot of others who aren't, and that's fine. I can't blame them for their opinion. Still, the fact that both these tendencies exist in the community is something that's been evident time and time again, and needs to be kept in mind imo.
Honestly, though, I think the point is that it's not so much casual v. hardcore as hardcore v. extremely hardcore. To use an American political example: Instead of fans being split into Democrats and Republicans, they're all Republicans, but some are moderate and some are Trump supporters.
Yeah, I'm not saying everyone has to fit into these categories 100%. That would be silly. I'm saying these are two general tendencies I've noticed. They're just there to draw rough images and you can never be both at the same time. Aspects from each, sure. I enjoyed HSC just as much as the next guy - because it always knew what it was. It was a great alternative to "hardcore" competition. What I don't really enjoy is something promoted as the most "professional" tournament in SC2 that is then held like almost a crossover of HSC and GSL. That doesn't fit the description and isn't genuine.
On February 02 2016 00:58 qingbo wrote: I don't know man, this WCS system is somewhat bad for the Koreans.
And I don't see how not playing with Koreans somehow improves your skills.
Can you tell me how tournament games contribute to overall level of the player? On what are you basing this opinion? I thought that players raise their skill by practicing, is it not true? And I don't see how tournament appearances of Koreans that practice in their own environment is beneficial to foreign players. Maybe the skill is transferred through shaking hands after lost game?
Anyway, nice article DLO. Of course people can't be labelled to (all) be in one of these two groups (and you're obviously not saying that) but these movements are discernable within the community and it can be helpful for organizations to be (more) aware of it and use this model, if you will, for future shows.
As a somewhat more to the highest possible level of competition leaning guy I would be satisfied with the current system if there were more tournaments that have Koreans competing in them.
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
How do few tournament losses bring foreigners closer to the level Koreans represent? I doubt that tournament games have as much of an impact on player level than tons of stressless practice games.
It allows them to test what they've found to work in practice. Does it actually beat the best of the best, or does it need revising? If you're just constantly playing vs worse people and getting away with doing X thing, and X ends up being easily beaten by a Korean, then they'll just be set up for failure in the long run because they have no way of knowing if what they're doing is actually good enough to beat the best.
On February 02 2016 00:46 RKC wrote: Yes, you can be both a casual and hard-core fan. But ultimately, one type is stronger in you than the other. And so the dichotomy, even though not strictly mutually exclusive, is real and matters for the future of SC2.
This is the key part. The traits of each category are not exclusive (I like fun and bizarre games and I also like clinic execution of builds), but what puts a person in on category or the other is which of these traits are more important or enjoyed most for said person.
DLO is simply defining two categories to help steer the discussion. I don't know why some people are up in arms. Categories are useful for serious discussion on any issue. Conservatives vs Democrats. Capitalism vs Socialism. And so on. Sure, there are always middle-ground positions with a mix of both (for instance, I can be socially liberal but economically conservative). Sure, there are fifty shades of grey between black and white. But that don't mean there aren't people who sit at far sides of the extremes and pulling hard towards their own direction.
Ideally, everyone should steer to the centre. I believe this is what DLO is suggesting we do. Before the gap widens and tears the entire community apart.
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
Ah ah...That's exactly what I Thought. In this excellent documentary made by Khaldor about SC2 Korean pro scene, koreans say foreign players have a lot to learn from korean players (about the fact foreign players gone to korea for practice).
That is the same idea about open WCS tournaments for korean players. They are stronger, indeed ! But sincerely I think foreign players became better when they play vs korean. Maybe not in every single tournament, but a few.
Just following the example of sports media in the US, that WCS cast is the kind of vibe you'd get from a radio show or podcast the day after, or from the live call of local radio guys or whatever. For the main standard live call of the game, they would not go with something so polarizing.
I think that the producers of SC2 broadcasts are eager to find anything that will pull more people in and hook them. When you do something like that, you see a ton of extremely positive feedback and evidence that many people got hooked. But how many did you repel? And how many of the people that you "hooked" were already fans who just enjoyed this broadcast more than usual? Is the call of the game a variable that you want to be tweaking that much?
I think the goal should be finding the atmosphere that best suits SC2. American football and soccer and tennis and golf have all settled on different styles of calling the game. There is far less variety between all the announcers calling the same sport as there is variety between different sports. SC2, however, has a ton of variety within itself. I think the WCS producers need to take a good look at all the different ways our great variety of announcers, commentators and analysts have called the games and decide on the best style. And all the guys calling the games for the main live broadcasts of the major tournaments need to homogenize to that style. If they don't want to do that, or can't, then they can make a career in some other corner of the scene, like with a podcast or with their own alternate casts of the games or streaming or whatever.
For the sake of this argument, consider the two mutually exclusive.
Very simplistic way of seeing things, and an already biased way of describing people's opinion about the WCS system. I don't think you can get anything relevant from this starting point.
Thinking that the opinion people have about WCS is just about this artificial "fun vs high skill" categorization is a cliche and can only lead to a cliche conclusion.
Now, don’t take all this as me shoving my opinions down your throat - I'm not trying to and I apologize if you feel that way. I’ve been vocal about not liking WCS in its current format, and most of you who know me will know quite clearly that I’m part of the category that enjoys high level play more than anything else.
And bam! Your biased starting point end up in a biased conclusion. You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
This sentence is repeated over and over without any evidence. If foreigners were already getting thrashed by koreans, how will region lock help RAISE the skill of foreigners? Foreigner vs foreigner competition does not lead to foreigners competing with koreans. Foreigners are stuck in 5th grade math because when they venture into 6th grade math they get thrashed. You're saying that foreigners should remain in 5th grade math and then one day they will know 6th grade math. That's not how you grow and develop. Stephano has made the leap. You go in and you either adapt or you get out. Competitors are expected to make the leap.
Koreans playing in their practice houses are expected to put in their very best and given few opportunities to shine (and so it better count). That leads to growth and innovation. Compare that to foreigners who coast by and stagnate. Region locking will only perpetuate stagnation and eventually lead to decline in skill as the bar for what constitutes top foreigner drops.
On February 02 2016 00:46 RKC wrote: Yes, you can be both a casual and hard-core fan. But ultimately, one type is stronger in you than the other. And so the dichotomy, even though not strictly mutually exclusive, is real and matters for the future of SC2.
This is the key part. The traits of each category are not exclusive (I like fun and bizarre games and I also like clinic execution of builds), but what puts a person in on category or the other is which of these traits are more important or enjoyed most for said person.
DLO is simply defining two categories to help steer the discussion. I don't know why some people are up in arms. Categories are useful for serious discussion on any issue. Conservatives vs Democrats. Capitalism vs Socialism. And so on. Sure, there are always middle-ground positions with a mix of both (for instance, I can be socially liberal but economically conservative). Sure, there are fifty shades of grey between black and white. But that don't mean there aren't people who sit at far sides of the extremes and pulling hard towards their own direction.
Ideally, everyone should steer to the centre. I believe this is what DLO is suggesting we do. Before the gap widens and tears the entire community apart.
Sort of. I'm saying that there's room for more than one preference in the community and it would be healthy to stop fighting among ourselves when really nobody's wrong in what they like - they just like what they like.
I don't agree with the distinction being made here between casual and competitive. I think there's another divide here because the professional sports leagues in Europe, Asia and America operate in different ways.
In the US, casual fans tune in when there's a dominant team playing. It's the people who follow a local team even when they're terrible that are considered the hardcore fans. You could easily see it in the games. When a local team is terrible, the stands are empty. Casual fans just don't show up. When a great team is visiting, more fans are in the stands to watch that great team. And that great team will even receive more cheers than the terrible local team. I think European fans just have a more local mentality while American fans are more inclined to watch the best regardless of nationality. In the US, the casual fan is synonymous with the bandwagon fan.
The focus of the foreigner scene is just wrong. Too much of the focus is not on SC2. People watch streamers to see them rage, do stupid antics and just act immaturely. People watch to see the casters do stand up comedy and watch the players say silly things in interviews. I see some say that casual fans can't tell the difference between foreigner play and Korean play if the fans don't see the players. Well, you can replace SC2 with rock-paper-scissors on the foreign scene and people won't notice the difference. It's all the sideshow surrounding the game that fans are paying attention to.
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
How do few tournament losses bring foreigners closer to the level Koreans represent? I doubt that tournament games have as much of an impact on player level than tons of stressless practice games.
It allows them to test what they've found to work in practice. Does it actually beat the best of the best, or does it need revising? If you're just constantly playing vs worse people and getting away with doing X thing, and X ends up being easily beaten by a Korean, then they'll just be set up for failure in the long run because they have no way of knowing if what they're doing is actually good enough to beat the best.
While I agree with your point of view, this opinion that was going around that claims playing against Koreans in a tournament is some hardcore trial, I don't think that players constantly being faced with such trials end up well for the scene longevity. I see it as a reason why so many foreign teams jumped ship. Among others, of course.
I'm all for region-lock, I'm even more for truly global events along local scenes developing and raising the interest in the game once again. While the lock seems really hard, I agree with it's premise. There has to be an incentive to keep playing. Certainly not constant trials by fire.
EDIT: foreign scene is pretty much exactly what pitied Korean B teamers look like, before neither of those got true opportunities and incentives, and there is a massive outrage that one group got them now, the other did not. I wonder how much of KeSPA's decision was in all that, I don't believe all of it was enforced by Blizzard
On February 02 2016 00:46 RKC wrote: Yes, you can be both a casual and hard-core fan. But ultimately, one type is stronger in you than the other. And so the dichotomy, even though not strictly mutually exclusive, is real and matters for the future of SC2.
This is the key part. The traits of each category are not exclusive (I like fun and bizarre games and I also like clinic execution of builds), but what puts a person in on category or the other is which of these traits are more important or enjoyed most for said person.
DLO is simply defining two categories to help steer the discussion. I don't know why some people are up in arms. Categories are useful for serious discussion on any issue. Conservatives vs Democrats. Capitalism vs Socialism. And so on. Sure, there are always middle-ground positions with a mix of both (for instance, I can be socially liberal but economically conservative). Sure, there are fifty shades of grey between black and white. But that don't mean there aren't people who sit at far sides of the extremes and pulling hard towards their own direction.
Ideally, everyone should steer to the centre. I believe this is what DLO is suggesting we do. Before the gap widens and tears the entire community apart.
Sort of. I'm saying that there's room for more than one preference in the community and it would be healthy to stop fighting among ourselves when really nobody's wrong in what they like - they just like what they like.
My fear is that for SC2 to survive, it needs to pick a niche side. Super serious like tennis. Or wacky fun like poker.
But maybe it doesn't. It can stay at the centre, and swing both ways. Just like football. Some pundit shows are serious, others are wacky fun. Some commentators are more professional (Europeans), others are super emo (South Americans). One sport, all kinds of shades and flavours. We can have GSL, and also HSC.
I think it's pretty clear that Western organizations and casters have come down on the casual side of things, and for good reason. At the end of the day, modern esports is more business than competition.
I feel like I'm on both ends of the spectrum. When I watch streams of tournaments and such, I watch with an upbeat and optimistic attitude. I'm having fun and enjoy watching some of my favorite players and other players play and listen to the casting. When it's all done and said, I go back and watch the VODs, with or without commentary, but make my own analysis of the game and interpret what was going on.
I think when casters are casting, their emotions come into play, which brings out their inner nerd. I love the excitement that they can bring over a "dead game" because in the end, if you're watching, you have some semblance of love towards the game...or that's what I think.
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
It doesn't. Region locking improving foreign play is a myth, anyone that has followed the scene in any kind of capacity knows this. The gap between top foreign players and korean players was at its closest during a time when there was absolutely NO region locking whatsoever. The gap has only grown wider over time.
Region locking has nothing to do with improving foreign play. It exists because there was a portion of the community that simply hated seeing an Asian man win everything. That's literally what it comes down to.
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
It doesn't. Region locking improving foreign play is a myth, anyone that has followed the scene in any kind of capacity knows this. The gap between top foreign players and korean players was at its closest during a time when there was absolutely NO region locking whatsoever. The gap has only grown wider over time.
Region locking has nothing to do with improving foreign play. It exists because there was a portion of the community that simply hated seeing an Asian man win everything. That's literally what it comes down to.
Wow, harsh. So if I enjoy Koreans playing very much it makes me a koreanophile? I know where you're trying to go
I think with the RL article when hes not decrying 'social justice' or complaining about boring personalities he is arguing for an increase of fun or personality, thats what he thinks esports is. I have to say that I agree with him that esports should be more fun, should have more personality, I was never really a fan of Idra but I think he was good for the scene, people wanted to watch his games, to see his reactions. Idra leaving a won game after hallucinated colossus in a pique of rage is still one of my favourite moments in Sc2.
I think that there are certainly different types of viewers in Sc2, though I see it as a scale or continuum and at the end the two are in quite vocal opposition. I'd describe one end as one who wants to wants to watch entertaining or enjoyable Sc2 (similar to fun in your example) and the other people who want to watch the most high level or best Sc2 matches (competitive in your example).
One point I'd like to make though as whilst I'm closer to 'fun' than 'competitive' in your definition I don't think that means that I or other 'fun lovers' don't enjoy entertaining games more than I enjoy silly interviews etc. I'm not just after flashy graphics or a silly interview; I'd prefer to watch a competitive, interesting game than listen to a silly interview or hype cast. Its just that I find it easier to get behind someone (root for someone) that has personality or that I can identify with (local heroes etc).
Anyways, great well written post and I would certainly agree that the Sc2 community does have an identity crisis.
The problem is that RTS has always been hardcore historically , but long time ago blizzard decided to convert it to casuals at all cost , as a result we now have casters , that not even the casuals enjoy.. as they are either players without any idea how to cast , or casters without any idea about the game .
There are many examples of failing games like this or genres.. when trying to innovate or change , sc2 as a game, is even harder now , so basically the game fails to deliver for both , hardcore and casuals , the game is way too hard for casuals , and too unforgiven for hardcores .
CSGO and LoL , succeded , because anyone can understand and play those game easily , yet both are very hard to master both of those games have very diferent casting tho , CSGO is much more profesional than the other games ,while LoL is basically focused on kids and "entertaining casting" like sc2 is trying to do .
conclusion SC2 is too hard , cannot be converted into a casual game where the money is :p
come on people, cant we just actually get over all this. Weve had enough. the game is 20 yrs old. Iterations dont change the core concept of the game. Ive played it from the start and im kinda done, i browse this site daily, look at the headlines, not much to see here, click twitch, look at top streams, not much to see here or if there is im not really watching it. Its just had its time and im afraid its time is up, it will always be there and thats the end of it. We have to just face the current state of the competitive game market.
I've already said enough on the changes, people know my thoughts and I don't back down from them. But I have no desire to get into an argument that will wind up with me or someone else getting angry and temp banned again. I'll simply watch what I consider to be the best games and not bother with the rest.
On February 02 2016 01:25 Waxangel wrote: I think it's pretty clear that Western organizations and casters have come down on the casual side of things, and for good reason. At the end of the day, modern esports is more business than competition.
Hey. To me when you were invited as an expert (I did not know you), you were the one who looked casual. No offence, just stating what I felt and why it is nonsence to make a distinction between casual and hardcore.
The casual viewer (probably not even player) will tend to bandwagon and watch what is the best out there, aka korean league. Just check on reddit page a guy asked today the rules of starcraft, because he catched proleague and found it entertaining even not knowing what was going on.
He is casual. He watches highest level of play. And I don't think he would have tuned for Bly vs Elazer.
All of this categorization is implicitely false imo.
I've watched RTS religiously for ~15 years and I'm casual <.< As soon as you're a fan of somebody it's because something stands out in that guy, ranging from stylistic playstyle, a good story, personality, playing your race, showing emotion. No one actually looks at statistics of winrates and then goes THAT is my favourite player..
The hype cast, I only facepalmed a little, because they were joking about it. The game was actually hype and deserved to be hyped up. If you're truly a hardcore Starcraft fan, you probably know even more than the casters, when it's about your race, with the exception of a few casters. And so that should make you not interested in them analyzing the game. Instead what I enjoy is a funny cast, with ACTUAL hype, something that can lift me up, as opposed to bring me down. So many times there has been boring ass casts where my excitement for the game, was not justified by the cast and I would've actually benefitted from not listening to it at all, in terms of getting pumped up. Often I listen into other language casts that I don't understand, because it brings more to the table. If you love Maynarde, or Tasteless, or even Kaelaris that doesn't make you casual..
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
It doesn't. Region locking improving foreign play is a myth, anyone that has followed the scene in any kind of capacity knows this. The gap between top foreign players and korean players was at its closest during a time when there was absolutely NO region locking whatsoever. The gap has only grown wider over time.
Region locking has nothing to do with improving foreign play. It exists because there was a portion of the community that simply hated seeing an Asian man win everything. That's literally what it comes down to.
What made koreans good when they started playing BW? Did they have a whole lot of superior rts players invade their country and steal their money/chances? Would they have been able to build the infrastructure they have now? Korea basically "region locked" their scene due to the format and the requirement to live there as well (not 100% as we know, grrr, etc), but the end result is similar, no? There ALWAYS has to be motivation first, if there is no motivation to get better you also won't get better. WCS not being region locked did exactly that to 99.99999% of (potential) foreign progamers, it removed all the motivation. I really don't think this is hard to understand. Obviously foreigners playing with foreigners only is worse practice than playing vs koreans, but you can get better in that scenario too, it just takes longer.
@topic: In theory you definitely should make the whole experience rather casual, otherwise you won't get the biggest following possible. It's pretty unfortunate that blizzard needed all these years to understand this though (and atm it's still not executed all that well, if you want to see how it is done properly: watch riot and the lcs) Right now most people having ANY interest in sc2 are the hardcore people, we watch korean sc2, we don't care about the "casual" stuff all that much (that's obviously not true 100%, but you get the idea) I am not entirely sure if we still have time to get some new casual viewers into watching sc2 (wcs), but the last dreamhack wasn't really all that well done to achieve it either imo. Why? Because while being a wcs tournament it felt like every dreamhack before, there wasn't much production value for sc2 (no cool videos, not even the main stage for the most part, etc). This won't cut it, i hope the winter final will be a different kind of calibre, otherwise this won't go anywhere.
On February 02 2016 01:35 Hoofit wrote: Interesting article, thanks for that.
I think with the RL article when hes not decrying 'social justice' or complaining about boring personalities he is arguing for an increase of fun or personality, thats what he thinks esports is. I have to say that I agree with him that esports should be more fun, should have more personality, I was never really a fan of Idra but I think he was good for the scene, people wanted to watch his games, to see his reactions. Idra leaving a won game after hallucinated colossus in a pique of rage is still one of my favourite moments in Sc2.
I think that there are certainly different types of viewers in Sc2, though I see it as a scale or continuum and at the end the two are in quite vocal opposition. I'd describe one end as one who wants to wants to watch entertaining or enjoyable Sc2 (similar to fun in your example) and the other people who want to watch the most high level or best Sc2 matches (competitive in your example).
One point I'd like to make though as whilst I'm closer to 'fun' than 'competitive' in your definition I don't think that means that I or other 'fun lovers' don't enjoy entertaining games more than I enjoy silly interviews etc. I'm not just after flashy graphics or a silly interview; I'd prefer to watch a competitive, interesting game than listen to a silly interview or hype cast. Its just that I find it easier to get behind someone (root for someone) that has personality or that I can identify with (local heroes etc).
Anyways, great well written post and I would certainly agree that the Sc2 community does have an identity crisis.
I find it hilarious how people still believe the myth that isolating scenes will lead to strengthening each region. If that were the case the EU, NA and China regions would be equal to Korea, which isn't the case, since, baring the first worlds, Korea has won each and every time, they might even be getting progressively better as last year was the first with an all Korean final.
No, isolating the scenes is not the solution, what Blizzard actually needs to do is to promote the creation of team houses and focused practice, it needs to encourage teams to hire coaches, it needs to create the equivalent of a Proleague for EU and NA. Because to be frank, Korea has all the right elements to create the best players in the world, yes its true they have a culture of perfectionism and discipline that pushes them ever forward, but they also have team houses, with actual focused practice a regular team league to get them motivated and awesome coaching staff.
