|
On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place.
Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over.
Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet.
|
On December 05 2012 09:12 MyTHicaL wrote:
This is ridiculous and is a direct attack on someone's financial wellbeing; a recognised legal offence in most if not all countries under tort law.
My only question is: if he shows up at LAN events or participates in international online tournaments will they attempt to prohibit this? Because he will obviously just change IP addresses and create a new account but it would be a first time thing if and when Dig qualify for an important LAN tournament and riot officials show up to attempt to disqualify this player.
Complete bullshit where the only objective in mind is to scare "toxic" players into being less "toxic" so noobies and immature kids will be more likely to get hooked and spend their pocket money in the Riot store. This shit makes me sick, whatever happened to freedom of speech? I mean there is a goddamn mute feature, why don't they just advertise that? zzzzzzzz
If an employee of a company gives the company a bad name by their behaviour, they will be warned and disciplined no matter WHAT the field. If I walk around my town wearing my work uniform being a cunt to people, my employer would probably be informed, and I'd be disciplined. If he was on a smurf unrelated to his main account that people didn't know was him, it'd be different. But after multiple warnings to stop doing something in the PUBLIC eye, Riot have every right to ban him from their tournaments.
That's the other thing. If they did something to influence his financial state there are laws surrounding it. However they didn't kick him off his team. They banned him from the tournaments THEY host and THEY run and THEY pay for. This is the proper response, AND this is good to set a bar for other pro gamers. A lot of them give others abuse in solo queue because obviously they're pros so anyone who disagrees with them is totally wrong flame them now! Maybe they'll conduct themselves better.
|
On December 05 2012 09:24 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 07:35 3 Lions wrote:
At least it will scare other professional players into behaving better in solo-queue Which is a problem, Riot prioritizes solo Q over the careers of players that create the pro scene in the first place. Really odd that people like this development. Solo Q players rejoicing?
As it turns out, Riot has smarter people than you or I telling them that it's not good exposure to have a professional player who treats the little folk like dirt. This isn't Feudal Europe, he doesn't own the place. He's just a little kid who can't handle the demands of his "profession."
|
On December 05 2012 09:28 overt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place. Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over. Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet.
I'm pretty certain other people are welcome to host their own LoL tournaments. Just because Riot are willing to invest so much into the competitive scene, and all the tournaments lap it up, doesn't mean they're the ONLY ones who can run any given tournament.
|
didn't even know he solo queued let alone rage
|
On December 05 2012 09:28 overt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place. Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over. Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet.
Yes this amount of control Riot has over the game is horrible policy and borderline unconstitutional. However, this is the system we are stuck with in the U.S. and most of the world (until lobbyists for movies, music, etc. somehow don't control Congress lololol). Not really Riot's fault they are gifted with this ridiculous IP system and they use it to the fullest extent.
I think this discussion though is kinda getting too far from what's happening here. Basically, Riot has the legal authority to do this and they used it in a reasonable way here. The main thing I'm afraid of is that it's not really a fair system and the more popular players are basically untouchable no matter what they do.
|
On December 05 2012 09:24 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 07:35 3 Lions wrote:
At least it will scare other professional players into behaving better in solo-queue Which is a problem, Riot prioritizes solo Q over the careers of players that create the pro scene in the first place. Really odd that people like this development. Solo Q players rejoicing?
Their game, their rules, their decisions. You all agreed to it in the EULA, if you have a problem with it they aren't forcing you to stay. If you act like that in any type of job setting you shouldn't be allowed to have a "career" in whatever it is you are trying to do. Act at least half like a decent human being and maybe you'll be able to keep a job.
|
On December 05 2012 09:31 IMABUNNEH wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:28 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place. Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over. Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet. I'm pretty certain other people are welcome to host their own LoL tournaments. Just because Riot are willing to invest so much into the competitive scene, and all the tournaments lap it up, doesn't mean they're the ONLY ones who can run any given tournament.