Until Blizzard stops trying to screw Korea and actually starts working to try and build up EU and NA, not throw welfare money at them, the regions will never grow in skill and the Koreans will always be better.
I couldn't get past groups being mutually exclusive...
I enjoy watching the highest level competition where each player lives in a team-house and has had a week (or more) to prepare and practice amazing crisp builds. I love seeing coaches decide who the ace player will be and to see the perfect snipe build - or blunder where they guess the opponent's ace wrong. I want to see builds and micro that will blow my mind. That is STARCRAFT at it's finest.
But I enjoy more than that. I love competition at almost every level. I think the game is awesome at my poor level. I actually got into casting mid-master level players practice against each other because I wanted an excuse to be in the game. I used to watch 4-6 personal streams at a time. It didn't matter what race or skill.
As someone that's always been very passionate about my heritage (half Finnish) I cheer for every Finn. I don't care what tournament. I've attended several local LANs to cast the 200€ tournaments. Not because the 50-200 viewers were going to make me famous (they haven't) but because I FUCKING LOVE STARCRAFT.
So... which group do I belong to before I continue reading?
I don't really believe region locking will help improve skill level for foreigners but at the same time I believe that foreigners will just give up eventually if koreans are allowed to compete freely. I would very much appreciate that if foreigners could rise up and compete in the free environment without giving up or retiring because they can not compete. The reality on the other hand doesn't seem to be that way. I think Blizzard realizes this too. The goal of Blizzard and SC2 fans is to sustain and help foster the growth of the scene. How do we achieve it though? Blizzard and many people seem to believe implicit or explicit that korean domination is an obstacle to the goal.
The argument about diversity comes into play. How do you force diversity without hurting koreans though? That's the hard part. Some people believe you simply don't. Some believe it's a necessary evil. There's no easy answer here.
The discussion about silly vs informative casters is for me not a hard decision to make. I believe that all casters should be well informed about the whole scene and the game at least to some extent. You could make jokes and have different styles of casting but you should be well informed before anything.
Here is the thing with the hypecast, if you want brain dead yelling get Maynarde to cast, if you want actual material in your casting, get anyone else, and have them do their job.
On February 02 2016 01:57 Destructicon wrote: I find it hilarious how people still believe the myth that isolating scenes will lead to strengthening each region. If that were the case the EU, NA and China regions would be equal to Korea, which isn't the case, since, baring the first worlds, Korea has won each and every time, they might even be getting progressively better as last year was the first with an all Korean final.
No, isolating the scenes is not the solution, what Blizzard actually needs to do is to promote the creation of team houses and focused practice, it needs to encourage teams to hire coaches, it needs to create the equivalent of a Proleague for EU and NA. Because to be frank, Korea has all the right elements to create the best players in the world, yes its true they have a culture of perfectionism and discipline that pushes them ever forward, but they also have team houses, with actual focused practice a regular team league to get them motivated and awesome coaching staff.
Until Blizzard stops trying to screw Korea and actually starts working to try and build up EU and NA, not throw welfare money at them, the regions will never grow in skill and the Koreans will always be better.
I think you stay focused only on foreigners catching up in term of skills. What Blizzard does is increasing the incentitives for foreign players to go pro. For tournament organisers to consider starcraft something marketable and bringing viewers. Everything is not about pure skill. Eventually with a EU proleague, in a unique city, with team houses and coaches. Yes foreigners could catch up. But it is very unlikely to happen.
Just look at League of Legends. There is no need to mix regions. It creaters own ecosystem and a shit ton of hype when regions meet few times a year.
And I would add that it is the exact same thing in real sport.
On February 02 2016 01:57 y0su wrote: I couldn't get past groups being mutually exclusive...
I enjoy watching the highest level competition where each player lives in a team-house and has had a week (or more) to prepare and practice amazing crisp builds. I love seeing coaches decide who the ace player will be and to see the perfect snipe build - or blunder where they guess the opponent's ace wrong. I want to see builds and micro that will blow my mind. That is STARCRAFT at it's finest.
But I enjoy more than that. I love competition at almost every level. I think the game is awesome at my poor level. I actually got into casting mid-master level players practice against each other because I wanted an excuse to be in the game. I used to watch 4-6 personal streams at a time. It didn't matter what race or skill.
As someone that's always been very passionate about my heritage (half Finnish) I cheer for every Finn. I don't care what tournament. I've attended several local LANs to cast the 200€ tournaments. Not because the 50-200 viewers were going to make me famous (they haven't) but because I FUCKING LOVE STARCRAFT.
So... which group do I belong to before I continue reading?
Casuals, easily. You show symptoms of respect for lower level players. /s
On February 02 2016 01:57 y0su wrote: I couldn't get past groups being mutually exclusive...
I enjoy watching the highest level competition where each player lives in a team-house and has had a week (or more) to prepare and practice amazing crisp builds. I love seeing coaches decide who the ace player will be and to see the perfect snipe build - or blunder where they guess the opponent's ace wrong. I want to see builds and micro that will blow my mind. That is STARCRAFT at it's finest.
But I enjoy more than that. I love competition at almost every level. I think the game is awesome at my poor level. I actually got into casting mid-master level players practice against each other because I wanted an excuse to be in the game. I used to watch 4-6 personal streams at a time. It didn't matter what race or skill.
As someone that's always been very passionate about my heritage (half Finnish) I cheer for every Finn. I don't care what tournament. I've attended several local LANs to cast the 200€ tournaments. Not because the 50-200 viewers were going to make me famous (they haven't) but because I FUCKING LOVE STARCRAFT.
So... which group do I belong to before I continue reading?
Neither, both, whatever. That's not the point. Continue reading.
On February 02 2016 01:35 Hoofit wrote: Interesting article, thanks for that.
I think with the RL article when hes not decrying 'social justice' or complaining about boring personalities he is arguing for an increase of fun or personality, thats what he thinks esports is. I have to say that I agree with him that esports should be more fun, should have more personality, I was never really a fan of Idra but I think he was good for the scene, people wanted to watch his games, to see his reactions. Idra leaving a won game after hallucinated colossus in a pique of rage is still one of my favourite moments in Sc2.
I think that there are certainly different types of viewers in Sc2, though I see it as a scale or continuum and at the end the two are in quite vocal opposition. I'd describe one end as one who wants to wants to watch entertaining or enjoyable Sc2 (similar to fun in your example) and the other people who want to watch the most high level or best Sc2 matches (competitive in your example).
One point I'd like to make though as whilst I'm closer to 'fun' than 'competitive' in your definition I don't think that means that I or other 'fun lovers' don't enjoy entertaining games more than I enjoy silly interviews etc. I'm not just after flashy graphics or a silly interview; I'd prefer to watch a competitive, interesting game than listen to a silly interview or hype cast. Its just that I find it easier to get behind someone (root for someone) that has personality or that I can identify with (local heroes etc).
Anyways, great well written post and I would certainly agree that the Sc2 community does have an identity crisis.
On February 02 2016 01:57 y0su wrote: I couldn't get past groups being mutually exclusive...
I enjoy watching the highest level competition where each player lives in a team-house and has had a week (or more) to prepare and practice amazing crisp builds. I love seeing coaches decide who the ace player will be and to see the perfect snipe build - or blunder where they guess the opponent's ace wrong. I want to see builds and micro that will blow my mind. That is STARCRAFT at it's finest.
But I enjoy more than that. I love competition at almost every level. I think the game is awesome at my poor level. I actually got into casting mid-master level players practice against each other because I wanted an excuse to be in the game. I used to watch 4-6 personal streams at a time. It didn't matter what race or skill.
As someone that's always been very passionate about my heritage (half Finnish) I cheer for every Finn. I don't care what tournament. I've attended several local LANs to cast the 200€ tournaments. Not because the 50-200 viewers were going to make me famous (they haven't) but because I FUCKING LOVE STARCRAFT.
So... which group do I belong to before I continue reading?
Neither, both, whatever. That's not the point. Continue reading.
I should have probably phrased it better.
New phrasing: the extreme versions of both categories are mutually exclusive!
On February 02 2016 01:57 y0su wrote: I couldn't get past groups being mutually exclusive...
I enjoy watching the highest level competition where each player lives in a team-house and has had a week (or more) to prepare and practice amazing crisp builds. I love seeing coaches decide who the ace player will be and to see the perfect snipe build - or blunder where they guess the opponent's ace wrong. I want to see builds and micro that will blow my mind. That is STARCRAFT at it's finest.
But I enjoy more than that. I love competition at almost every level. I think the game is awesome at my poor level. I actually got into casting mid-master level players practice against each other because I wanted an excuse to be in the game. I used to watch 4-6 personal streams at a time. It didn't matter what race or skill.
As someone that's always been very passionate about my heritage (half Finnish) I cheer for every Finn. I don't care what tournament. I've attended several local LANs to cast the 200€ tournaments. Not because the 50-200 viewers were going to make me famous (they haven't) but because I FUCKING LOVE STARCRAFT.
So... which group do I belong to before I continue reading?
Casuals, easily. You show symptoms of respect for lower level players. /s
Haha thanks you have resumed my thoughts about this awkward article in one sentence
Fantastically good post. Thanks! Some observations from me below.
"Casual" crowd versus the "informed" crowd:
StarCraft (BW/SC2) is in my opinion the most difficult RTS that exists. It is difficult to understand and impossible to master. To understand it, you need to have at the very least, the insight that comes from casual playing.
I have tried to introduce it to a few of my friends that have never touched the game. The result has always been one of utter confusion. One friend has a kid brother that plays CS (and is considered good on a local level), this kid tried SC2 a year ago or so and just said this. "I could not understand a single thing that was happening, it was too complex". And that pretty much sums it up. This game is hard mechanically and cerebrally.
As such, it is always going to be a niche game attracting individuals that enjoy puzzles, trickery, planning, strategy, psychology, tactics, thinking on your feet (adapting to new information) and technical excellence such as multitasking, micro and macro.
Artosis compares it to chess. The only difference between chess and StarCraft is the lack of multitasking, micro and macro in the former.
Solution to the identity problem of StarCraft?
- Accept that it can not ever be a major e-sport for uninformed viewers. It is as specialized as Chess is. - Accept that flashy production and hype can only have temporary value. Lasting value comes from depth and consistency. - Accept that this limited crowd expects the highest possible competition in every tournament. That is: regional tournaments should only determine local heroes if it is justifiable such as crowning the best StarCraft player in the US. All other tournaments should be open to all.
This game is played over the net and as such transcends borders. Korean players should be able to play in any tournament anywhere except national championships. The current WCS is subsequently flawed.
StarCraft is also, more than any other game in my opinion, a game of the highest status possible. It is the high water mark of what competitive e-sport can be. As such, some aspects of the game should be wrestled out of Blizzards hands and given to the community, such as balance and tournament structure.
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
It doesn't. Region locking improving foreign play is a myth, anyone that has followed the scene in any kind of capacity knows this. The gap between top foreign players and korean players was at its closest during a time when there was absolutely NO region locking whatsoever. The gap has only grown wider over time.
Region locking has nothing to do with improving foreign play. It exists because there was a portion of the community that simply hated seeing an Asian man win everything. That's literally what it comes down to.
Look at tennis, and see how a player like Serena Williams is treated compared to other players such as Sharapova. This is a racial issue from the start and it's nothing new to sports.
Obviously we wouldn't watch anything if not for the entertainment, whether its hardcore or casual...
I think the Arsenal BPL commentators do a really good job of providing play by play and overall strategic analysis while at the same time interjecting bits of humor from their experiences as football players. It's professional, but it's not too dry. And that's ENGLISH FOOTBALL.
For StarCraft I think the cast should obviously be a bit more casual, but it should still focus on important things like "why did he not scout" that sub Diamond/Masters players can't figure out on their own. The cast shouldn't just be 20 minutes of play by play what's happening and jokes...
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
It doesn't. Region locking improving foreign play is a myth, anyone that has followed the scene in any kind of capacity knows this. The gap between top foreign players and korean players was at its closest during a time when there was absolutely NO region locking whatsoever. The gap has only grown wider over time.
Region locking has nothing to do with improving foreign play. It exists because there was a portion of the community that simply hated seeing an Asian man win everything. That's literally what it comes down to.
Has the amount of foreigner players in premier league made English players better? I could argue that the level of English players is the worst it's ever been. But is it because of the foreigner players in the league or the training of the youth? So can u really say that region locking was the reason of foreigners getting worse or was it actually made too late to save foreigner players?
I think it's not as black and white, whether region lock actually is good or bad for foreigner players. I think the foreigner scene has always been about those few good players but the total level of scene hasn't really changed that much compared to Korean scene.
The fact that to be the best you have train a lot and rather with people that are better or as good as you are. But were foreigners really training a lot with Koreans when regions were not locked? Getting stomped few times a year is not what makes u better but good training. And why Koreans are so good is that they have bigger pool of players giving it all to the game and better practice. I think region lock aims to widen the pool of foreigner players that can and want to play competitive (more price money left for them). With bigger pool of players aiming to the top there's more good practice partners to figure the game out with. And hopefully in the end that would end up the whole level of the foreigner scene catching up with Korean scene. At least I think that's what Blizzard is aiming for with region locking. Whether it actually works like that I'm not sure.
But I do think it's important that there's also tournaments were the top foreigners actually get to try their level with the best of the Koreans. I think they went abit too far with the region lock and more tournament for both should exist.
On February 02 2016 01:57 y0su wrote: I couldn't get past groups being mutually exclusive...
I enjoy watching the highest level competition where each player lives in a team-house and has had a week (or more) to prepare and practice amazing crisp builds. I love seeing coaches decide who the ace player will be and to see the perfect snipe build - or blunder where they guess the opponent's ace wrong. I want to see builds and micro that will blow my mind. That is STARCRAFT at it's finest.
But I enjoy more than that. I love competition at almost every level. I think the game is awesome at my poor level. I actually got into casting mid-master level players practice against each other because I wanted an excuse to be in the game. I used to watch 4-6 personal streams at a time. It didn't matter what race or skill.
As someone that's always been very passionate about my heritage (half Finnish) I cheer for every Finn. I don't care what tournament. I've attended several local LANs to cast the 200€ tournaments. Not because the 50-200 viewers were going to make me famous (they haven't) but because I FUCKING LOVE STARCRAFT.
So... which group do I belong to before I continue reading?
Neither, both, whatever. That's not the point. Continue reading.
I should have probably phrased it better.
New phrasing: the extreme versions of both categories are mutually exclusive!
fair enough - and after reading I'd put myself in the group that thinks most events have gotten far too casual AND hsc has gotten too serious. + Show Spoiler +
Both types have given up what makes them good in order to try to placate both groups. + Show Spoiler +
Up to 500 000 players A few hundred players worldwide that try to live from playing professionally 50-100 players (mostly Koreans) that may have a slim chance to qualify for Code S if they tried 32 players in Code S At most 8 players that could be called favorites to win Code S 2 finalists 1 champion
Choose whoever you want to watch, but don't tell people they are wrong, or not true fans or whatever if they choose a different quantile than you did. At the end of the day we are still all here to watch the games, whether we watch it only to see the champions, or whether we watch it only to see our personal favorites.
Thanks for the topic and the article. One comment from me for the perspective.
I consider myself to be the casual, fun oriented spectator. I enjoy flashy production, funny interviews and commentary. I am no expert in highest level play (at least not in LotV). BUT.
I like tennis. I like to watch Wimbledon. I do not like to watch some local tournament with players ranked on 1300 -1700 place in the world. I just value my time so that it is not worth spectating the players 1300-1700, even when they are from my region and their play might be fun.
I really like watching SC2. With the flashy production, interviews, stories behind each win and loss. I just value my time too much to watch the players on the 50-100 place in the world. I am just not interested. There is no point for me to watch the "local heroes". I want to watch the flashy production, interviews and stories WITH THE TOP PLAYERS IN THE WORLD!!!
At the end I turned on the Leipzig DreamHack, I liked the interviews, casting ... But I was not at all interested in the games. I had it just as a radio, was listening to it and doing my stuff ... Whenever a game started, I stopped watching. Worthless. I just watched lated from VOD the first and second game of uThermal against Showtime, as it had something interesting in it.
And the current WCS is a FUCKING INJUSTICE, which makes me to stop cheering for any of the "local heroes" in general. Now, I seriously dislike all the players, who expressed publicly on Twitter or here on TL their support of the new WCS format. Bastards!
And I believe, that even the other "casual audience" will value their time to be more worth than spectating players 50-100 with this injustice in place.
For the sake of this argument, consider the two mutually exclusive.
Very simplistic way of seeing things, and an already biased way of describing people's opinion about the WCS system. I don't think you can get anything relevant from this starting point.
Thinking that the opinion people have about WCS is just about this artificial "fun vs high skill" categorization is a cliche and can only lead to a cliche conclusion.
Now, don’t take all this as me shoving my opinions down your throat - I'm not trying to and I apologize if you feel that way. I’ve been vocal about not liking WCS in its current format, and most of you who know me will know quite clearly that I’m part of the category that enjoys high level play more than anything else.
And bam! Your biased starting point end up in a biased conclusion. You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide. You locked into your "foreigner = funny low skill guys vs Koreans = superior skilled players which can only be appreciated by people like me".
Reallisticly, the core of your opinion may just be conservatism and lack of long term view, and not the "love of high level play" (that, quite franckly, everybody has)
Don't go for simplistic categorization, they always end up being wrong. Above all, don't think other's opinion is different that yours because they're not educated enough in elite sc2 play.
You seem to have completely missed the message of the article because you got hung up on something I said in the introduction. That's quite ironic considering it's exactly what you're accusing me of.
What you quoted is not my conclusion. My conclusion is that there needs to be compromise to accommodate as many in the community as possible and not drive them out. If that's what you call black and white, sure? Can't say I agree with you though.
I don't call it black and white, I call it simplisitc, irrelevant and condescending.
For the sake of this argument, consider the two mutually exclusive.
Very simplistic way of seeing things, and an already biased way of describing people's opinion about the WCS system. I don't think you can get anything relevant from this starting point.
Thinking that the opinion people have about WCS is just about this artificial "fun vs high skill" categorization is a cliche and can only lead to a cliche conclusion.
Now, don’t take all this as me shoving my opinions down your throat - I'm not trying to and I apologize if you feel that way. I’ve been vocal about not liking WCS in its current format, and most of you who know me will know quite clearly that I’m part of the category that enjoys high level play more than anything else.
And bam! Your biased starting point end up in a biased conclusion. You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide. You locked into your "foreigner = funny low skill guys vs Koreans = superior skilled players which can only be appreciated by people like me".
Reallisticly, the core of your opinion may just be conservatism and lack of long term view, and not the "love of high level play" (that, quite franckly, everybody has)
Don't go for simplistic categorization, they always end up being wrong. Above all, don't think other's opinion is different that yours because they're not educated enough in elite sc2 play.
You seem to have completely missed the message of the article because you got hung up on something I said in the introduction. That's quite ironic considering it's exactly what you're accusing me of.
What you quoted is not my conclusion. My conclusion is that there needs to be compromise to accommodate as many in the community as possible and not drive them out. If that's what you call black and white, sure? Can't say I agree with you though.
I don't call it black and white, I call it simplisitc, irrelevant and condescending.
Nice article. You don't need all the apologizing for hurting people's feelings though. If you make enemies it just shows you stand for something.
I think the casters should study some famous sports commentators.
If you watch the world cup, there are long periods when they just say the name of the guy that receives the ball. They don't need to talk about game of thrones or tell jokes or other random stuff about their lives that nobody cares about but an audience that should rather be watching a reality show. I would really love to see more of that in e-sports too. And also, countless times from every single actual sc2 caster, they just don't have a clue about the match history of the players in the match they comment, which in turns results in the garbage gap-filling speech they serve us all the time.
I would be way more one sided than OP on the division of commentary between "fun" and "info". It should ONLY be info, like in professional sport. This should be football commentary level, not WWE commentary level. Not a single viewer cares about the casters life or their jokes or memes on stream, they turn in to watch SC2. If they wanted to have a laugh they would watch a humorist show instead, there are plenty of those and they are many times better at the job.
On February 02 2016 00:31 Gwavajuice wrote: You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide.
How does keeping the foreigners from playing against the best end up making them higher level players?
It doesn't. Region locking improving foreign play is a myth, anyone that has followed the scene in any kind of capacity knows this. The gap between top foreign players and korean players was at its closest during a time when there was absolutely NO region locking whatsoever. The gap has only grown wider over time.
Region locking has nothing to do with improving foreign play. It exists because there was a portion of the community that simply hated seeing an Asian man win everything. That's literally what it comes down to.
Without region locking there is little to no incentive for a foreign player to stay or go pro. How does less pro players mean higher skill?
The wide skill gap caused the region locking not the other way around.
I think this is exactly why the Artosis/Tasteless Castercombo is as much appreciated as it is by so many viewers. Artosis serves the harc-core viewer, Tasteless serves the casual-oriented viewer. But obviously it gets more problematic in regards to balance discussion or discussion in general. Also it shows how difficult it is to make a Starcraft we can all enjoy. If Blizzard aims only for perfect balance it might not be "flashy" enough for the casual gamer. At the same time a game that lacks balance or includes "flashy" features that are bad for deciding who is the better player is a pain in the ass for the pro gamers and the hardcore viewers. Blizzard has to find a good middleground that can be accepted my anyone. And thats a difficult task.
I think there are a lot of people who like both things: entertainment and competition. If anything those things don't just exist as polar opposites but on a spectrum and everybody who watches sc2 falls somewhere in between. This means that the best tournaments need to find the right amount of both.
Now I am a filthy casual by TL standard... : P Okay but to be serous, I don't think it is necessary to color the audience into two groups like black and white... it more like every color in between and plus some invisible radiation, and that is just the western community people watch starcraft for different reason but in the very end it just has to be entertaining to attract audience SKT beating the heal out of Afreeca earlier today is not exciting despite high level players Kungfu cup qualifier with previously mostly unknown new player beating IG and Zoo's veteran on the other hand is much more entertaining to watch
On February 02 2016 03:52 lohdon wrote: I think there are a lot of people who like both things: entertainment and competition. If anything those things don't just exist as polar opposites but on a spectrum and everybody who watches sc2 falls somewhere in between. This means that the best tournaments need to find the right amount of both.
Yeah and in general, the competivness is a part of entertainment. I guess this game does spawn some masochism, but the general assumption should be that people watch to have a good time. Whether this is due to production, due to the game, due to the players, due to the competition or due to any other reason is up to everybody's preferences. I personally feel like anybody who says he/she is just here for the competition has not really thought it through to begin with, because the game itself is probably the major reason they are here and not just who is better at it. But yeah, maybe some people really don't care what game they are watching, and what the players are doing, as long as they are going against each other. Dunno, sounds like a weird fetish to me, but yeah, those guys are welcome too. But that's what the meaning of watching only for the competition is. If someone is here for the game, he/she already has set a preference for a certain form of entertainment and then I find it very contradictory if they tell someone else what they should or should not be into.
I think this is a really great article, my big pet peeve however is how often you explained that this wasn't necessarily your view but the view of some. I felt like you "clarified" way too often that you were just saying both talking points and not necessarily agreeing with them, when in reality you should have just said them.
Not sure if this makes any sense, but I enjoyed the article nonetheless.
For the sake of this argument, consider the two mutually exclusive.
Very simplistic way of seeing things, and an already biased way of describing people's opinion about the WCS system. I don't think you can get anything relevant from this starting point.
Thinking that the opinion people have about WCS is just about this artificial "fun vs high skill" categorization is a cliche and can only lead to a cliche conclusion.
Now, don’t take all this as me shoving my opinions down your throat - I'm not trying to and I apologize if you feel that way. I’ve been vocal about not liking WCS in its current format, and most of you who know me will know quite clearly that I’m part of the category that enjoys high level play more than anything else.
And bam! Your biased starting point end up in a biased conclusion. You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide. You locked into your "foreigner = funny low skill guys vs Koreans = superior skilled players which can only be appreciated by people like me".
Reallisticly, the core of your opinion may just be conservatism and lack of long term view, and not the "love of high level play" (that, quite franckly, everybody has)
Don't go for simplistic categorization, they always end up being wrong. Above all, don't think other's opinion is different that yours because they're not educated enough in elite sc2 play.
You seem to have completely missed the message of the article because you got hung up on something I said in the introduction. That's quite ironic considering it's exactly what you're accusing me of.
What you quoted is not my conclusion. My conclusion is that there needs to be compromise to accommodate as many in the community as possible and not drive them out. If that's what you call black and white, sure? Can't say I agree with you though.
I don't call it black and white, I call it simplisitc, irrelevant and condescending.
Oh well.
I'm sorry but have to agree with him, at least to me your categories translated to clownery aka foreigner SC2 vs. honest competition aka Korean SC2 and that is condescending.
Anyways, I think I understand where you like to go with this article but I also think you are missing a few very important points. For me casual viewers are casuals because they don't follow always the best possible player/competition, they like the SC2 and watch what is on when they have time to watch some games regardless of the quality and the players they see then are the players they like the most. I like watching Korean SC2 but mostly I don't have time to watch it live due to time zones and I'm not interested enough to watch the VOD's. I watch much more Foreigners, therefore I'm more interested in them doing well in Tournaments too. This has nothing to do with “funny interviews” or “flashy production” and I hate awkward trashtalk..
Regarding the show-aspect of casting or player personalities, I don't think you can apply your categories casual/hardcore to draw a line for that, in my opinion this comes much more down to personal preferences on both sides of the fence. I see myself as a casual but I don't like overhyped cast at all, same applies for wannabe “super professional” casts where casters have to check every word spoken – my preference is a mainly analytical but relaxed style where casters are allowed to state their own preferences/bias like Narruto or Apollo in earlier years but that is of course just my opinion. On the other side, I think it was today's SPL- LR where some people praised the Korean cast for constantly shouting...
But now to the main point – in your outlook you write the differences between hardcore and casual are the reason for recent conflicts and understanding them would maybe the key for solving them. And you write the goal now should be to find a way to accommodate both.
In my opinion these conflicts are just the fallout and not the reason for a much deeper problem – there are not enough viewers and therefore money in the scene. The hole welfare-system vs. increasing foreigner skill-discussion is IMO totally beside the point.
For me Blizzard reasoning behind these changes had nothing to do with quality of skill/competition or the Foreigner/Korean Scene, they try desperately to increase the overall viewership to attract more Sponsors and Tournaments. We all have seen the size of the SC2-Stage at Dreamhack. Add to that the roomers that ESL declined to continue producing WCS and today's letter from the former Kespa-President stating how hard it was to get Sponsors for this years SPL. At the moment both scenes pretty much depend on Blizzard-Money. I also liked the 2015 WCS-System more but viewership got down even more so I can fully understand why Blizzard had to pull the plug and try something different. They can't justify to pump even more money in a system where they have no chance for any revenue out of their investment – most of the existing fan base already bought the game or decided not to – either way there is nothing in for Blizzard.
Of course increasing the viewership is a much bigger discussion as just the WCS-System (Gameplay, RTS vs. other E-Sports and so on), but I think we should stop fighting the other half of the community, casters or Blizzard/other Organisations and instead think about growing the hole scene, regardless of individual preferences, else there won't be much competitive SC2 in 2017 for all of us.
PS: I know my english is pretty bad but I hope you can understand my thoughts anyways
For the sake of this argument, consider the two mutually exclusive.
Very simplistic way of seeing things, and an already biased way of describing people's opinion about the WCS system. I don't think you can get anything relevant from this starting point.
Thinking that the opinion people have about WCS is just about this artificial "fun vs high skill" categorization is a cliche and can only lead to a cliche conclusion.
Now, don’t take all this as me shoving my opinions down your throat - I'm not trying to and I apologize if you feel that way. I’ve been vocal about not liking WCS in its current format, and most of you who know me will know quite clearly that I’m part of the category that enjoys high level play more than anything else.
And bam! Your biased starting point end up in a biased conclusion. You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide. You locked into your "foreigner = funny low skill guys vs Koreans = superior skilled players which can only be appreciated by people like me".
Reallisticly, the core of your opinion may just be conservatism and lack of long term view, and not the "love of high level play" (that, quite franckly, everybody has)
Don't go for simplistic categorization, they always end up being wrong. Above all, don't think other's opinion is different that yours because they're not educated enough in elite sc2 play.
You seem to have completely missed the message of the article because you got hung up on something I said in the introduction. That's quite ironic considering it's exactly what you're accusing me of.
What you quoted is not my conclusion. My conclusion is that there needs to be compromise to accommodate as many in the community as possible and not drive them out. If that's what you call black and white, sure? Can't say I agree with you though.
I don't call it black and white, I call it simplisitc, irrelevant and condescending.
Oh well.
I'm sorry but have to agree with him, at least to me your categories translated to clownery aka foreigner SC2 vs. honest competition aka Korean SC2 and that is condescending.
Anyways, I think I understand where you like to go with this article but I also think you are missing a few very important points. For me casual viewers are casuals because they don't follow always the best possible player/competition, they like the SC2 and watch what is on when they have time to watch some games regardless of the quality and the players they see then are the players they like the most. I like watching Korean SC2 but mostly I don't have time to watch it live due to time zones and I'm not interested enough to watch the VOD's. I watch much more Foreigners, therefore I'm more interested in them doing well in Tournaments too. This has nothing to do with “funny interviews” or “flashy production” and I hate awkward trashtalk..
Regarding the show-aspect of casting or player personalities, I don't think you can apply your categories casual/hardcore to draw a line for that, in my opinion this comes much more down to personal preferences on both sides of the fence. I see myself as a casual but I don't like overhyped cast at all, same applies for wannabe “super professional” casts where casters have to check every word spoken – my preference is a mainly analytical but relaxed style where casters are allowed to state their own preferences/bias like Narruto or Apollo in earlier years but that is of course just my opinion. On the other side, I think it was today's SPL- LR where some people praised the Korean cast for constantly shouting...
But now to the main point – in your outlook you write the differences between hardcore and casual are the reason for recent conflicts and understanding them would maybe the key for solving them. And you write the goal now should be to find a way to accommodate both.
In my opinion these conflicts are just the fallout and not the reason for a much deeper problem – there are not enough viewers and therefore money in the scene. The hole welfare-system vs. increasing foreigner skill-discussion is IMO totally beside the point.
For me Blizzard reasoning behind these changes had nothing to do with quality of skill/competition or the Foreigner/Korean Scene, they try desperately to increase the overall viewership to attract more Sponsors and Tournaments. We all have seen the size of the SC2-Stage at Dreamhack. Add to that the roomers that ESL declined to continue producing WCS and today's letter from the former Kespa-President stating how hard it was to get Sponsors for this years SPL. At the moment both scenes pretty much depend on Blizzard-Money. I also liked the 2015 WCS-System more but viewership got down even more so I can fully understand why Blizzard had to pull the plug and try something different. They can't justify to pump even more money in a system where they have no chance for any revenue out of their investment – most of the existing fan base already bought the game or decided not to – either way there is nothing in for Blizzard.
Of course increasing the viewership is a much bigger discussion as just the WCS-System (Gameplay, RTS vs. other E-Sports and so on), but I think we should stop fighting the other half of the community, casters or Blizzard/other Organisations and instead think about growing the hole scene, regardless of individual preferences, else there won't be much competitive SC2 in 2017 for all of us.
PS: I know my english is pretty bad but I hope you can understand my thoughts anyways
Thank'you for your thoughts, finally a guy that makes sense in this thread.
Parting and MC combine skill and personality. I like watching gsl, but the round of 16 group selection is also very entertaining. I'm definitely on the hardcore side of things but I love it when we have both.
On February 02 2016 03:41 Shiiken222 wrote: I think this is exactly why the Artosis/Tasteless Castercombo is as much appreciated as it is by so many viewers. Artosis serves the harc-core viewer, Tasteless serves the casual-oriented viewer. But obviously it gets more problematic in regards to balance discussion or discussion in general. Also it shows how difficult it is to make a Starcraft we can all enjoy. If Blizzard aims only for perfect balance it might not be "flashy" enough for the casual gamer. At the same time a game that lacks balance or includes "flashy" features that are bad for deciding who is the better player is a pain in the ass for the pro gamers and the hardcore viewers. Blizzard has to find a good middleground that can be accepted my anyone. And thats a difficult task.
I think I must be one of the only people on earth who can't stand Tastosis now.
Don't get me wrong. I loved them in the early days of SC2. They have been the guys behind some of the hypest casts in the history of the game. Nowadays though I feel like they'd rather be casting Heroes and this is just a job to them
you hit the nail on the head and even though you say that the 2 groups are just "rough images", they are actually really accurate based on the current scene. i think a lot of ppl in group 2 like myself feel the same way. unfortuneatly blizzard seems to care a little bit more about the casual fans. great read thanks for the write up
On February 02 2016 01:14 NonY wrote: Just following the example of sports media in the US, that WCS cast is the kind of vibe you'd get from a radio show or podcast the day after, or from the live call of local radio guys or whatever. For the main standard live call of the game, they would not go with something so polarizing.
I think that the producers of SC2 broadcasts are eager to find anything that will pull more people in and hook them. When you do something like that, you see a ton of extremely positive feedback and evidence that many people got hooked. But how many did you repel? And how many of the people that you "hooked" were already fans who just enjoyed this broadcast more than usual? Is the call of the game a variable that you want to be tweaking that much?
I think the goal should be finding the atmosphere that best suits SC2. American football and soccer and tennis and golf have all settled on different styles of calling the game. There is far less variety between all the announcers calling the same sport as there is variety between different sports. SC2, however, has a ton of variety within itself. I think the WCS producers need to take a good look at all the different ways our great variety of announcers, commentators and analysts have called the games and decide on the best style. And all the guys calling the games for the main live broadcasts of the major tournaments need to homogenize to that style. If they don't want to do that, or can't, then they can make a career in some other corner of the scene, like with a podcast or with their own alternate casts of the games or streaming or whatever.
I think the focus should be placed more on the casual viewer because the hardcore viewer will always go the extra mile, i.e., by watching games more than once, by making threads about them, etc. The casual viewer, on the other hand, will most likely not watch a game more than once. Also, the hardcore viewer has a more profound understanding of the game and can draw their own conclusions.
On February 02 2016 04:36 Makro wrote: people are too fragmented nowadays, as for me i enjoy both foreigncraft and koreancraft and i know what i'm looking for when i'm watching both of them
Exactly. This is also one reason I wanted "foreigner only" tournaments already a few years ago - ever since the 2012 EU SC2 WCS. I'd also watch "Code A" or some sort of "Korean 'B' scene" (which many would say is what's lacking in the current system).
edit: fully agree with Myt:
The changes to WCS have a lot more to do with trying to keep SC2 alive in the western esports scene. Having foreigner tournaments is better than no tournaments. This has nothing to do with casual/fun/hardcore/serious.
and NonY:
I do wish we had more "professional" broadcasts and let the "personalities" flow in recap shows.
Very interesting perspective, I really enjoyed the read.
While in my mind StarCraft presents the most intense and demanding competition out of any esport (not trying to start a war here), it's fans and community are not substantially different than the other games. What I mean by that is that the majority of the proscene related content isn't connected to any event or competition cycle. The largest part of the content consumed by progaming fans in any esports are the player streams and combined the viewer numbers would always eclipse those of the events (notable exception would be Smash). This is where the connection between fans and players, or personalities, is nurtured. While Im sure most regular followers of any players are always up to speed with their competitive schedules, in terms of entertainment value the tournament formats are rarely in my mind a serious concern. The very need for debate shows that there are no two groups of fans concerned with that issue. I think it's just the diehard fans who are in this for the competition are raising questions about the format. The rest just want to watch Destiny, Winter, TLO etc stream as often as possible. Taking care of the fans that want daily entertainment through players streams is just as important if not more for the development of the scene.
On February 02 2016 01:14 NonY wrote: Just following the example of sports media in the US, that WCS cast is the kind of vibe you'd get from a radio show or podcast the day after, or from the live call of local radio guys or whatever. For the main standard live call of the game, they would not go with something so polarizing.
I think that the producers of SC2 broadcasts are eager to find anything that will pull more people in and hook them. When you do something like that, you see a ton of extremely positive feedback and evidence that many people got hooked. But how many did you repel? And how many of the people that you "hooked" were already fans who just enjoyed this broadcast more than usual? Is the call of the game a variable that you want to be tweaking that much?
I think the goal should be finding the atmosphere that best suits SC2. American football and soccer and tennis and golf have all settled on different styles of calling the game. There is far less variety between all the announcers calling the same sport as there is variety between different sports. SC2, however, has a ton of variety within itself. I think the WCS producers need to take a good look at all the different ways our great variety of announcers, commentators and analysts have called the games and decide on the best style. And all the guys calling the games for the main live broadcasts of the major tournaments need to homogenize to that style. If they don't want to do that, or can't, then they can make a career in some other corner of the scene, like with a podcast or with their own alternate casts of the games or streaming or whatever.
This is the way I'd like things to go too.
How to find this best atmosphere though. Football (soccer) commentating differs quite a lot per nation for example and SC2 is a lot more complicated as well so where to settle on the casual to pro spectrum exactly.
I personally like variety in the SC2 shows I watch btw
On February 02 2016 07:39 disciple wrote: Taking care of the fans that want daily entertainment through players streams is just as important if not more for the development of the scene.
Great point. I think that StarCraft II needs content - aside of actual games - centered around the game itself. I think this side of content is almost nonexistant right now. Tutorials are outdated, build orders are not easy to find for lower-level players, and I think that nowadays people not necessarily want to read prediction/review articles. I'm not saying that these articles are bad, they are great, but content easier to digest and not so "insider-like" would be certainly helpful to an extent.
I don't know about other scenes, but I get the feeling that they create a lot of things to talk about and engage people. Nowadays "content" is what we call funny/outrageous things people do and drunk streams...
EDIT: Look at other competitive games. Their biggest community websites have a lot of things for entry players. LoL, DotA, HS have builds/decklists and CS:GO has demos of I believe almost all meaningful games. What does SC2 have besides replays after foreign tournaments? Super-rare community BO breakdowns, that are very analytical and serve only very dedicated players. It's not easily digestible or entry-level content. And these replays are not a reliable source of information for entry level players to make them understand the game, that is super hard from the start.
It's hard for me to believe there are really a lot of people who are into SC2 but not looking for the competitive side of things. Everybody who wants casters to be talking about pizza instead of build orders are probably playing LoL these days...
To start this off, this was well written and it should be dicussed. Regioin Lock is a complicate aspect and there should be a healthy dicussion like. But I dislike how it was structured and what points you bring up to talke about the issue. And these are the reasons why:
My Issues with the Archetype section: - Because you begin with this, you are litterally trying to establish this "THEM or US' mentality. You are presenting it as if these two group have no overlap or that these two groups are in direct conflict with each other. The problem with this is that, almost everything you list that defines the two groups are not opposites of each other. Having more of one of them does not prevent having more of the other. That is a big issue with how you present them, which helps dilute the issue. - I hate how you label the first group as 'The fun-oriented spectator'. Based on how you defined them, I think the better term that would paint the group better would be something like: 'The emotion-oriented spectator'. It's about the show making you feel welcome, the stories created about rivials clashing again, or a champion trying to keep his title, or feeling pumped up and excited to see the next match. This is about emotionally driven show, and calling it 'fun' undercuts it by a lot. And when you label this group as more 'emotion-oriented', it should be more apperent why people shouldn't see these two opposing each other. Emotions and competition are not fighting against each other. They are two different factors that work together to make 1 great thing. - Using the words 'causual' and 'hardcore'. Why did you even bring them up? I have so many issues with these additional labels since they bring so much more connatation just with those words alone. Additionally, ff your a person who is invested to the personal rarivary, or those who bother to read interviews, and follow stories of SC2, you have long past the threshold that most people would even call causal. You're more closer to what people would call a 'hardcore' fan. - The entire Archetype section dosen't help contribute into helping exampling the conflict. Meaning, it wasn't helpful and brings a fake demmila that isn't needed. I honestly think it would have been better off if you left out the entire archetype section because what you describle within the Conflict section is far more helpful to paint an accurate picture of what you think is the issue.