Actually this is exactly the problem. In the U.S. Riot ARE the only ones that can run a tournament. Others must seek permission from Riot in order to run a tourney. Now of course you can run a little local tourney for $100 or whatever and Riot won't give a shit or bother to sue you. But the large tournaments must get the ok from Riot first and if they don't Riot probably will take legal action.
|
On December 05 2012 09:26 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:25 iinsom wrote:
I cant see how this is an issue?
He was warned sufficient times (8 is massive, at work i get 3 verbal warnings, 1 written warning them im out) and this is his job, then he should treat it as such and be a professional about it. Solo queue isn't his job.
He's salaried by RIOT, everything to do with League is now technically his "job"
It'd be like if in your job you went out to lunch still wearing a badge/uniform and completely badmouth your company and how terrible it is etc yet when you were at the job you acted all prim and proper, you represent the company, your behaviours are associated to the company.
I don't honestly understand anyones points in trying to defend this, even without the salary acting like that shouldn't be accepted at any level & why would you ever want someone like him in your SoloQ game, he's the exact same as any of the ragey kids but he just happens to have ELO, good riddance.
|
On December 05 2012 09:33 Slow Motion wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:28 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place. Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over. Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet. Yes this amount of control Riot has over the game is horrible policy and borderline unconstitutional. However, this is the system we are stuck with in the U.S. and most of the world (until lobbyists for movies, music, etc. somehow don't control Congress lololol). Not really Riot's fault they are gifted with this ridiculous IP system and they use it to the fullest extent. I think this discussion though is kinda getting too far from what's happening here. Basically, Riot has the legal authority to do this and they used it in a reasonable way here. The main thing I'm afraid of is that it's not really a fair system and the more popular players are basically untouchable no matter what they do.
How more popular do you need to get? He's on one of the most well-known pro teams and plays for them in every tournament.
Not a fair system? 9 tribunal trips, 8 punishments. Any reasonable person would agree you should learn your lesson after that or something like this is going to happen, no matter who you are.
|
On December 05 2012 09:39 Atokad wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:33 Slow Motion wrote:On December 05 2012 09:28 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place. Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over. Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet. Yes this amount of control Riot has over the game is horrible policy and borderline unconstitutional. However, this is the system we are stuck with in the U.S. and most of the world (until lobbyists for movies, music, etc. somehow don't control Congress lololol). Not really Riot's fault they are gifted with this ridiculous IP system and they use it to the fullest extent. I think this discussion though is kinda getting too far from what's happening here. Basically, Riot has the legal authority to do this and they used it in a reasonable way here. The main thing I'm afraid of is that it's not really a fair system and the more popular players are basically untouchable no matter what they do. How more popular do you need to get? He's on one of the most well-known pro teams and plays for them in every tournament. Not a fair system? 9 tribunal trips, 8 punishments. Any reasonable person would agree you should learn your lesson after that or something like this is going to happen, no matter who you are.
I dunno I think Riot may be a lot more lenient with someone like Dyrus who has a huge fan following. They may still ban him if he goes super out of line but somehow I think he will get more chances.
|
United States23745 Posts
On December 05 2012 09:38 Skithiryx wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:26 Serpico wrote:On December 05 2012 09:25 iinsom wrote:
I cant see how this is an issue?
He was warned sufficient times (8 is massive, at work i get 3 verbal warnings, 1 written warning them im out) and this is his job, then he should treat it as such and be a professional about it. Solo queue isn't his job. He's salaried by RIOT, everything to do with League is now technically his "job" It'd be like if in your job you went out to lunch still wearing a badge/uniform and completely badmouth your company and how terrible it is etc yet when you were at the job you acted all prim and proper, you represent the company, your behaviours are associated to the company. I don't honestly understand anyones points in trying to defend this, even without the salary acting like that shouldn't be accepted at any level & why would you ever want someone like him in your SoloQ game, he's the exact same as any of the ragey kids but he just happens to have ELO, good riddance.