My issue with the WCS section - To attempt to simplifiy Region lock to a debate about 'fun' or 'competition' is misguided, in my humble opinoin. If you're looking at this as 'simply cater to one group', that is so narrow minded. Region lock is not happenign because of those natures, or not specially because of that. And the focus shouldn't be about that, but rather, the short term cost vs the possible long term gains. If anything, I think the questions about region lock should be somewhere around this:
1) Do I (the spectator) believe this will foster better regional players and draw in more viewers for each tournment? 2) Do I believe this is better for the short and/or long term of SC2? 3) Do I believe that this short term cost (Koeran scene + etc) is worth it for Starcraft's longevity? 4) Do I think there is a better way to achive these goals? 5) Do I think I'm willing and other people are willing to only see the best regional players for possible benefits in the long run or rather I just watch the best players in the world with a different long term plan?
...Okay, I think I'm done ranting. Personal thoughts about the casters and what people what.
I would hope that the casters' job are to be informative in why we (the viewers) should be in invested the match. Maybe it's through being excited in themselves because excitement is contagious (when something that is worth that excitment happens). Maybe showing that inner fan themselves, speculating like the viewer and/or making funny comments that a normal person would make when watching. Maybe inform the viewers the history of these players so we can have some invesetment on them. Or maybe it's through the ability to articulate why this strategy is so billiant or why this player is acting in this fanshion. But most important, they need to heighten our emotions for when a big moment happens.
And I say this, the casters should ideally not be bias as a whole, but they should be well informed about the matches and be emotinoally driven like the fans. Many of the most beloved commentaries are those that does both well. It's not a balancing act with them, but rather using both of them to strenghts to make a better boardcast.
Region lock and that Koren scene... I'm indifferent to it. I'm a casual player who watches a few tournments every once in awhile, but I don't follow any personailities or pay attentions to bigger stories. I just come to see interesting new plays.
The hardcore people will never agree with the analysis anyway. Plus you're already catering to a small minority of people. You have to to cater to the casuals. Any major sport does this. Just look at the commentating for an NFL game. I'm assuming soccer / euro football games are the same.
On February 02 2016 08:25 guitarizt wrote: The hardcore people will never agree with the analysis anyway. Plus you're already catering to a small minority of people. You have to to cater to the casuals. Any major sport does this. Just look at the commentating for an NFL game. I'm assuming soccer / euro football games are the same.
I don't think any of the major sports is complex enough to require in-depth analysis commentary. It's all about outsmarting/outplaying the opponent in a game with full visibility and no strategy. Just tactics - which often is called "strategy", but in fact is not. Many casual fans of soccer are literally self-entitled experts of the game for example... that's why relatively simple games cater to bigger audiences.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think tactics =/= strategy
StarCraft is like classical music, when compared to the pop music that is League of Legends, and should be marketed as such. That's its niche, and losing what makes it distinct just for the purposes of "bring in new viewers" is equivalent to suicide. With that said, the way to foster the scene isn't so much to bring in more viewers (though that is definitely important), but to have its viewers spend more money. That's how classical music survive. Flavour of the month and local heroes only do so much to help the scene, just like how movie soundtracks alone can't sustain an orchestra.
Funnily enough, I have actually been offered ads with the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra on this website, something that doesn't happen in most other places.
On February 02 2016 08:25 guitarizt wrote: The hardcore people will never agree with the analysis anyway. Plus you're already catering to a small minority of people. You have to to cater to the casuals. Any major sport does this. Just look at the commentating for an NFL game. I'm assuming soccer / euro football games are the same.
I don't think any of the major sports is complex enough to require in-depth analysis commentary. It's all about outsmarting/outplaying the opponent in a game with full visibility and no strategy. Just tactics - which often is called "strategy", but in fact is not. Many casual fans of soccer are literally self-entitled experts of the game for example... that's why relatively simple games cater to bigger audiences.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think tactics =/= strategy
this is WAAAAAY off topic but...
One of the reasons I love American football so much is the strategy. Many find the 30 seconds between plays (excluding the longer breaks for commercials in pro matches) boring but they're there because coaches can change players and call intricate plays - as well captains making adjustments based on what the other side is showing. Some of this stuff gets lightly mentioned by the commentators but so much more could be... And is during the half-time shows and post-game analysis all week.
Back on topic... I think a lot of the scene could/would enjoy this "hardcore" and "casual" content OUTSIDE of events. Player interviews, trash talk and other things that let the personalities shine before events as well as in depth breakdowns of strategies and tactics after the tournament has ended.
Awesome post, very constructive. Although the OP is simplifying things, that's a good way to start with, and very common for example in modern science: You build a simple model and you try to see if it can reproduce your observations and to which extent. Well understood (in its moderate version), his model explains to some extent part of the recent struggles within the community. Not too bad, social models are the hardest as we humans are all crazy...
Correct the model or not, self-awareness is essential for the progress of any human group. If people know what the interests of other members of the group are, and are able to value them as legit and see merit in them, they (we) can reach a compromise that benefits the group/community as a whole.
From my point of view, Blizzard has always tried to please the whole spectrum, intending to reach the largest audience for his product (and passion). As doing it with every single feature is impossible, sometimes the results please more people in one sub-group than in the other. The community has failed to recognize that both interests are legit, and part of the group less pleased by a change feels attacked every time something changes. From here on, the action seems to depend on the group: The more casual members loose interest and leave the community, therefore it shrinks. The more "hardcore" members stay in it, as they have invested more of his life into it, but still feel negative. The result is an increasingly smaller, more "hardcore", and more negative community.
Now, how do we address this? I think, as others in this thread do, that Blizzard only sees one way out: Attracting new members. And it is clear that out there everybody is a casual. Therefore, recently many Bilzzard decisions tend towards benefiting the "casual" group. This leads to more negativity in the existing community, which is clearly bad for attracting new members. If this is the only action taken, there is a good chance it will fail. Blizzard realizes it, and starts actions to please the existing community: Community Feedback. This initially works, hardcore members are somewhat pleased, constructive ideas arise, negativity decreases, and we all get the best iteration of the game: LOTV.
BUT after the release the improvements in the game are not so fast, Blizzard/DK thinks the best for the game is to have some stability and promote casuals to join the community. Again the community fails to recognize merit in Blizzard's position, and Negativity strikes back. Community Feedback does not resolve the problem anymore, because it fails in the most important point: To show the community that Blizzard's decision is legit and has a clear goal, even when it might be wrong.
So, what do we do now? Can we live together? I think self-awareness inside the community is again the key point: (1) ALL Blizzard, teams, casual members, hardcore members, kespa, etc. want SC2 to succeed in the long term. (2) Everybody thinks it has good reasons to act as they do. They may be proved wrong in the future, but that's ok because of point (1). (3) Nobody in the community will get exactly what he wants, because there are several legit interests. Learn to live with it, enjoy what you like from the game and try to convince others to join your view over time. If you cannot live with it, you are hurting yourself. (4) Negativity in the community is acting against the growth of it. It discourages new members to join. If you are being constantly negative, you're acting against (1) and against yourself.
1) Do I (the spectator) believe this will foster better regional players and draw in more viewers for each tournment? 2) Do I believe this is better for the short and/or long term of SC2? 3) Do I believe that this short term cost (Koeran scene + etc) is worth it for Starcraft's longevity? 4) Do I think there is a better way to achive these goals? 5) Do I think I'm willing and other people are willing to only see the best regional players for possible benefits in the long run or rather I just watch the best players in the world with a different long term plan?
1) No 2) No 3) No 4) There certainly couldn't be anything worse 5) No
On February 02 2016 08:25 guitarizt wrote: The hardcore people will never agree with the analysis anyway. Plus you're already catering to a small minority of people. You have to to cater to the casuals. Any major sport does this. Just look at the commentating for an NFL game. I'm assuming soccer / euro football games are the same.
I don't think any of the major sports is complex enough to require in-depth analysis commentary. It's all about outsmarting/outplaying the opponent in a game with full visibility and no strategy. Just tactics - which often is called "strategy", but in fact is not. Many casual fans of soccer are literally self-entitled experts of the game for example... that's why relatively simple games cater to bigger audiences.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think tactics =/= strategy
One of the reasons I love American football so much is the strategy. Many find the 30 seconds between plays (excluding the longer breaks for commercials in pro matches) boring but they're there because coaches can change players and call intricate plays - as well captains making adjustments based on what the other side is showing. Some of this stuff gets lightly mentioned by the commentators but so much more could be... And is during the half-time shows and post-game analysis all week.
Maybe I overstated what I meant. I'm not saying that major sports are simple or anything, but they don't require that many strategic calls depending on only one person during the match...
1) Do I (the spectator) believe this will foster better regional players and draw in more viewers for each tournment? 2) Do I believe this is better for the short and/or long term of SC2? 3) Do I believe that this short term cost (Koeran scene + etc) is worth it for Starcraft's longevity? 4) Do I think there is a better way to achive these goals? 5) Do I think I'm willing and other people are willing to only see the best regional players for possible benefits in the long run or rather I just watch the best players in the world with a different long term plan?
1) No 2) No 3) No 4) There certainly couldn't be anything worse 5) No
On February 02 2016 08:25 guitarizt wrote: The hardcore people will never agree with the analysis anyway. Plus you're already catering to a small minority of people. You have to to cater to the casuals. Any major sport does this. Just look at the commentating for an NFL game. I'm assuming soccer / euro football games are the same.
Sports commentaries are awesome.
They say something along the lines of "He took the small thingy to the score thingy" and then they make lines on the screen/map as if it matters. Then trace how random guys run back and forth.
Totally intellectual and not for noobs
------- Back on topic--the issue is not that there is an us vs them mentality. The issue is that 99% of the population thinks they are the hardcore part of the population, but they're really in the casual part of the population, but pretend to be in the hardcore part of the population.
So you have companies using actual data metrics to make decisions, find out they need to cater to casuals, and the casuals spending more time telling people they are hardcore than the spend working on mechanics. So you end up with a bunch of try hards yelling that the game is not hard enough because a pro on some stream they watched was able to do a maneuver one time.
1) Do I (the spectator) believe this will foster better regional players and draw in more viewers for each tournment? 2) Do I believe this is better for the short and/or long term of SC2? 3) Do I believe that this short term cost (Koeran scene + etc) is worth it for Starcraft's longevity? 4) Do I think there is a better way to achive these goals? 5) Do I think I'm willing and other people are willing to only see the best regional players for possible benefits in the long run or rather I just watch the best players in the world with a different long term plan?
1) No 2) No 3) No 4) There certainly couldn't be anything worse 5) No
Damn that was constructive
Like I said earlier. I have no desire to be temp banned again. My thoughts on people who support WCS 2016 should be known by now
On February 02 2016 08:57 showstealer1829 wrote: 1) Do I (the spectator) believe this will foster better regional players and draw in more viewers for each tournment? 2) Do I believe this is better for the short and/or long term of SC2? 3) Do I believe that this short term cost (Koeran scene + etc) is worth it for Starcraft's longevity? 4) Do I think there is a better way to achive these goals? 5) Do I think I'm willing and other people are willing to only see the best regional players for possible benefits in the long run or rather I just watch the best players in the world with a different long term plan?
1) No 2) No 3) No 4) There certainly couldn't be anything worse 5) No
1) Yes, but not short-term 2) Yes, for the long term 3) Not to the extent Korea is hurt right now. 4) Yes, region lock + 3/4 seasons in Korea 5) Why only see one of them? You can watch WCS + GSL + SPL
On February 02 2016 08:25 guitarizt wrote: The hardcore people will never agree with the analysis anyway. Plus you're already catering to a small minority of people. You have to to cater to the casuals. Any major sport does this. Just look at the commentating for an NFL game. I'm assuming soccer / euro football games are the same.
I don't think any of the major sports is complex enough to require in-depth analysis commentary. It's all about outsmarting/outplaying the opponent in a game with full visibility and no strategy. Just tactics - which often is called "strategy", but in fact is not. Many casual fans of soccer are literally self-entitled experts of the game for example... that's why relatively simple games cater to bigger audiences.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think tactics =/= strategy
One of the reasons I love American football so much is the strategy. Many find the 30 seconds between plays (excluding the longer breaks for commercials in pro matches) boring but they're there because coaches can change players and call intricate plays - as well captains making adjustments based on what the other side is showing. Some of this stuff gets lightly mentioned by the commentators but so much more could be... And is during the half-time shows and post-game analysis all week.
Maybe I overstated what I meant. I'm not saying that major sports are simple or anything, but they don't require that many strategic calls depending on only one person during the match...
If you actually play a sport you will know 100% that you don't have full information. Spectators have full information, the coach *might* have 90% of the information. But visibility, personal responsibility, and team dynamics is not something that any one person can see when on the field. When the offensive line in football is busy watching their guy, and they don't see the second guy behind his target slip through a running play--that is because vision is limited. When the quarterback throws a hundred yard toss to his target--not everyone sees it until the deed is already done. There is a LOT of actual strategy in controlling player information, player accessibility, player visibility, and terrain mobility. On top of that--there's the actual strategy discussions on the coach level where formation efficiency, threat assessment, player redundancy (you do need to let players rest even during the game), etc... all come into play. There's as much strategy to cycling when your top players get on the field as there is getting them off the field to sit and drink water. ALL the players need to be aware of it. The captains, the coach, etc....
The difference between sports and chess is not the amount of strategy involved--nor even the amount of strategic responsibility involved. The difference is real life decisions versus real life problems. Making the right strategic play when the other guy is faster, stronger, quicker, more destrous, etc... Will produce the opposite results. In sports its not just making the right strategic play, but the correct resource manipulation play. If they are faster than you--don't try to outrun them. If they are stronger than you, don't try to muscle them. Etc... Knowing what resources you have in a sports match is as important as knowing when to take your 3rd base.
The reason sports commentaries are shit is because the casual viewers DO NOT CARE how many minutes the third stringer has been resting before getting on the court for the 5 minutes of rest he is supposed to give the first stringer. The casual viewers don't care what the weight differences are between specific offensive linemen and the different postures, grips, and knee shifts each has to do depending on who they are facing off against. The don't care what field positions are only there to restrict player vision. And they don't care about different baseball stances there are to maximize hand reaction speed. They just don't. They care about home runs, touchdowns, and goals. They care about star players being injured, or not injured. They care about how many injuries, more so than what the proper rotation options have to be used to compensate for omnipresent injuries.
Viewers are casual at heart. They are only hardcore in mind.
While i probably bend more towards the "competition oriented" archetype i do enjoy fun
I think casters and tournament formats can do better than this. As mentioned HSC is more about fun and hype and sillyness and its a clear premise, the fact it also had high level competition and informative casting made it absolutely great.
I wish WCS, a tournament series to decide the very best, could take itself a bit more seriously.
I always love Rotterdam casts because he is hyped and fun, but more important, he always takes the games seriously and knows when its time to stop goofing and go back to the game (and of course, his analysis is good). Sometimes im paying attention to the screen, sometimes im not. When i have my attention on screen the caster can help me catch as much information as i can while watching, when im not audio should be enough to have an idea of what is going on. High standards, but we have great, experienced casters that are fully capable of doing it (if they are not dead after 10 hours of casting). Of course, if i am a minority, f*ck me.
edit: actually, i know i am a minority, but i also know there is a reasonable public interested in analytical casts and enjoys top level competition more than anything else. Its not such a small minority that can be ignored, we are here on TL and you cannot count us with your fingers.
The more I watch the more I don't care for WCS korean-lock. I watch vods with Korean players and don't watch vods without Korean players. So nothing changed except I watch much more smaller Korean events like Olimo.
On February 02 2016 09:18 Superbanana wrote: Awesome article!
While i probably bend more towards the "competition oriented" archetype i do enjoy fun
I think casters and tournament formats can do better than this. As mentioned HSC is more about fun and hype and sillyness and its a clear premise, the fact it also had high level competition and informative casting made it absolutely great.
I wish WCS, a tournament series to decide the very best, could take itself a bit more seriously.
I always love Rotterdam casts because he is hyped and fun, but more important, he always takes the games seriously and knows when its time to stop goofing and go back to the game (and of course, his analysis is good). Sometimes im paying attention to the screen, sometimes im not. When i have my attention on screen the caster can help me catch as much information as i can while watching, when im not audio should be enough to have an idea of what is going on. High standards, but we have great, experienced casters that are fully capable of doing it (if they are not dead after 10 hours of casting). Of course, if i am a minority, f*ck me.
edit: actually, i know i am a minority, but i also know there is a reasonable public interested in analytical casts and enjoys top level competition more than anything else. Its not such a small minority that can be ignored, we are here on TL and you cannot count us with your fingers.
I wish that it got split. There's always about 15-30 minutes of dead time between matches, and sometimes even between games. Why not codify it? Why not have hype commentary (with light analysis) for the game itself, and then deep level analysis for breaks in between.
So instead of waiting 20 minutes looking at a countdown timer, you have 2-3 five minute long analysis (maybe longer) sessions that just uses 2-3 screenshots. Have one person do an analysis of an important moment for one player, and then a second analysis on the other player. They could even streamline it more.
Opening Build Analysis. Interesting Midgame Moment. Final Fight Analysis.
If nothing interesting happened in the midgame, skip it and just do an in depth build analysis. Player A chose Build X because Player B is known for Y and hence when in Map C Player A wants to be ready for Z--BUT here is the tiny change he made to the build either by accident or intentionally.
Then you have them do an analysis of the final fight (or maybe the last 2 fights) and talk about why one side won over the other. If the game was long/back and forth enough then you go deep on 1-2 midgame moments.
By doing this you essentially do a recap of the game that gives a general narrative of a player's mind set. You tell the viewers "This is how he started, this cool thing happened in the middle, and this is where he won/lost" you do it for both players at the end of each match. And as the match progresses there is time for the viewers to pause, think about what just happened, and then be told the narrative of what's going on behind the screen.
On February 02 2016 09:18 Superbanana wrote: Awesome article!
While i probably bend more towards the "competition oriented" archetype i do enjoy fun
I think casters and tournament formats can do better than this. As mentioned HSC is more about fun and hype and sillyness and its a clear premise, the fact it also had high level competition and informative casting made it absolutely great.
I wish WCS, a tournament series to decide the very best, could take itself a bit more seriously.
I always love Rotterdam casts because he is hyped and fun, but more important, he always takes the games seriously and knows when its time to stop goofing and go back to the game (and of course, his analysis is good). Sometimes im paying attention to the screen, sometimes im not. When i have my attention on screen the caster can help me catch as much information as i can while watching, when im not audio should be enough to have an idea of what is going on. High standards, but we have great, experienced casters that are fully capable of doing it (if they are not dead after 10 hours of casting). Of course, if i am a minority, f*ck me.
edit: actually, i know i am a minority, but i also know there is a reasonable public interested in analytical casts and enjoys top level competition more than anything else. Its not such a small minority that can be ignored, we are here on TL and you cannot count us with your fingers.
I wish that it got split. There's always about 15-30 minutes of dead time between matches, and sometimes even between games. Why not codify it? Why not have hype commentary (with light analysis) for the game itself, and then deep level analysis for breaks in between.
So instead of waiting 20 minutes looking at a countdown timer, you have 2-3 five minute long analysis (maybe longer) sessions that just uses 2-3 screenshots. Have one person do an analysis of an important moment for one player, and then a second analysis on the other player. They could even streamline it more.
Opening Build Analysis. Interesting Midgame Moment. Final Fight Analysis.
If nothing interesting happened in the midgame, skip it and just do an in depth build analysis. Player A chose Build X because Player B is known for Y and hence when in Map C Player A wants to be ready for Z--BUT here is the tiny change he made to the build either by accident or intentionally.
Then you have them do an analysis of the final fight (or maybe the last 2 fights) and talk about why one side won over the other. If the game was long/back and forth enough then you go deep on 1-2 midgame moments.
By doing this you essentially do a recap of the game that gives a general narrative of a player's mind set. You tell the viewers "This is how he started, this cool thing happened in the middle, and this is where he won/lost" you do it for both players at the end of each match. And as the match progresses there is time for the viewers to pause, think about what just happened, and then be told the narrative of what's going on behind the screen.
That could work. But i think it all could be better balanced in one cast/tournament. I just share OP frustration that all the effort to appeal to the fun-oriented audience made it less appealing to the ones that loved true global play.
unrelated, but something i forgot to mention before, i think the casual and hardcore tags are bad. There might be a tendency that competition oriented public watch more SC2 but its certainly not a rule. Hardcore fans may enjoy hype cast, local heroes, personalities and fluff the most. Casual fans may tune in just to figure out "how is the meta in korea" or see some nice builds in action.
On February 02 2016 09:18 Superbanana wrote: Awesome article!
While i probably bend more towards the "competition oriented" archetype i do enjoy fun
I think casters and tournament formats can do better than this. As mentioned HSC is more about fun and hype and sillyness and its a clear premise, the fact it also had high level competition and informative casting made it absolutely great.
I wish WCS, a tournament series to decide the very best, could take itself a bit more seriously.
I always love Rotterdam casts because he is hyped and fun, but more important, he always takes the games seriously and knows when its time to stop goofing and go back to the game (and of course, his analysis is good). Sometimes im paying attention to the screen, sometimes im not. When i have my attention on screen the caster can help me catch as much information as i can while watching, when im not audio should be enough to have an idea of what is going on. High standards, but we have great, experienced casters that are fully capable of doing it (if they are not dead after 10 hours of casting). Of course, if i am a minority, f*ck me.
edit: actually, i know i am a minority, but i also know there is a reasonable public interested in analytical casts and enjoys top level competition more than anything else. Its not such a small minority that can be ignored, we are here on TL and you cannot count us with your fingers.
I wish that it got split. There's always about 15-30 minutes of dead time between matches, and sometimes even between games. Why not codify it? Why not have hype commentary (with light analysis) for the game itself, and then deep level analysis for breaks in between.
So instead of waiting 20 minutes looking at a countdown timer, you have 2-3 five minute long analysis (maybe longer) sessions that just uses 2-3 screenshots. Have one person do an analysis of an important moment for one player, and then a second analysis on the other player. They could even streamline it more.
Opening Build Analysis. Interesting Midgame Moment. Final Fight Analysis.
If nothing interesting happened in the midgame, skip it and just do an in depth build analysis. Player A chose Build X because Player B is known for Y and hence when in Map C Player A wants to be ready for Z--BUT here is the tiny change he made to the build either by accident or intentionally.
Then you have them do an analysis of the final fight (or maybe the last 2 fights) and talk about why one side won over the other. If the game was long/back and forth enough then you go deep on 1-2 midgame moments.
By doing this you essentially do a recap of the game that gives a general narrative of a player's mind set. You tell the viewers "This is how he started, this cool thing happened in the middle, and this is where he won/lost" you do it for both players at the end of each match. And as the match progresses there is time for the viewers to pause, think about what just happened, and then be told the narrative of what's going on behind the screen.
That could work. But i think it all could be better balanced in one cast/tournament. I just share OP frustration that all the effort to appeal to the fun-oriented audience made it less appealing to the ones that loved true global play.
Well that's aways an issue.
For example: I don't really watch German Football (not Futbol/Soccer) because I'd rather watch American Football. I don't watch Canadian Football either--for much the same reasons. If you're a casual viewer why would you watch someone who lives from a completely different continent than you.
Fifa, Tennis, and Golf are really the only publicly loved sports that crosses international borders from what I can tell; and they're the exceptions, not the rule. Most other sports are fairly locally loved even if there is a lot of leagues for it. The same is to be expected of SC2.
On February 02 2016 09:18 Superbanana wrote: Awesome article!
While i probably bend more towards the "competition oriented" archetype i do enjoy fun
I think casters and tournament formats can do better than this. As mentioned HSC is more about fun and hype and sillyness and its a clear premise, the fact it also had high level competition and informative casting made it absolutely great.
I wish WCS, a tournament series to decide the very best, could take itself a bit more seriously.
I always love Rotterdam casts because he is hyped and fun, but more important, he always takes the games seriously and knows when its time to stop goofing and go back to the game (and of course, his analysis is good). Sometimes im paying attention to the screen, sometimes im not. When i have my attention on screen the caster can help me catch as much information as i can while watching, when im not audio should be enough to have an idea of what is going on. High standards, but we have great, experienced casters that are fully capable of doing it (if they are not dead after 10 hours of casting). Of course, if i am a minority, f*ck me.
edit: actually, i know i am a minority, but i also know there is a reasonable public interested in analytical casts and enjoys top level competition more than anything else. Its not such a small minority that can be ignored, we are here on TL and you cannot count us with your fingers.
I wish that it got split. There's always about 15-30 minutes of dead time between matches, and sometimes even between games. Why not codify it? Why not have hype commentary (with light analysis) for the game itself, and then deep level analysis for breaks in between.
So instead of waiting 20 minutes looking at a countdown timer, you have 2-3 five minute long analysis (maybe longer) sessions that just uses 2-3 screenshots. Have one person do an analysis of an important moment for one player, and then a second analysis on the other player. They could even streamline it more.
Opening Build Analysis. Interesting Midgame Moment. Final Fight Analysis.
If nothing interesting happened in the midgame, skip it and just do an in depth build analysis. Player A chose Build X because Player B is known for Y and hence when in Map C Player A wants to be ready for Z--BUT here is the tiny change he made to the build either by accident or intentionally.
Then you have them do an analysis of the final fight (or maybe the last 2 fights) and talk about why one side won over the other. If the game was long/back and forth enough then you go deep on 1-2 midgame moments.
By doing this you essentially do a recap of the game that gives a general narrative of a player's mind set. You tell the viewers "This is how he started, this cool thing happened in the middle, and this is where he won/lost" you do it for both players at the end of each match. And as the match progresses there is time for the viewers to pause, think about what just happened, and then be told the narrative of what's going on behind the screen.
That could work. But i think it all could be better balanced in one cast/tournament. I just share OP frustration that all the effort to appeal to the fun-oriented audience made it less appealing to the ones that loved true global play.
Well that's aways an issue.
For example: I don't really watch German Football (not Futbol/Soccer) because I'd rather watch American Football. I don't watch Canadian Football either--for much the same reasons. If you're a casual viewer why would you watch someone who lives from a completely different continent than you.
Fifa, Tennis, and Golf are really the only publicly loved sports that crosses international borders from what I can tell; and they're the exceptions, not the rule. Most other sports are fairly locally loved even if there is a lot of leagues for it. The same is to be expected of SC2.
Even BW was pretty much a Korea only phenomenon.
I mostly agree, but why SC2 is expected to be the same? Throughout HotS SC2 was crossing international borders. If you meant its what blizzard expects, or part of the public, then i agree. But there is no intrinsical factor that forces SC2 to be only mostly locally loved and not cross international borders. edited: misunderstood a bit.
I'm very amused that most responses to this articles are some variation of "but the two groups arent mutually exclusive" or "you shouldnt view those groups as mutually exclusive" when it was the premise/lens that allowed the article to be written.
I liked the article. I think ideally if we try to make foreigners locked to improve their skill, we have to acknowledge it is because koreans are that much better. Like, Vygotsky's zone of proximal development for foreigners doesn't include koreans(in other words, foreigners wouldnt improve by playing koreans consistently in tournaments).
And, we need more korean starcraft. Increase that and keep the region lock and we good.
I still think the solution is to split the ladder.
First is to have a casual ladder with more maps, more diversity, more units and tech options, faster game speed, and queue with a bunch of options. (like 3 tech trees per race, 20 1v1 maps, queue in 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, archon simultaneously, similar to cs:go or dota 2)
Second is to have a competitive ladder which is highly balanced, finely tuned not designed around extreme maps and diversity.
The title and coverage might be a little overboard, though it does outline the two factions really well. What wasn't covered was neither faction was arguing for the extreme local-heroes Korean-exclusion that Blizzard unilaterally adopted. Casual hype viewers already knew heavy discouragement of Korean attendance was a bad thing for the game, and competitive viewers thought there were enough foreign events to ensure diversity of attendees and spread Korean entrants thin regardless.
On February 02 2016 10:19 tokinho wrote: I still think the solution is to split the ladder.
First is to have a casual ladder with more maps, more diversity, more units and tech options, faster game speed, and queue with a bunch of options. (like 3 tech trees per race, 20 1v1 maps, queue in 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, archon simultaneously, similar to cs:go or dota 2)
Second is to have a competitive ladder which is highly balanced, finely tuned not designed around extreme maps and diversity.
As unrealistic and terrible this idea might sound at first, after a bit of thought it seems to be the only difficult yet logical solution to revive the game.
There’s been a lot of discussion recently about all sorts of topics - WCS, decreasing talent pool in Korea, even casting in general. What I want to address in this article is a foundation to these arguments that I think is very important to understand where a lot of people are coming from and what their arguments suggest.
I’m going to attempt to split the SC2 community in two categories: those mainly looking for fun and those interested in the highest level competition. For the sake of this argument, consider the extreme forms of these two categories mutually exclusive. Keep in mind that I’m not going to argue for or against either side in this article. This argument can be applied to every sport and esport, as Richard Lewis for example talked about in a recent article (article here). This will be about the SC2 community only, however. I will NOT be taking into consideration issues such as marketing and monetarization of SC2, whether or not different systems are sustainable, etc. These are separate issues that don’t necessarily factor into the division I’m talking about. I'm purely talking about the different types of viewers in these conflicts.
To start, I’ll explain how I define these two categories.
<h1>THE ARCHETYPES</h1> 1) The fun-oriented spectator:
The way I see it, the “mainstream” audience largely falls into this category. This is the category I would put viewers in who are primarily entertained by things such as flashy production, funny interviews and commentary, local heroes winning, trashtalk, that sort of thing. I think you can catch my train of thought on this. This category is what is commonly and perhaps a bit unfairly referred to as the “casual” community.
2) The competition-oriented spectator:
This, to me, is the part of the community that finds entertainment in watching the best players in the world play the game at the highest level, regardless of their likability outside the game. This is the part of the community that is interested in absolute, sometimes rigorous fairness, pure skill, the highest level of play, informative commentary tailored to specifically analyse the game at a high level. Commonly referred to as the “hardcore” community.
Again, these are very rough images of two general approaches I’ve perceived in the community. Don’t take these as literal definitions, let them instead give you an overall feeling of the two different "archetypes" of spectators I’m basing this entire argument on.
<h1>THE CONFLICT</h1>
The reason why I think this distinction is important is because everyone arguing about these topics I named above can generally be categorized this way and the arguments made are almost entirely based on their answers to this simple question: “Why do you follow SC2?” You will generally get only two types of answers - fun and competition.
This entire recent conflict in our community can be reduced to this. These are the two main parties in these debates, if you will. I am not an expert on this subject, so correct me if I’m wrong, but the following is how I feel this alienation came about. Throughout the history of SC2 and even BW before it, a large part of the community, especially on TeamLiquid, grew around the Korean scene. Following its players, becoming fans of different high-level playstyles, etc. Through this, they also became fans of players - they bridged the gap in language and culture as they originally followed players not for their personality, but their skill or playstyle at a high level.
Since then however, esports and with it SC2 have reached a broader, more mainstream audience. This happened when international tournaments were already taking place. Koreans as well as foreigners participated there. This part of the community did not grow up with the Korean scene. It did not have that time to closely follow the Korean scene and get to know its players despite the cultural barriers. Naturally, this more “casual” audience was more interested in players they could immediately identify with - local heroes, foreigners who spoke their language. But not just that, “fun” personalities like MC and PartinG who made an effort to interact with a foreign audience were also welcomed with open arms.
And this is exactly where I think the conflict began.
<h1>APPLIED TO WCS</h1>
Now, keep in mind what I’ve established so far. We now have two general “movements” that are looking for two different things - in one community. The reason why this discussion is happening now of all times should be clear as day then. WCS 2016 has introduced changes that massively cater to one of these categories as opposed to the other. By essentially banning Korean players from international tournaments, Blizzard caters to the part of the community that’s interested in the former - fun, local heroes, all that. Reminder: I am not arguing for or against this.
The Korean landscape on the other hand has two fewer tournaments, making the scene extremely unforgiving. Two bad days and a player can be sidelined from individual competition for essentially half a year. This has already happened to Blizzcon champion sOs, for example. It’s about to happen to either Maru or Zest, as those two face each other in Code A and have been eliminated from SSL. Looking at the international scene, it’s nowhere near as rough. International events happen in more regular intervals and prize money is spread more than it used to be. The same is the case in Korea by the way, but the Korean scene also has less tournaments and more top end players competing for prize money. Surely you can see where the frustration of competition-oriented spectators is coming from, whether you agree with it or not.
This exact same division also causes arguments about casting quite frequently. There are those that would like nothing more than having every match cast by two professional players of the races involved. And then there are others that enjoy a more free-flowing, entertaining cast that incorporates jokes, memes and a generally more fun approach. Both are perfectly fine and have their own value. What’s causing these arguments recently however is that WCS, casting in general, show production, all these things, are beginning to lean more and more towards the “casual”, fun oriented part of the community.
A lot of people loved the cast for this match. A lot of people absolutely hated it. The casting was really funny, fast paced, exciting. It was however, not at all informative. And a lot of people I’ve talked to about it while doing research for this article told me that in a deciding game 5, especially a game that’s as unique and incredible as this one, they would much rather have had a serious, informative cast to properly understand what was going on in such a wild game. Both arguments are perfectly fine and I am absolutely not writing this to tell anyone what they should or shouldn’t be entertained by. But this example again shows how difficult it is to satisfy both of these spectator categories.
<h1>BLIZZCON AND PUNDITS</h1>
I think going forward, this is going to be the biggest issue to figure out for event organizers, casters and personalities. What do “the fans” want, considering there’s two essentially opposing archetypes of spectators? Who is it you’re catering to? What is my tournament supposed to be? It cannot be a solution to claim that BlizzCon crowns the best player in the world, when we all know that the player pool would look entirely different if everyone in the world was given the same chances. You’re roping in both categories of people with that promotion, which means you’re bound to disappoint one of the two “divisions” of the community.
It cannot be a solution to present BlizzCon as the epitome of SC2 as a competitive sport, and then have pundits on a couch that aren’t aware of the players’ achievements over the year - the exact achievements that qualified them for BlizzCon. I was extremely disappointed when I was told that Classic was “not a top tier protoss” and that “he didn’t do as well as others” by casters at BlizzCon, when all it takes to refute that statement is a quick look at his Liquipedia page. This would have been perfectly ignorable in a less “professional” setting, but on a stage that supposedly epitomizes and celebrates the game’s highest level competition? I’m not cool with that. If you’re building BlizzCon up to be SC2’s World Cup Final the way it’s held in “real” sports - which is the feeling I got from the way it was built up and promoted by Blizzard - then do it that way. But I have to say that in a real World Cup final, poorly informed pundits would not be tolerated for a second. That’s not their job in that setting. Their job is to inform.
<h1>OUTLOOK</h1>
Now, don’t take all this as me shoving my opinions down your throat - I'm not trying to and I apologize if you feel that way. I’ve been vocal about not liking WCS in its current format, and most of you who know me will know quite clearly that I’m part of the category that enjoys high level play more than anything else. I am merely trying to put these recent conflicts into perspective and hoping that both fans and tournament organizers, as well as casters, personalities, etc. can keep this in mind when participating in arguments. This is where it all comes from, this is what it’s all fundamentally based on. Neither side is in the right or wrong here - but understanding the core of these discussions may ultimately prove key in solving them.
The ideal goal now is to find a way to walk the fine line and keep both sub-communities happy. This is what made HomestoryCup so great. It was a casual, friendly, extremely fun tournament and gave an alternative to hardcore competition. But imagine - if every tournament were like HSC, a lot of people would be unhappy about the lack of tough, "professional" tournaments. There's a place for both in our community, and it's of the utmost importance that we cater not only to one crowd. If we lean too far in either direction, large parts of our community will feel alienated.
So the solution, however difficult, should be to accommodate both. I am not an expert on how to do this, however fascinating this area may be, it's not my field of work. This is where organizers, casters, the community itself comes into play and has to take initiative to improve and figure out how to reach this common goal. But one thing is clear - we're not doing enough right now.
I still think the solution is to split the ladder.
First is to have a casual ladder with more maps, more diversity, more units and tech options, faster game speed, and queue with a bunch of options. (like 3 tech trees per race, 20 1v1 maps, queue in 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, archon simultaneously, similar to cs:go or dota 2)
Second is to have a competitive ladder which is highly balanced, finely tuned not designed around extreme maps and diversity.
Yes, Yes, YES!!!! a separate "casual" ladder can solve a lot of problems. Same result can be achieved by making WoL and HoTS ladder free to play and advertise them as "casual".
To be fair it was a pretty fun cast and there is some missing context for why and how that happened. All things aside, it's a game and yeah I don't care if people hate me having fun with it.
Is there anything to back up the premise of your article? Or is your article purely based upon "rough images" you've perceived?
I'm interested in this subject, but I fear a complete absence of any data or investigation may have rendered this article meaningless. I could understand it if you're simply giving your opinion on the issue, but as you are speaking about the opinions of the community, it would seem to necessitate some sort of meaningful evaluation of the community.
I guess I'm basically saying the article seems completely made up, and I'm wondering if there's anything I'm missing that would point towards it not being completely made up.
On February 02 2016 13:14 Nathanias wrote: To be fair it was a pretty fun cast and there is some missing context for why and how that happened. All things aside, it's a game and yeah I don't care if people hate me having fun with it.
You should care whether people hate you, you are a front figure for tournaments in this game, like it or not. That said there should always be room for fun and you bring a lot to the table with your casts
On February 02 2016 13:14 Nathanias wrote: To be fair it was a pretty fun cast and there is some missing context for why and how that happened. All things aside, it's a game and yeah I don't care if people hate me having fun with it.
You should care whether people hate you, you are a front figure for tournaments in this game, like it or not. That said there should always be room for fun and you bring a lot to the table with your casts
I completely disagree. Nobody no matter what your position is can ever be liked by everyone and his brother.... As long as you're a decent guy and give it your all at what you do, there is no reason to think twice about what people think. Heck, I wouldn't know whether to get up in the morning if I started givin a rats behind about that
On February 02 2016 13:14 Nathanias wrote: To be fair it was a pretty fun cast and there is some missing context for why and how that happened. All things aside, it's a game and yeah I don't care if people hate me having fun with it.
You should care whether people hate you, you are a front figure for tournaments in this game, like it or not. That said there should always be room for fun and you bring a lot to the table with your casts
I completely disagree. Nobody no matter what your position is can ever be liked by everyone and his brother.... As long as you're a decent guy and give it your all at what you do, there is no reason to think twice about what people think. Heck, I wouldn't know whether to get up in the morning if I started givin a rats behind about that
One should never care about what others think.
Care about what they actually do to you. Care about what they do to others.
But if they have opinions different from your own then they are free to have them.
For the sake of this argument, consider the two mutually exclusive.
Very simplistic way of seeing things, and an already biased way of describing people's opinion about the WCS system. I don't think you can get anything relevant from this starting point.
Thinking that the opinion people have about WCS is just about this artificial "fun vs high skill" categorization is a cliche and can only lead to a cliche conclusion.
Now, don’t take all this as me shoving my opinions down your throat - I'm not trying to and I apologize if you feel that way. I’ve been vocal about not liking WCS in its current format, and most of you who know me will know quite clearly that I’m part of the category that enjoys high level play more than anything else.
And bam! Your biased starting point end up in a biased conclusion. You miss that the whole point of WCS region lock could be to develop the skill of foreigners and to end up with an even higher level of play worldwide. You locked into your "foreigner = funny low skill guys vs Koreans = superior skilled players which can only be appreciated by people like me".
Reallisticly, the core of your opinion may just be conservatism and lack of long term view, and not the "love of high level play" (that, quite franckly, everybody has)
Don't go for simplistic categorization, they always end up being wrong. Above all, don't think other's opinion is different that yours because they're not educated enough in elite sc2 play.
You seem to have completely missed the message of the article because you got hung up on something I said in the introduction. That's quite ironic considering it's exactly what you're accusing me of.