He isn't salaried by Riot, he was going to be, but they haven't signed any contracts yet. I guess my biggest issue is I'm trying to compare it to traditional sports, but since you have to agree to the EULA to play LoL, whereas you don't to practice football, it falls apart for me where Riot has more power. In football there are different levels of rules, but the NFL can't suspend you before you sign a contract since you aren't part of the league.
|
On December 05 2012 09:26 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:25 iinsom wrote:
I cant see how this is an issue?
He was warned sufficient times (8 is massive, at work i get 3 verbal warnings, 1 written warning them im out) and this is his job, then he should treat it as such and be a professional about it. Solo queue isn't his job.
However, accepting Riot's 3 Champion league deal would make him a Riot employee.
And Riot has fired Rioters for acting like idiots.
|
I think it is sensible for them to ban him from competition for a year because he cannot compete without playing on their servers. Ergo, he is banned from competitive play. Maybe there's a quibble over a year length ban as a first-of-its-kind punishment, but this is not a single instance of bad behavior. He has a long pattern of unrepentant toxic behavior. It's amazing he even got this far without some sort of action.
|
On December 05 2012 09:41 Slow Motion wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:39 Atokad wrote:On December 05 2012 09:33 Slow Motion wrote:On December 05 2012 09:28 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place. Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over. Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet. Yes this amount of control Riot has over the game is horrible policy and borderline unconstitutional. However, this is the system we are stuck with in the U.S. and most of the world (until lobbyists for movies, music, etc. somehow don't control Congress lololol). Not really Riot's fault they are gifted with this ridiculous IP system and they use it to the fullest extent. I think this discussion though is kinda getting too far from what's happening here. Basically, Riot has the legal authority to do this and they used it in a reasonable way here. The main thing I'm afraid of is that it's not really a fair system and the more popular players are basically untouchable no matter what they do. How more popular do you need to get? He's on one of the most well-known pro teams and plays for them in every tournament. Not a fair system? 9 tribunal trips, 8 punishments. Any reasonable person would agree you should learn your lesson after that or something like this is going to happen, no matter who you are. I dunno I think Riot may be a lot more lenient with someone like Dyrus who has a huge fan following. They may still ban him if he goes super out of line but somehow I think he will get more chances.
In my opinion, if Dyrus was in the exact same situation as IWD, Riot wouldn't hesitate to ban him, regardless of his fan following.
And for all those saying IWD's carreer is over because he can't come back in a year, why? Will he not be able to practice or something outside of tournaments? Will LoL be dead in a year, in which case who cares? He's going to be just fine. It's up to him whether he returns to a team next year or not. Riot didn't destroy anything.
|
On December 05 2012 09:36 Slow Motion wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:31 IMABUNNEH wrote:On December 05 2012 09:28 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place. Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over. Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet. I'm pretty certain other people are welcome to host their own LoL tournaments. Just because Riot are willing to invest so much into the competitive scene, and all the tournaments lap it up, doesn't mean they're the ONLY ones who can run any given tournament. Actually this is exactly the problem. In the U.S. Riot ARE the only ones that can run a tournament. Others must seek permission from Riot in order to run a tourney. Now of course you can run a little local tourney for $100 or whatever and Riot won't give a shit or bother to sue you. But the large tournaments must get the ok from Riot first and if they don't Riot probably will take legal action.
Blizzard is the same way.
|
United States37500 Posts
After a brief talk with several Riot heads:
1. I want to reiterate that IWD has had numerous warnings and bans before this perm ban took place today. Unfortunately, everyone will simply have to take Riot's word at face value. As with TeamLiquid, when a moderator bans a TL user over severe behavior, you accept our actions for what they are. There is no reason why Riot or TL would unjustifiably ban a player, pro or otherwise.