What you quoted is not my conclusion. My conclusion is that there needs to be compromise to accommodate as many in the community as possible and not drive them out. If that's what you call black and white, sure? Can't say I agree with you though.
I don't call it black and white, I call it simplisitc, irrelevant and condescending.
Oh well.
I'm sorry but have to agree with him, at least to me your categories translated to clownery aka foreigner SC2 vs. honest competition aka Korean SC2 and that is condescending.
Anyways, I think I understand where you like to go with this article but I also think you are missing a few very important points. For me casual viewers are casuals because they don't follow always the best possible player/competition, they like the SC2 and watch what is on when they have time to watch some games regardless of the quality and the players they see then are the players they like the most. I like watching Korean SC2 but mostly I don't have time to watch it live due to time zones and I'm not interested enough to watch the VOD's. I watch much more Foreigners, therefore I'm more interested in them doing well in Tournaments too. This has nothing to do with “funny interviews” or “flashy production” and I hate awkward trashtalk..
Regarding the show-aspect of casting or player personalities, I don't think you can apply your categories casual/hardcore to draw a line for that, in my opinion this comes much more down to personal preferences on both sides of the fence. I see myself as a casual but I don't like overhyped cast at all, same applies for wannabe “super professional” casts where casters have to check every word spoken – my preference is a mainly analytical but relaxed style where casters are allowed to state their own preferences/bias like Narruto or Apollo in earlier years but that is of course just my opinion. On the other side, I think it was today's SPL- LR where some people praised the Korean cast for constantly shouting...
But now to the main point – in your outlook you write the differences between hardcore and casual are the reason for recent conflicts and understanding them would maybe the key for solving them. And you write the goal now should be to find a way to accommodate both.
In my opinion these conflicts are just the fallout and not the reason for a much deeper problem – there are not enough viewers and therefore money in the scene. The hole welfare-system vs. increasing foreigner skill-discussion is IMO totally beside the point.
For me Blizzard reasoning behind these changes had nothing to do with quality of skill/competition or the Foreigner/Korean Scene, they try desperately to increase the overall viewership to attract more Sponsors and Tournaments. We all have seen the size of the SC2-Stage at Dreamhack. Add to that the roomers that ESL declined to continue producing WCS and today's letter from the former Kespa-President stating how hard it was to get Sponsors for this years SPL. At the moment both scenes pretty much depend on Blizzard-Money. I also liked the 2015 WCS-System more but viewership got down even more so I can fully understand why Blizzard had to pull the plug and try something different. They can't justify to pump even more money in a system where they have no chance for any revenue out of their investment – most of the existing fan base already bought the game or decided not to – either way there is nothing in for Blizzard.
Of course increasing the viewership is a much bigger discussion as just the WCS-System (Gameplay, RTS vs. other E-Sports and so on), but I think we should stop fighting the other half of the community, casters or Blizzard/other Organisations and instead think about growing the hole scene, regardless of individual preferences, else there won't be much competitive SC2 in 2017 for all of us.
PS: I know my english is pretty bad but I hope you can understand my thoughts anyways
Got to agree with this. End of the day blizzard is a business.
I agree with the article, it's a pretty good analysis.
I don't have a problem with fun or casual events (or foreigners) but those aspects should not be privileged over actual competition. It's also just blatantly unfair to host "entire world except Korea" events, by the way.
Ok, I think I have to put my 2 cents in this thread. Maybe because IMHO I'm a very special case! What is so special about me? Well, I actually don't play any games (anymore). Well, yeah, I play a little Super Meat Boy, Undertale got me hooked for a longer time and somehow I stumbled across Barkley, Shut Up and Jam: Gaiden and play that atm. But I have here the box of SC2:LotV ... and I haven't even installed the game on my PC! I don't even know why...
So, what do I do in this gaming-community? Most of the time I watch streams of tournaments (and speedruns)! And I do that, because I like high-level play. I like to see the skill people have and I never will! But before you put me in the "hardcore-area" of the OP: No! I do that to be entertained! But sorry, that is really not exclusive (even if you want this to be seen exclusivly)! Espacially here in this SC2 comparison. Really? So watching a game of Snute is "boring", because the Koreans are soooo much better? WTF? He is still really high-skilled! And that is enough for me!
And about this casting entertaining against professional: The "fine line" is both! The legendary Tastosis was so great, because Tasteless was the entertainer and Artosis was the analyst. And they made it work that everybody got what he/she was searching for in a cast. Haven't watched the linked VOD. If there was just entertainment/hype and no insight into the game, I can understand the problem. Also a "problem" is the tournament. At a HSC there will be entertainment! Period! And that is the special thing about that tournament. But do you want that for a Blizzcon? Or maybe you really want that! Dota2 and The International had/has a "noob stream" where everything is explained and what's happening why and so on. Someone with above average knowledge will be bored out of his/her mind. But I heard that the stream was quite liked! Maybe for bigger tournaments there can be "themed" streams. A "analysis"-Stream, where the caster will talk about the game and NOTHING but the game; and an "entertainment"-stream, where every action is hyped and and talked about what the players had for breakfast and how this will influence their play or something like that.
Overall I don't think that these "two groups" are the problem with the community.
Would love to have one more caster that is able to go "stop we have a bit of explaining to do, then fun again", you just need one of those in a cast. I don't mind 2 fanboys losing it over a game. I would probably mind pure analysis more. But if you can switch from fun to analysis and go back to fun. Then you are a caster that almost everyone will enjoy to watch. Because they will only remember the part they enjoyed. There are people that remember only the negative bits, but those will probably be annoyed either way.
And you should care about improving as a caster. Kinda your job to hold viewers and make them come back.
While I dont have a huge interest in this matter (I am more of a broodwar gamer rather than SC2), I think there are a few things people have to consider:
A) Marketing/money: If we think about what teams want and what sponsors want, we will get a different picture than what fans want.
B) WCS Region lock vs no region lock is in my opinion a bad debate: If the reason we region lock is to allow lower skill player (who would have not made it otherwise) to get to a certain part of the tournament, they will still get eliminated by the higher skill players, only a little bit later.
My problem is that Blizzard is taking upon itself to be the deciding party (anyone asked blizzard to do this?). In all other tournaments, the invites are what the tournaments organizers "believe" to be the best choice for getting massive viewership. Those that will make the right calls, will prosper, those that dont, will fall, leaving more room for those that prospered.
If however one company can put pressure over most of the big tournaments and they have a monopoly on decision making, how will they know if they are doing the right thing. If you cant compare yourself to someone else... you have no meter for success or failure, and you are unable to make corrections accordingly.
C) Blizzard with balance patches: This is something I simply dont get. In broodwar we had the same version for years and strategies keep on showing up even to this day (although much less commonly, thats a given). Blizzard seems to think in terms of "this is the way people like to play, but if they do, X is imbalanced to Y so we should change something" instead of "people need to figure out how to deal with X with something different than Y".
That being said, there are some things that are flat out insane....
Please note that this is just my opinion and I rearly watch sc2 with passion, so I am probably less informed than many around there.
I don't understand the conflict. The topic looks a little far fetched.
What I do believe is that SC2 is losing its popularity disregarding whether there is a community conflict and it didn't start today. I think it was pretty obvious from the beginning that it should be better than BW or die a slow death later (if not for tons of sponsorship money dumped into it would already happen). The level of entertainment slowly fades with or without skilled players involved. A series of retirements, the interviews, now this match-fixing stuff, and the overall game aura are not healthy and I could feel it without even daily following the game. I have never heard a single BW progamer say that the game was boring back in time. It was something unthinkable. But reading some interviews you can well feel the frustration and disappointment.
Some people may disagree with me completely, I might sound like an old whiner, but in the end of the day, it is us who decide. Those who are too deeply involved (casters, writers, players) will never see it coming unless it strikes them in the face. They will always brush off your criticism or disregard it as being a mere ignorance because what do I know. I am just another forum visitor.
Sad truth is, SC2 is not entertaining for me as other games anymore.
On the brighter side. You can all see how many ppl watch BW streams.
On February 02 2016 23:03 iloveav wrote: In broodwar we had the same version for years and strategies keep on showing up even to this day (although much less commonly, thats a given).
Simply because when you try to make everyone happy, nobody is in the end. Following "expert" community advises about how to nerf or buff one thing or another never works in the first place.
(Sorry for BW examples, but truth is, it's the best example of a well engineered strategy game). Look at BW units, some of them are insanely overpowered but it works. And this what always made it so entertaining. Just one lucky reaver shot, an unlucky dropship or even a single corsair lost to scourge could be the end of you so high was the skill level. You even woke up at 4am to watch the games. How crazy is that?
On February 02 2016 23:03 iloveav wrote: While I dont have a huge interest in this matter (I am more of a broodwar gamer rather than SC2), I think there are a few things people have to consider:
A) Marketing/money: If we think about what teams want and what sponsors want, we will get a different picture than what fans want.
B) WCS Region lock vs no region lock is in my opinion a bad debate: If the reason we region lock is to allow lower skill player (who would have not made it otherwise) to get to a certain part of the tournament, they will still get eliminated by the higher skill players, only a little bit later.
My problem is that Blizzard is taking upon itself to be the deciding party (anyone asked blizzard to do this?). In all other tournaments, the invites are what the tournaments organizers "believe" to be the best choice for getting massive viewership. Those that will make the right calls, will prosper, those that dont, will fall, leaving more room for those that prospered.
If however one company can put pressure over most of the big tournaments and they have a monopoly on decision making, how will they know if they are doing the right thing. If you cant compare yourself to someone else... you have no meter for success or failure, and you are unable to make corrections accordingly.
C) Blizzard with balance patches: This is something I simply dont get. In broodwar we had the same version for years and strategies keep on showing up even to this day (although much less commonly, thats a given). Blizzard seems to think in terms of "this is the way people like to play, but if they do, X is imbalanced to Y so we should change something" instead of "people need to figure out how to deal with X with something different than Y".
That being said, there are some things that are flat out insane....
Please note that this is just my opinion and I rearly watch sc2 with passion, so I am probably less informed than many around there.
The fact remains: DH wasn't planning to have SC2 at the event. There ended up being one there because Blizzard stepped up. So maybe no one asked them to do it, but nobody else was doing it...
We clearly need two casts for every event - one stream to feature the TLO/Snute cast levels of hype, and the other to provide in-depth analysis of timings, math, strategy, and tactics. Everyone wins!
Honestly, I am entertained and satisfied by both styles, though I do have a slight preference to the "hardcore" information. I really miss those Day[9] dailies =*(
I think it's the same thing with people who go watch a football match, one might go there for the atmossphere of the crowd related to football, while another wants to support their team and a third one might want to just enjoy high level plays. This is natural in sports and I fail to see why it'd be a particular problem to sc2 at all.
I think the more natural thing to blame is interest of the game decreasing. I only come to this site for BW and wouldn't have seen this thread otherwise, while I used to superficially follow sc2, it's not a thing for me anymore.
On February 03 2016 05:02 Iplaythings wrote: I think it's the same thing with people who go watch a football match, one might go there for the atmossphere of the crowd related to football, while another wants to support their team and a third one might want to just enjoy high level plays. This is natural in sports and I fail to see why it'd be a particular problem to sc2 at all.
I think the more natural thing to blame is interest of the game decreasing. I only come to this site for BW and wouldn't have seen this thread otherwise, while I used to superficially follow sc2, it's not a thing for me anymore.
That's a very good example of how it can (and should) work. It does require that the broadcasts be more neutral and appropriate fans can then find the extras they crave from shows - very similar to the different content that can be found between football matches.
Hi guys, I know I haven't been very active lately but I'm happy to be back so thanks.
I just wanted to weigh in and ask - why is this article featured? Did DarkLordOlli self-feature himself or what?
So the reason I'm asking is - this is basically just an article about his random whiny opinion. My understanding was that featured/headline news is for major tournaments and significant pieces of critical analysis. This is neither - it is just a random whiny opinion.
The reason why this is a random whiny opinion:
Random: No analysis has been included at all - in fact, it starts off with an unsubstantiated premise that 'fun' and 'competitive' are a mutually exclusive dichotomy, but gives absolutely no rationale why this is the case other than it suits the agenda he is trying to push.
Whiny: Basically things aren't going his way (i.e. he doesn't like region locking) so he is making a post based on his own agenda. I strongly doubt he would have written this post if he liked region locking, or prior to region locking.
Opinion: This is DarkLordOlli's own opinion only - he has clearly not done any, or at minimum a very limited amount of investigation into others' views on the topic before posting about it. This is not written as an issues paper or discussion paper, it is simply his statement of fact without any research.
My concerns are growing that the TL Writers group are becoming a bit cliquey. Certain writers are somehow ending up time and again in the featured articles section for writing that isn't necessarily good. Some writers, such as Stuchiu, are at least putting in the yards to verify their arguments and I applaud that.
The reason I am strongly against this article in particular is that Olli is trying to cultivate an 'us vs them' mentality between Starcraft fans. The initial premise that there are 'casuals' and 'hardcores' is absurd, and is a contributing reason for why many other communities, such as HoN and Dota, have such toxic communities. At the end of the day, we all play for fun. Starcraft is a recreational activity. The argument he is trying to push is that people watching foreign tournaments are scrubs who only care about fun, and people watching Korean tournaments are pros who only care about skill. In both of these instances, a viewer has taken to an external media to learn more about the game - does that not make them 'hardcore'?
Olli believes that his clique - TL writers, and those who contribute heavily to the forums - are the only hardcore fans of Starcraft. This is nonsense.
I feel bad for Blizzard because they constantly have to deal with these keyboard warriors who write unsubstantiated crap. Blizzard can't really respond and tell them that, because it's bad for their image, and also costs resources that are better spent actually improving the game and the game model. They have a problem with Starcraft II that eSports has never really faced before, that being that all progamers essentially were cultivated in the one region even before Starcraft II was released (stemmed from Broodwar). This really isn't their own doing and they have very little ability to influence it, but the way they can is by making sure foreign players have an incentive to keep playing and keep improving. The only way to do that is by ensuring they have a chance at winning tournament prize money.
Region locking may have downsides in the short term, but it is a valid long-term approach to try and fix a systemic issue that means not all Starcraft progamers have equal opportunities.
We don't need random whiny opinions trying to compromise that.
Just to add quickly to the above - how is it that Life being arrested for match-fixing is hiding in the random comments, but this random whiny opinion is featured news?
I wonder if the TL writers need some more stringent rules on what can and can't be considered featured news?
Quick explanation - it's called an editorial, and I did one! Maybe you should read it again! The premise is actually one that says we should stop fighting and start looking for solutions to make everyone feel welcome again. That kinda contradicts everything you said there ;(
On February 02 2016 01:57 Destructicon wrote: I find it hilarious how people still believe the myth that isolating scenes will lead to strengthening each region. If that were the case the EU, NA and China regions would be equal to Korea, which isn't the case, since, baring the first worlds, Korea has won each and every time, they might even be getting progressively better as last year was the first with an all Korean final.
No, isolating the scenes is not the solution, what Blizzard actually needs to do is to promote the creation of team houses and focused practice, it needs to encourage teams to hire coaches, it needs to create the equivalent of a Proleague for EU and NA. Because to be frank, Korea has all the right elements to create the best players in the world, yes its true they have a culture of perfectionism and discipline that pushes them ever forward, but they also have team houses, with actual focused practice a regular team league to get them motivated and awesome coaching staff.
Until Blizzard stops trying to screw Korea and actually starts working to try and build up EU and NA, not throw welfare money at them, the regions will never grow in skill and the Koreans will always be better.
I agree with Destruction.
I think the whole Korean scene is something the Foreign scene should try to emulate. I haven't followed Brood War, but I know thanks largely to the Lickpiddy and this very website that SKT1 is stoked in history - BoxeR and iloveoov played and coached for the team - iloveoov helped lead SKT1 to epic heights last year with the Proleague win and various standout performances of it's players. Here are the storylines, folks. SKT1 has a rivalry with KTRolster and has done since BW. Again, storylines, history, folklore even.
The Korean productions also offer entertainment, such as "10 Questions", opportunities to see oldschool teams like SKT1, KTRolster play live, the GSL group selections/nominations (storylines!).
We simply don't have that in Foreignland - and it makes sense considering it's effectively "The rest of the world, minus South Korea". However, a Blizz-sanctioned forum to enable this sort of thing would be a start. It seems like events such as Nation Wars III get people's blood flowing and then it stops. I for one was surprised and Elated for France when they beat Korea - imagine watching something similar to this in one big, distribued Proleague-esque event all year long. Amazing.
Team houses and the infrastructure to support them needs to be in place in order to allow players to truly focus on improving their skills and capacity to play the game, coaches need to be employed to mentor and (as we've heard from iloveoov himself from his recent interview) find ways to attach other player's and what they are liable to do badly against race/match-up/build-wise.
Salaries also need to be able to allow players to actually make a living by doing the above without worrying about financial problems.
But I digress. I'm probably talking out of my ass anyway
On February 03 2016 07:13 DarkLordOlli wrote: Quick explanation - it's called an editorial, and I did one! Maybe you should read it again! The premise is actually one that says we should stop fighting and start looking for solutions to make everyone feel welcome again. That kinda contradicts everything you said there ;(
I object to taking that position for the sake of argument. The position must be proven before I can accept the proceeding argument. At a base level, it seems like a false dichotomy. I assert that designing / whatever for fun and competition are not mutually exclusive, and rather are mutually beneficial. I also assert that SC2 multiplayer has neither fun nor competitive design, and point to this as the primary culprit of it dying.
On February 03 2016 06:02 boxerfred wrote: im done with sc2 due to various reasons.
Can you elaborate? Is it related with the topic in discussion?
Yes. It's basically three things.
1. WCS 2016 system, absolutely not liking it 2. Life matchfixing 3. Not having fun at playing the game.
Although WCS is obviously worse than before, I think there are alternatives. SPL is so good... Life though... Shit. But for me the most important point would be nr 3. I hope you find something else you can be passionate about, it is not the end of the world.
just to give my own random whiny irrelevant opinion on this matter:
when i followed sc2 more closely (very closely. like way too closely, spending about as much time on it as i did on university closely), i was very engaged in the scene, the characters, storylines, all that stuff. of course i was also interested in gameplay, but it felt less exciting simply because i was watching so much of it that i kept seeing the same thing over and over again so many times that it was just too repetitive to stay fresh. however, the sc2 community had (and probably still has) so many great and exciting people, whether it be players (both Korean and foreign), casters, etc., and storylines that it was still very engaging and interesting to follow the scene. however, to become that emotionally involved in it, i had to spend a lot of time to really engage with all these characters and stuff.
over the last two years or so, i have been following sc2 less and less, to the point where i have literally only played singleplayer in LotV so far. my main race is/was Terran, and i learnt yesterday watching Proleague that there is an upgrade for the Hurricane. my point is that nowadays, my only real motivation for watching sc2 is the actual gameplay, because it is fresh and exciting and interesting. i don't really know anything about how players are doing, who won what tournament (hell i don't even realise tournaments are happening most of the time), or whatever else is going on in the community, precisely because acquiring the knowledge about all of this takes a lot of time that i am not willing to invest in sc2 currently.
Therefore, you would probably want to stick me in the 'casual' category cause i don't spend much time on sc2, but the fact of the matter is that i only watch it for gameplay, and i only watch Korean leagues, and this is admittedly partially because i'm more likely to actually get the chance to watch them, but it is mostly because i know i'll see the game being played at the highest possible level. if i didn't have this past as a hardcore follower, i would actually know even less about the characters (because finding out Tasteless has a big beard now does put a smile on my face), and i would care even less about what you characterise to be the 'casual' community.
On February 02 2016 01:57 Destructicon wrote: I find it hilarious how people still believe the myth that isolating scenes will lead to strengthening each region. If that were the case the EU, NA and China regions would be equal to Korea, which isn't the case, since, baring the first worlds, Korea has won each and every time, they might even be getting progressively better as last year was the first with an all Korean final.
No, isolating the scenes is not the solution, what Blizzard actually needs to do is to promote the creation of team houses and focused practice, it needs to encourage teams to hire coaches, it needs to create the equivalent of a Proleague for EU and NA. Because to be frank, Korea has all the right elements to create the best players in the world, yes its true they have a culture of perfectionism and discipline that pushes them ever forward, but they also have team houses, with actual focused practice a regular team league to get them motivated and awesome coaching staff.
Until Blizzard stops trying to screw Korea and actually starts working to try and build up EU and NA, not throw welfare money at them, the regions will never grow in skill and the Koreans will always be better.
I agree with Destruction.
I think the whole Korean scene is something the Foreign scene should try to emulate. I haven't followed Brood War, but I know thanks largely to the Lickpiddy and this very website that SKT1 is stoked in history - BoxeR and iloveoov played and coached for the team - iloveoov helped lead SKT1 to epic heights last year with the Proleague win and various standout performances of it's players. Here are the storylines, folks. SKT1 has a rivalry with KTRolster and has done since BW. Again, storylines, history, folklore even.
The Korean productions also offer entertainment, such as "10 Questions", opportunities to see oldschool teams like SKT1, KTRolster play live, the GSL group selections/nominations (storylines!).
We simply don't have that in Foreignland - and it makes sense considering it's effectively "The rest of the world, minus South Korea". However, a Blizz-sanctioned forum to enable this sort of thing would be a start. It seems like events such as Nation Wars III get people's blood flowing and then it stops. I for one was surprised and Elated for France when they beat Korea - imagine watching something similar to this in one big, distribued Proleague-esque event all year long. Amazing.
Team houses and the infrastructure to support them needs to be in place in order to allow players to truly focus on improving their skills and capacity to play the game, coaches need to be employed to mentor and (as we've heard from iloveoov himself from his recent interview) find ways to attach other player's and what they are liable to do badly against race/match-up/build-wise.
Salaries also need to be able to allow players to actually make a living by doing the above without worrying about financial problems.
But I digress. I'm probably talking out of my ass anyway
Well, I wasn't around either for BW but as far as I understand the history Blizzard hat nothing to do with the hole BW-boom in South Korea besides providing the game itself. For some reason BW became incredible popular with massive TV coverage and thousands of attendees for the tournaments. That attracted Sponsors which put in the necessary money to build up the infrastructure which then in part carried over to SC2 and is probably the main reason why the Koreans dominate SC2 so much. But you can't do it the other way around, first you need the popularity and sponsor money, than you are able to build the infrastructure.
At the moment it seems to me most teams a in a big struggle to keep their SC2-divisions at all, a lot of them are closing or shrinking, so I am happy when they are able at all to provide the players with at least basic support. It's not very likely they will be able to invest more money for infrastructure. See for example here which is surprisingly not even community news:
On February 03 2016 06:02 boxerfred wrote: im done with sc2 due to various reasons.
Can you elaborate? Is it related with the topic in discussion?
Yes. It's basically three things.
1. WCS 2016 system, absolutely not liking it 2. Life matchfixing 3. Not having fun at playing the game.
Although WCS is obviously worse than before, I think there are alternatives. SPL is so good... Life though... Shit. But for me the most important point would be nr 3. I hope you find something else you can be passionate about, it is not the end of the world.
I had high expectations of LotV and I don't like the game as it is now. You're correct, #3 is the worst, then #2, then #1 actually.
I like watching all SC2, I watch all the korean and foreign leagues and tournaments I have time for. I enjoy both the fun casts and the "serious" casts, although of all the casters I think most of them have fun as well... I don't know how big of deal this is really. I think most of the big events do a pretty good job of mixing it up with there casters; Having some that are more casual and some that are more straight to the point. For instance hiring pro players as casters, like Snute and pigbaby.. Yes, your not going to make everyone happy every single match, everyones personal opinions on favorite casters n what not varies. Like you said, just got to fine that happy median. Tournaments that cater to more casual or "fun" viewers can obviously hire casters that cater more to their event and the larger tournaments that get a wide range of viewers can hire a larger variety of casters to appease more people.
Honestly, I don't care about informative commentary, I care about informative OBSERVING. If I can see it, I will understand it.
What I can't stand is so-called "expert" analysis which is a) mediocre and/or self-explanatory and b) not great at casting in general/lacking in charisma.
On February 05 2016 16:28 plogamer wrote: Honestly, I don't care about informative commentary, I care about informative OBSERVING. If I can see it, I will understand it.
What I can't stand is so-called "expert" analysis which is a) mediocre and/or self-explanatory and b) not great at casting in general/lacking in charisma.
All 3 of those are SUPER subjective. How do you even define "informative observing"???
It's funny how a lot of live threads from WCS or announcements like WCS Circuit Shanghai Announced draws a lot of negative comments along the lines of "Damn you to heck blizzard for bankrupting korea, I will never watch SC2 again!!oneoen!" whereas a thread like Code S Lineup complete has no comments not watching it because there are no foreigners present in the Korean tourneys.
On February 06 2016 03:01 BaneRiders wrote: It's funny how a lot of live threads from WCS or announcements like WCS Circuit Shanghai Announced draws a lot of negative comments along the lines of "Damn you to heck blizzard for bankrupting korea, I will never watch SC2 again!!oneoen!" whereas a thread like Code S Lineup complete has no comments not watching it because there are no foreigners present in the Korean tourneys.
Its because the community is one of the biggest problems with SC2.
Too lazy to play well. Too racist to root for koreans. Too prideful to say either out loud.
Honestly, I think the identity crisis is more due to the game itself than the community atm... The game itself is kind of having an identity crisis.
It's very hard to have a consistent identity in the community if the game itself is not consistent with either BW or past iterations of SC2.
Unlike earlier iterations of SC2, there simply aren't many new players who want to "learn" the game at this point. So the popularity of analytical commentary is obviously at debatably the lowest point in SC2's history.
Compounded with the issue of the professional player base not quite being in too strong of a position at the moment, and there are not really many players who inspire a wild fan base like some of the renowned players in the past did. So it doesn't quite cater to the "fun/casual" oriented community either.
Then we have the hardcore community, who themselves are not quite happy with SC2 either, which have a problem that has been years in the making. Beyond how hardcore players watch the game, when it comes to their expectations from the game, they usually have much higher standards than other players. They want things to be more hardcore, to be more skill based, to be "harder". This inherently does not play well with the other player types.
For the game to cater to the hardcore, it will then be less welcoming to new players, as well less satisfying for casual audiences. This led to a strong hardcore following early on (mainly the hardcore made it through WoL onward), but with discontent over the years, the hardcore player base has slowly became smaller and smaller, and with no influx of new players to replace older ones... In the end we have many of the players who are most passionate about the game, that are slowly going extinct, or in their discontent just end up back at BW.
It's not actually as simple as stating that the game simply "does not cater to any specific community right now". That statement only implies that it's not heavily invested in any single 1 type of community, but could reasonably appeal to any of them. But in reality, right now the game specifically pushes away members of all 3 communities. This is a much worse problem... StarCraft 2 is not a game that is currently designed to satisfy any particular community. Their current changes are focused on damage-control and trying to minimize the loss of players... But without actually attracting to any certain type of player to the community, the game itself has no identity, and the population of the community could do nothing but dwindle.
The future of SC2 is very short sighted. If SC2 is going to truly survive, we need long-term plans to change directions. Just look at the live streams on the right of this page, and you can see the problem for yourself... These days BW consistently has the higher portion of viewers (or a larger community) watching it at nearly any time you check. Things truly need to change for things to improve rather than continue declining, and these short-sighted patches, and PvE map packs, will not be enough to spark interest in the game. SC2 needs an identity that ANY form of community is looking for right now. New players, hardcore, casuals, long-time SC fans... all of those forms of communities time is better spent else where.
I am only a viewer, but for me that sort of enthusiastic commentary never really did the trick. I don't like guys screaming and basically telling me what I can see anyways. I like the more analytical commentary. The featured video represents the worst case for me and I would immediately switch it off.
On February 06 2016 03:01 BaneRiders wrote: It's funny how a lot of live threads from WCS or announcements like WCS Circuit Shanghai Announced draws a lot of negative comments along the lines of "Damn you to heck blizzard for bankrupting korea, I will never watch SC2 again!!oneoen!" whereas a thread like Code S Lineup complete has no comments not watching it because there are no foreigners present in the Korean tourneys.
Its because the community is one of the biggest problems with SC2.
Too lazy to play well. Too racist to root for koreans. Too prideful to say either out loud.
I rather think it is a part of this community that is acting very childish with this constant ranting, because they are not getting things the way they want (namely Koreans in the WCS circuit). So they do the internet equivalent of a kid throwing him/herself on the ground, screaming and kicking because the parents didn't buy them an ice cream. At least that is the way it comes across to me.
On February 06 2016 06:44 Neric wrote: I am only a viewer, but for me that sort of enthusiastic commentary never really did the trick. I don't like guys screaming and basically telling me what I can see anyways. I like the more analytical commentary. The featured video represents the worst case for me and I would immediately switch it off.
I feel like the best casters, or at least my personal favourite casters typically combined elements from both these stereotypical styles of commentary though. I haven't watched in a long long time so I'm not sure who are the best casters these days, but Artosis used to be able to bring the hype to a game when it deserved the hype, and also offer some analysis as well (although maybe not as good as a pro player). Hearing the pros commentate at HSC was always a lot of fun too.
I don't see how you can simultaneously claim to be a fan of competitive SC2 and at the same time be in favour of things that compromise the competitive nature of the game like region locking or inviting "funny" "personalities" that have no clue what they're doing over someone who knows the game but doesn't spout as many epic memes for the 12 year olds in chat. I'm just going to say it: compared to other esports like CS:GO or LoL, SC2 is a joke. Not just smaller, less viewed, a complete joke. Compare the production and commentary for a big CS:GO tournament to an SC2 one. In CS:GO you have very professional commentators that work well together and can be funny and entertaining while also giving detailed concise descriptions of what's going on, then you go to an analysis desk where they give very in depth analysis that really breaks everything down and lets even a noob understand what's going on. In SC2 you get Kaelaris stuggling to construct a sentence while Nathanias talks about rip in pepperoni, then you cut to an analysis desk where some epic personality points to a screen and says "I think this part where he attacked and won the game was important, back to you boys lads banter". I know this sounds like a cruel rant but I really care about SC2, at least I used to. Now all I see in the scene is an old boys club of "personalities" coasting by on name recognition, pretending that the below par foreigners they're casting are great because Koreans weren't allowed in, while spouting cringe worthy """""banter""""" that is mostly just repeating memes like a little kid who just found out about the internet. Pretty much every big figure in the scene seems to give the impression that broadcasting high level competitive SC2 is at the absolute bottom of their list of priorities and it makes me so mad, because they are shaping the future of the scene, and they're leading it into an early grave.
On February 03 2016 15:51 Douillos wrote: Is there any way of knowing what the distribution is for each group ? 50/50? How about a good old poll on front page ?
On February 03 2016 15:51 Douillos wrote: Is there any way of knowing what the distribution is for each group ? 50/50? How about a good old poll on front page ?
There are only two groups of people.
1. Those who play Protoss 2. Those who are wrong
i was watching a popular North American Terran streamer who explained there are 3 kinds of maps. Protoss favoured maps , Zerg favoured maps, and well-balanced maps.
by the game's very nature you'll have a splintered even fractured community. you have MOD-ders.... people who like to play MODs, people who like to build AI bots/scripts, campaign players who like to play single player on the hardest possible levels, Co-Op buddies who do nothing but move from game to game together and enjoy 2v2s in SC2,
and the list goes on and on.
there is no solution to this problem.. each of these individual communities alone can't sustain or justify ATVI investment in a game.
I can only speak for myself but to me starcraft 2 got more and more frustrating to watch and play. Games where you (or the player you root for) are (is) ahead all game, getting a bigger and bigger advantage through good multitasking and many small engagements and then you (he) lose(s) because of a single ability or unit or the game is turned around completely within a second after building it up for such a long time. However, contrary to my believe in the beta, LOTV seems to be less "volatile" then I initially feared. Because its the building up tension and then collapsing within seconds that made it frustrating or not worth to watch it.
SC2 has become more track and field. That was forced by hardcore SC2 community since the beginning. People want to watch players like Goody, while the hardcore coummunity hates Goody because his APM is low. Creativity and strategy has lost against training time and reaction abilities. Sure it is nice to see a Rubik's Cube solved in some seconds, but I don't need to watch a tournament with guys solving a Rubik's Cubes even they do some kind of battles.
On February 09 2016 03:20 Atrimex wrote: SC2 has become more track and field. That was forced by hardcore SC2 community since the beginning. People want to watch players like Goody, while the hardcore coummunity hates Goody because his APM is low. Creativity and strategy has lost against training time and reaction abilities. Sure it is nice to see a Rubik's Cube solved in some seconds, but I don't need to watch a tournament with guys solving a Rubik's Cubes even they do some kind of battles.
Goody is actually a perfect example of the issue with the community.
Despite doing well, he was derided for low APM--because the community wanted to feel that the reason they lost is not being fast enough instead of not being smart enough. Patches followed to punish Goody type players more and more as the game became focused on high APM high speed clicks--and no amount of power creep was considered hard enough.
What are you guys talking about? Goody was never hated or derided. Don't just make up a story to fit your narrative. His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against, just simply defending, waiting to mine out the map.
Anyways, despite the poster hiding behind a new name, the following post is so true, but we are all afraid to acknowledge it.
On February 08 2016 02:31 pimp daddy automatic wrote: I don't see how you can simultaneously claim to be a fan of competitive SC2 and at the same time be in favour of things that compromise the competitive nature of the game like region locking or inviting "funny" "personalities" that have no clue what they're doing over someone who knows the game but doesn't spout as many epic memes for the 12 year olds in chat. I'm just going to say it: compared to other esports like CS:GO or LoL, SC2 is a joke. Not just smaller, less viewed, a complete joke. Compare the production and commentary for a big CS:GO tournament to an SC2 one. In CS:GO you have very professional commentators that work well together and can be funny and entertaining while also giving detailed concise descriptions of what's going on, then you go to an analysis desk where they give very in depth analysis that really breaks everything down and lets even a noob understand what's going on. In SC2 you get Kaelaris stuggling to construct a sentence while Nathanias talks about rip in pepperoni, then you cut to an analysis desk where some epic personality points to a screen and says "I think this part where he attacked and won the game was important, back to you boys lads banter". I know this sounds like a cruel rant but I really care about SC2, at least I used to. Now all I see in the scene is an old boys club of "personalities" coasting by on name recognition, pretending that the below par foreigners they're casting are great because Koreans weren't allowed in, while spouting cringe worthy """""banter""""" that is mostly just repeating memes like a little kid who just found out about the internet. Pretty much every big figure in the scene seems to give the impression that broadcasting high level competitive SC2 is at the absolute bottom of their list of priorities and it makes me so mad, because they are shaping the future of the scene, and they're leading it into an early grave.
On February 09 2016 03:36 Dangermousecatdog wrote: What are you guys talking about? Goody was never hated or derided. Don't just make up a story to fit your narrative. His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against, just simply defending, waiting to mine out the map.
You contradict yourself. Goody was a casual fan favorite since the beginning.
On February 09 2016 03:36 Dangermousecatdog wrote: What are you guys talking about? Goody was never hated or derided. Don't just make up a story to fit your narrative. His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against, just simply defending, waiting to mine out the map.
You contradict yourself. Goody was a casual fan favorite since the beginning.
My saying he wasn't hated contradicts him having fans how so? Saying that I have contradicted myself doesn't make it so.
On February 09 2016 03:36 Dangermousecatdog wrote: What are you guys talking about? Goody was never hated or derided. Don't just make up a story to fit your narrative. His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against, just simply defending, waiting to mine out the map.
You contradict yourself. Goody was a casual fan favorite since the beginning.
My saying he wasn't hated contradicts him having fans how so? Saying that I have contradicted myself doesn't make it so.
What you said was
His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against, just simply defending, waiting to mine out the map.
On February 09 2016 05:59 Dangermousecatdog wrote: And...where is the contradiction?
You attempted to show that Goody was not derided, using the example that people thought his play style was strategically bad, visually boring, and a shining example of how awful an aspect of terran design was. That makes Goody a joke, a jester, a clown to be laughed at. No offense to him--lots of people mention how much they love goody. But always in a joking way.
However, in WoL, when he was wrecking the German scene, no one ever used him as an example of strong terran play. Because the assumption is that slow hands =/= low skill.
You attempting to point out that Goody has fans while telling us that those fans essentially treated Goody as a joke is you contradicting the message of your statement.
1) I never said people thought his playstyle was strategically bad. That's you 2) I never said Goody a joke, a jester, a clown to be laughed at. That's you. 3) Goody has fans. That is true. A community is made out of different people. Goody's fans essentially treating Goody as a joke? I never said that. That's you.
So you made up a bunch of stuff up just so you can say I contradicted myself? Not sure what your intention is, but I suggest you stop.
On February 09 2016 07:34 Dangermousecatdog wrote: 1) I never said people thought his playstyle was strategically bad. That's you 2) I never said Goody a joke, a jester, a clown to be laughed at. That's you. 3) Goody has fans. That is true. A community is made out of different people. Goody's fans essentially treating Goody as a joke? I never said that. That's you.
So you made up a bunch of stuff up just so you can say I contradicted myself? Not sure what your intention is, but I suggest you stop.
I'm going to let you answer your own questions.
1) I never said people thought his playstyle was strategically bad
His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against
2) I never said Goody a joke, a jester, a clown to be laughed at.
His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against
3) Goody has fans. That is true. A community is made out of different people. Goody's fans essentially treating Goody as a joke? I never said that.
His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against
i genuinely would be interessted to see what percentage of TL's visitors fall in either category. my guess is 95% in favour of high quality play with fundamental analysis and maybe 5% for the other side . This is only logical. Why would a casual even follow starcraft at. Starcraft per se is hardcore stuff. Maybe someone can make a poll. Because i dont believe the "casual" side is big at all.
On February 09 2016 08:59 bypLy wrote: i genuinely would be interessted to see what percentage of TL's visitors fall in either category. my guess is 95% in favour of high quality play with fundamental analysis and maybe 5% for the other side . This is only logical. Why would a casual even follow starcraft at. Starcraft per se is hardcore stuff. Maybe someone can make a poll. Because i dont believe the "casual" side is big at all.
This is probably true, but only because the extremely hardcore players are the majority of players that are left playing the game at this point.
Hence the major problem. StarCraft 2 is not bringing in any new players, only trying to keep the old players (mostly the hardcore fan base) as long as they can possibly can before they move on.
That's why I believe the problem is with SC2's identity more than the community identity. They spend so much time trying to please their hardcore fans since that's the main ones left... But that's not a key to success in game design or game marketing.
If they do anything to make competitive multiplayer more casual friendly, hardcore players get pissed and an overly elitist attitude, and they risk losing their hardcore fans. But the more hardcore they make it, the more players they lose who simply don't have the time to practice as much, and it puts the game on life support as your basing your marketing strategy around slowing decline, rather than encouraging growth.
Then you end up with a game like LotV - where they removed downtime to try to speed things up (which makes it appeal to casuals) but with an early beta goal of "making the game harder" to please hardcore players, it only ups the barrier of entry. And hardcore players are still not happy, because balance is a higher concern to hardcore and that's screwed with how little time they left in beta to balance, and Blizzard still tries to force hardcore players in to things they don't want like having to play on maps that force you to play a certain way (which means they favor specific races) rather than developing a competitive standard.
A game full of half-measures that doesn't really cater to any audience, and is doing nothing but minimizing damage as they slowly decline. A game that tries to force itself to be hard in pre-determined/artificially competitive ways where your fighting the game mecahnics, rather than allowing players to push the skill cap boundary on their own.
A well designed game needs to be both welcoming and fun to new players, as well as a deep & engaging with a high skill cap, strong balance, and mechanics that make the balance feel "fair" by communicating a clear understanding to a knowledgeable player of what is going on at all times, rather than being volatile. LotV fails on both fronts.
On February 09 2016 08:59 bypLy wrote: i genuinely would be interessted to see what percentage of TL's visitors fall in either category. my guess is 95% in favour of high quality play with fundamental analysis and maybe 5% for the other side . This is only logical. Why would a casual even follow starcraft at. Starcraft per se is hardcore stuff. Maybe someone can make a poll. Because i dont believe the "casual" side is big at all.
This is probably true, but only because the extremely hardcore players are the majority of players that are left playing the game at this point.
Hence the major problem. StarCraft 2 is not bringing in any new players, only trying to keep the old players (mostly the hardcore fan base) as long as they can possibly can before they move on.
That's why I believe the problem is with SC2's identity more than the community identity. They spend so much time trying to please their hardcore fans since that's the main ones left... But that's not a key to success in game design or game marketing.
If they do anything to make competitive multiplayer more casual friendly, hardcore players get pissed and an overly elitist attitude, and they risk losing their hardcore fans. But the more hardcore they make it, the more players they lose who simply don't have the time to practice as much, and it puts the game on life support as your basing your marketing strategy around slowing decline, rather than encouraging growth.
Then you end up with a game like LotV - where they removed downtime to try to speed things up (which makes it appeal to casuals) but with an early beta goal of "making the game harder" to please hardcore players, it only ups the barrier of entry. And hardcore players are still not happy, because balance is a higher concern to hardcore and that's screwed with how little time they left in beta to balance, and Blizzard still tries to force hardcore players in to things they don't want like having to play on maps that force you to play a certain way (which means they favor specific races) rather than developing a competitive standard.
A game full of half-measures that doesn't really cater to any audience, and is doing nothing but minimizing damage as they slowly decline. A game that tries to force itself to be hard in pre-determined/artificially competitive ways where your fighting the game mecahnics, rather than allowing players to push the skill cap boundary on their own.
A well designed game needs to be both welcoming and fun to new players, as well as a deep & engaging with a high skill cap, strong balance, and mechanics that make the balance feel "fair" by communicating a clear understanding to a knowledgeable player of what is going on at all times, rather than being volatile. LotV fails on both fronts.
To make this easier, think about Fast Food vs Diners vs Fine Dining.
Each has its own market. Each market has its own identity, and way to juggle it. But its only when you try to blend those markets that you get something awful.
Expensive fast food? Mass produced fine dining? etc...
If you want to market something--you have to pick one audience and don't spread your product across markets.
On February 09 2016 08:59 bypLy wrote: i genuinely would be interessted to see what percentage of TL's visitors fall in either category. my guess is 95% in favour of high quality play with fundamental analysis and maybe 5% for the other side . This is only logical. Why would a casual even follow starcraft at. Starcraft per se is hardcore stuff. Maybe someone can make a poll. Because i dont believe the "casual" side is big at all.
This is probably true, but only because the extremely hardcore players are the majority of players that are left playing the game at this point.
Hence the major problem. StarCraft 2 is not bringing in any new players, only trying to keep the old players (mostly the hardcore fan base) as long as they can possibly can before they move on.
That's why I believe the problem is with SC2's identity more than the community identity. They spend so much time trying to please their hardcore fans since that's the main ones left... But that's not a key to success in game design or game marketing.
If they do anything to make competitive multiplayer more casual friendly, hardcore players get pissed and an overly elitist attitude, and they risk losing their hardcore fans. But the more hardcore they make it, the more players they lose who simply don't have the time to practice as much, and it puts the game on life support as your basing your marketing strategy around slowing decline, rather than encouraging growth.
Then you end up with a game like LotV - where they removed downtime to try to speed things up (which makes it appeal to casuals) but with an early beta goal of "making the game harder" to please hardcore players, it only ups the barrier of entry. And hardcore players are still not happy, because balance is a higher concern to hardcore and that's screwed with how little time they left in beta to balance, and Blizzard still tries to force hardcore players in to things they don't want like having to play on maps that force you to play a certain way (which means they favor specific races) rather than developing a competitive standard.
A game full of half-measures that doesn't really cater to any audience, and is doing nothing but minimizing damage as they slowly decline. A game that tries to force itself to be hard in pre-determined/artificially competitive ways where your fighting the game mecahnics, rather than allowing players to push the skill cap boundary on their own.
A well designed game needs to be both welcoming and fun to new players, as well as a deep & engaging with a high skill cap, strong balance, and mechanics that make the balance feel "fair" by communicating a clear understanding to a knowledgeable player of what is going on at all times, rather than being volatile. LotV fails on both fronts.
To make this easier, think about Fast Food vs Diners vs Fine Dining.
Each has its own market. Each market has its own identity, and way to juggle it. But its only when you try to blend those markets that you get something awful.
Expensive fast food? Mass produced fine dining? etc...
If you want to market something--you have to pick one audience and don't spread your product across markets.
Problem is, Blizzard has never stuck to one audience. They have always tried to balance casual and hardcore. It could potentially be done (many other genres focus on this as a core aspect of their design, such as fighting games etc, even games like Rocket League with a high skill cap but easy to pick up), as there is a 'semi-hardcore' audience out there, which has typically fell in to Blizzards games audiences. But too many things just don't make sense from the beginning of SC2's development, and those things have never been changed.
I completely believe that one of their biggest hurdles is how they are "trying" to make a hard game. A "hard" game has difficult to balance, because it has to feel "Hard, but fair". An example of this is D3's torment mode at launch - its difficult in the way that everything just 1 shots you and you have to kite them off screen to have a chance.
But SC2 is a competitive game. Trying to make a competitive game "harder" is a silly venture. Because the difficulty of a competitive game should be determined by the strength of your opponent. You don't HAVE to make the mechanics "hardcore". Making mechanics harder only artificially increases difficulty, but this is the player competing against the game, rather than the player competing against their opponent.
That's why typically you see innovation in a games design by making the controls improved. If the player can make their units do what they want easier, they are spending more time competing against the opponent rather than competing against the computer or themselves.
Blizzard does a half-measure of this. Units control better than they did in BW, but they put new mechanics in place to try to make it more "difficult". They added a crap load of active abilities in LotV to specifically try to make the game more "difficult". If you are adding mechanics to make it harder after every improvement, it's not really an improvement in the end, and it stands out as "out of place" in the design. It's destined to fail. It halts the innovation of the game, and this is one of the many contributing factors that is causing RTS's as a genre to fall off.
They didn't need to give every unit an active ability of some sort to make the game "harder". They simply had to give the player more decisions to make that have COMPETITIVE strategic value. That's where the true difficulty of a game comes in to play, because decisions turn in to mind games, tactics, scouting, and prediction based upon your opponents actions. Metagames aren't as straight forward with more strategic options in play.
Too many options were removed at this point, and more than ever it is about mechanics > strategy. How is that supposed to make hardcore or casual players happy?
I've said this so many times lately... SC2 needs a vision. It needs to change directions, and move towards a clear vision of what StarCraft wants to be. The closest thing it caters to right now is hardcore players, but it doesn't make them happy, and there needs to be some sort of appeal for new players.
Appeal for new players doesn't necessarily mean casual, but it does mean removing hindrances that do not feel natural or like they add much to competitive gameplay. Moba's are the most popular genre these days, and those games are NOT new player friendly. They have a steep learning curve where you must learn dozens/100+ characters, a deep metagame, and a toxic community making you feel like shit every mistake you make. BUT they do not have all the hindrances RTS games have, and the mechanics make sense for what they are. Newer players might not know any of the spell abilities or anything, but have a decent idea of what is going on and/or who is winning. They can have a relative idea of where they failed and where they need to improve without watching replays.
If playing a moba game with toxic players trash talking you repeatedly is MORE fun and has less hiderances than learning an RTS game like SC2, there's a problem. Becuase that's not even an ideal situation for moba games, and it's far better than what we have here.
On February 09 2016 07:34 Dangermousecatdog wrote: 1) I never said people thought his playstyle was strategically bad. That's you 2) I never said Goody a joke, a jester, a clown to be laughed at. That's you. 3) Goody has fans. That is true. A community is made out of different people. Goody's fans essentially treating Goody as a joke? I never said that. That's you.
So you made up a bunch of stuff up just so you can say I contradicted myself? Not sure what your intention is, but I suggest you stop.
I'm going to let you answer your own questions.
1) I never said people thought his playstyle was strategically bad
His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against
2) I never said Goody a joke, a jester, a clown to be laughed at.
His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against
3) Goody has fans. That is true. A community is made out of different people. Goody's fans essentially treating Goody as a joke? I never said that.
His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against
You can quote me all you want, but it still remains that what you are qouting does not correlate with what I have written, implied or otherwise. There is simply no contradictory staements. Stop making things up. All this just so you can make up a story of how Goody was derided, to continue whatever agenda you have.
On February 09 2016 07:34 Dangermousecatdog wrote: 1) I never said people thought his playstyle was strategically bad. That's you 2) I never said Goody a joke, a jester, a clown to be laughed at. That's you. 3) Goody has fans. That is true. A community is made out of different people. Goody's fans essentially treating Goody as a joke? I never said that. That's you.
So you made up a bunch of stuff up just so you can say I contradicted myself? Not sure what your intention is, but I suggest you stop.
I'm going to let you answer your own questions.
1) I never said people thought his playstyle was strategically bad
His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against
2) I never said Goody a joke, a jester, a clown to be laughed at.
His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against
3) Goody has fans. That is true. A community is made out of different people. Goody's fans essentially treating Goody as a joke? I never said that.
His games were best known during HotS, with his style being emblematic of the problem with mech. It wasn't smart, it wasn't skillful, boring to watch, boring to play and play against
You can quote me all you want, but it still remains that what you are qouting does not correlate with what I have written, implied or otherwise. There is simply no contradictory staements. Stop making things up. All this just so you can make up a story of how Goody was derided, to continue whatever agenda you have.
You honestly believe that your saying that Goody's play being boring, not smart, and not skillful is you suggesting that people liked Goody's play?
Excellent article and analysis (and I was skeptical when I first saw it). Pretty solid information regarding the current state of our beloved game.
My only criticism would be that it didn't cover enough. There are so many more layers to this that I would love for this writer (or others) to unpack and look at. Maybe make this a series of articles.
Also, no need to be so apologetic. If people actually got angry and offended by this honest and necessary analysis, then our beloved game is REALLY in trouble.
I think casual vs hard core is irrelevant. The problem is that there is no broad access to VODS. Sure, someone's always streaming, but it's rarely ever tournaments, and I don't have time to watch live casts often, and I'm not going to pay twitch sub fee to every single goddamn tournament stream channel (demuslim is the only person who gets my hard earned money because he embodies the attitude I respect most in a pro gamer, alongside QXC and Jinro)
My issue with SC2 is that I just don't have the time to follow events and there is NO good system in place for archiving events for people to watch later. That frustrates the hell out of me to the point where I just don't watch SC2 much anymore despite it being quite literally the only online game I enjoy to watch played. If blizzard had a system (or hell even a youtube channel) where all major tournaments were uploaded in straight blocks, they'd get a hell of a lot of revenue out of me alone.
Caster wise, I am generally pretty zen with regards to who's casting what, but I hate forced, artificial screaming and "hype" as the internet kids put it these days (so that video was mostly good apart from the screaming and forced "hype"). It makes me want to claw my eyes out with forks. Good casting compliments a game, it doesn't drown the gameplay out. I don't think all games need pure analysis.
The problem is that there is no real system in place for players to all rally around. the GSL was a great start, but it mutated into this ungainly monstrosity that ultimately fell apart, the NASL just didn't have the viewership. Blizzard really should step in and put together something to bring the players together more than just once a year at blizzcon, and host VODS of cast games (as much as I love analyzing games myself, I do really enjoy well cast games so much)
Tbh I think the real problem is that the game is 6 years old and people just lose interest. It's pretty natural.
You will always have a small group left that follows it (the hardcore, if you wish), but the casuals will jump ship eventually.
For me this happened during the BL/Infestor era, my entire group of friends lost interest and switched to Dota. Dota and LoL both saw a massive rise in players in that period btw, let's blame it all on BL/Infestor
Now I'm back briefly for LotV, but I don't see myself getting invested in the pro scene ever again. I'm just fooling around on ladder and earning some achievements until the next good game rolls around (looking at you, fire emblem fates).
On February 10 2016 16:59 Honeybadger wrote: I think casual vs hard core is irrelevant. The problem is that there is no broad access to VODS. Sure, someone's always streaming, but it's rarely ever tournaments, and I don't have time to watch live casts often, and I'm not going to pay twitch sub fee to every single goddamn tournament stream channel (demuslim is the only person who gets my hard earned money because he embodies the attitude I respect most in a pro gamer, alongside QXC and Jinro)
My issue with SC2 is that I just don't have the time to follow events and there is NO good system in place for archiving events for people to watch later. That frustrates the hell out of me to the point where I just don't watch SC2 much anymore despite it being quite literally the only online game I enjoy to watch played. If blizzard had a system (or hell even a youtube channel) where all major tournaments were uploaded in straight blocks, they'd get a hell of a lot of revenue out of me alone.
Caster wise, I am generally pretty zen with regards to who's casting what, but I hate forced, artificial screaming and "hype" as the internet kids put it these days (so that video was mostly good apart from the screaming and forced "hype"). It makes me want to claw my eyes out with forks. Good casting compliments a game, it doesn't drown the gameplay out. I don't think all games need pure analysis.
The problem is that there is no real system in place for players to all rally around. the GSL was a great start, but it mutated into this ungainly monstrosity that ultimately fell apart, the NASL just didn't have the viewership. Blizzard really should step in and put together something to bring the players together more than just once a year at blizzcon, and host VODS of cast games (as much as I love analyzing games myself, I do really enjoy well cast games so much)
I'll address the first point of your argument. There seems to be two main parts to your argument 1. Broad access to VODs (preferably high level tournament vods) 2. No system in place for watching VODS
I think part of the problem with this argument is that you do not have the time to familiarize yourself with the ways to access vods. Basetradetv always has free vods on their twitch page, and it's only a matter of looking through them to see which tournaments are casted.
ESL, Dreamhack, and GSL (at least currently) have free vods on twitch, and those are available relatively quickly after a broadcast. Admittedly, it's harder to track down IEM vods since esltv SC2 is constantly playing reruns.
However, for all major tournaments, vods are usually up within a week on their respective Youtube channels. For GSL, it's afreecatv, for Proleague, it's esportstv, for esl, esltv, dreamhacktv, and ogaming. All of these are completely free on youtube, and it's really easy to find these channels.
Second
You say that there is no system in place for watching archived, but I would say that for the most part, the youtube channels above have all organized their vods (usually into english vods) but also for the english channels into tournaments, like for example IEM Taipei, on the esltv vods, it would be "IEM Taipei" or something like that. It's really not that hard to go to youtube, type in "channel" and then browse vods there.
It's not completely up to date for 2016, but the pages are on there that specify which matchup in which round on like page 48 for like the GSL. Furthermore, if you wanted to watch archived vods (at least the ones that weren't taken down), it has the near complete listing for 2014/2015 vods.
Perhaps it is that you are just not up to date with searching vods, but your profile indicates that you were a user since 2010, so you likely had to find vods then as well, so it seems odd that you would have missed this.
It just seems that there are vods in fairly accessible locations that take a minimal amount of effort to find. Admittedly, all the youtube channels and the team liquid page are not blizzard sponsored, and they are not all in one place, but your complaint that "My issue with SC2 is that I just don't have the time to follow events and there is NO good system in place for archiving events for people to watch later" sounds a lot more like an excuse when there's a resource within your grasp that has almost ALL the premier tournament vods (some are unaccessible or lost).
And does it really take that much time to google "iem youtube," then click "ESL" for youtube, go to "playlists," then scroll down to the SC2 events?
I am sorry if I sound and come across as condescending and/or rude, but it also frustrates me quite a bit when people say that there's no easy way to find vods when there is clearly an easy way to find vods, and they have not taken that effort to find them.
On February 10 2016 17:47 FrkFrJss wrote: I'll address the first point of your argument. There seems to be two main parts to your argument 1. Broad access to VODs (preferably high level tournament vods) 2. No system in place for watching VODS
Shortened your post to avoid wall of text. That's excellent info that I'll absolutely be taking advantage of and I greatly appreciate you taking the time to put it there for me. That said, you did kind of prove my point, that vods require combing through five or more different resources, which is something a lot of fans just got tired of doing. If blizzard stepped in and consolidated the professional tournament videos in some way, a lot of people would likely come back to SC2.
I'm gonna go look for some tournament vids at the sites you listed. thanks!
On February 10 2016 17:47 FrkFrJss wrote: I'll address the first point of your argument. There seems to be two main parts to your argument 1. Broad access to VODs (preferably high level tournament vods) 2. No system in place for watching VODS
Shortened your post to avoid wall of text. That's excellent info that I'll absolutely be taking advantage of and I greatly appreciate you taking the time to put it there for me. That said, you did kind of prove my point, that vods require combing through five or more different resources, which is something a lot of fans just got tired of doing. If blizzard stepped in and consolidated the professional tournament videos in some way, a lot of people would likely come back to SC2.
I'm gonna go look for some tournament vids at the sites you listed. thanks!
A Blizz sponsored Top 5 games of the week three based on viewership and two based on personal taste of the team in charge of the weekly list would be amazing.
On February 10 2016 17:47 FrkFrJss wrote: I'll address the first point of your argument. There seems to be two main parts to your argument 1. Broad access to VODs (preferably high level tournament vods) 2. No system in place for watching VODS
Shortened your post to avoid wall of text. That's excellent info that I'll absolutely be taking advantage of and I greatly appreciate you taking the time to put it there for me. That said, you did kind of prove my point, that vods require combing through five or more different resources, which is something a lot of fans just got tired of doing. If blizzard stepped in and consolidated the professional tournament videos in some way, a lot of people would likely come back to SC2.
I'm gonna go look for some tournament vids at the sites you listed. thanks!
A Blizz sponsored Top 5 games of the week three based on viewership and two based on personal taste of the team in charge of the weekly list would be amazing.
That would actually be really awesome, especially since it would demonstrate more blizzard interest in the esports scene (aside from balancing).
Also, honeybadger, I'm really glad that you could take advantage of the vods, but the link to the teamliquid page is a consolidated resource that doesn't require combing through five different sources.
On February 10 2016 17:47 FrkFrJss wrote: I'll address the first point of your argument. There seems to be two main parts to your argument 1. Broad access to VODs (preferably high level tournament vods) 2. No system in place for watching VODS
Shortened your post to avoid wall of text. That's excellent info that I'll absolutely be taking advantage of and I greatly appreciate you taking the time to put it there for me. That said, you did kind of prove my point, that vods require combing through five or more different resources, which is something a lot of fans just got tired of doing. If blizzard stepped in and consolidated the professional tournament videos in some way, a lot of people would likely come back to SC2.
I'm gonna go look for some tournament vids at the sites you listed. thanks!
A Blizz sponsored Top 5 games of the week three based on viewership and two based on personal taste of the team in charge of the weekly list would be amazing.
That would actually be really awesome, especially since it would demonstrate more blizzard interest in the esports scene (aside from balancing).
Also, honeybadger, I'm really glad that you could take advantage of the vods, but the link to the teamliquid page is a consolidated resource that doesn't require combing through five different sources.
You guys remember battle reports? I LOVED battle reports. Now they can just VOD it!
If they spent some energy showing us good games of their new units, pushing through Bnet, even put some vod watching achievements, they would make this so much more exciting
I have been watching competitive play for fun for many years. I came in around the time Tasteless moved to Korea and have enjoyed his goofy casting style ever since. Flashy production values is fun to me, and I understand enough about the game that I don't need super- technical commentary to enjoy it.
Fast forward a number of years. Now I watch Starcraft with my wife and appreciate that, years later, Tasteless and Artosis are still there, casting in a way that entertains me, but makes it accessible to help my wife become a fan of good Starcraft. Neither of us enjoy watching sloppy foreigners play. We mostly stick to Korean games, and have appreciated that more of them are around to play against each other in Korea nowdays, however unfair it is to them.
We should try and bridge these two sides, offer feedback, then get back to enjoying the game for what it is. Balance is largely up to the players to get better at their races and overcome adversity.
The main reason i watch sc2 is to find out who is the toughest SC2 player thats it. Blizzcon was all about that. Only the toughest foreigners was able to make it.
EPT