2. I am informed that the Dignitas orga was notified of IWD's ingame behavior "months in advance". In no way was this simply sprung on dig, without letting them know actions were going to be levied against IWD. dig had time to rein in IWD and work on his behavior before today's decision was made.
3. From Zileas and Lyte, pro players are role models of the community. If you want to get a salary and participate in Season 3, where the benefits have greatly improved since Season 2, don't do negative actions for a long period of time. Riot understands even pros have their bad days but keep yourself in check. This one is common sense.
4. Unfortunately, I am seeing a comparison with Dota2 for some reason and I have to say that is neither here nor there. Riot is doing what it thinks is best for their brand and game. If a professional player misbehaves, Riot/Tribunal will step in and say something. If this occurs to the same player nine times over the course of one season, how would you not implement a severe action here?
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
On December 05 2012 09:41 Slow Motion wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:39 Atokad wrote:On December 05 2012 09:33 Slow Motion wrote:On December 05 2012 09:28 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place. Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over. Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet. Yes this amount of control Riot has over the game is horrible policy and borderline unconstitutional. However, this is the system we are stuck with in the U.S. and most of the world (until lobbyists for movies, music, etc. somehow don't control Congress lololol). Not really Riot's fault they are gifted with this ridiculous IP system and they use it to the fullest extent. I think this discussion though is kinda getting too far from what's happening here. Basically, Riot has the legal authority to do this and they used it in a reasonable way here. The main thing I'm afraid of is that it's not really a fair system and the more popular players are basically untouchable no matter what they do. How more popular do you need to get? He's on one of the most well-known pro teams and plays for them in every tournament. Not a fair system? 9 tribunal trips, 8 punishments. Any reasonable person would agree you should learn your lesson after that or something like this is going to happen, no matter who you are. I dunno I think Riot may be a lot more lenient with someone like Dyrus who has a huge fan following. They may still ban him if he goes super out of line but somehow I think he will get more chances.
If that's the case and people are worried, then maybe they should create a player union like NHLPA, NBAPA, etc. There will always be a power struggle between the owners (Riot) and the players so there may as well be a central player organization to help each other out.
On December 05 2012 09:44 onlywonderboy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:38 Skithiryx wrote:On December 05 2012 09:26 Serpico wrote:On December 05 2012 09:25 iinsom wrote:
I cant see how this is an issue?
He was warned sufficient times (8 is massive, at work i get 3 verbal warnings, 1 written warning them im out) and this is his job, then he should treat it as such and be a professional about it. Solo queue isn't his job. He's salaried by RIOT, everything to do with League is now technically his "job" It'd be like if in your job you went out to lunch still wearing a badge/uniform and completely badmouth your company and how terrible it is etc yet when you were at the job you acted all prim and proper, you represent the company, your behaviours are associated to the company. I don't honestly understand anyones points in trying to defend this, even without the salary acting like that shouldn't be accepted at any level & why would you ever want someone like him in your SoloQ game, he's the exact same as any of the ragey kids but he just happens to have ELO, good riddance. He isn't salaried by Riot, he was going to be, but they haven't signed any contracts yet. I guess my biggest issue is I'm trying to compare it to traditional sports, but since you have to agree to the EULA to play LoL, whereas you don't to practice football, it falls apart for me where Riot has more power. In football there are different levels of rules, but the NFL can't suspend you before you sign a contract since you aren't part of the league.
As several other people have said, isn't the suspension more like Riot not wanting to hire/draft IWD into their championship series?
|
On December 05 2012 09:52 JBright wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:41 Slow Motion wrote:On December 05 2012 09:39 Atokad wrote:On December 05 2012 09:33 Slow Motion wrote:On December 05 2012 09:28 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place. Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over. Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet. Yes this amount of control Riot has over the game is horrible policy and borderline unconstitutional. However, this is the system we are stuck with in the U.S. and most of the world (until lobbyists for movies, music, etc. somehow don't control Congress lololol). Not really Riot's fault they are gifted with this ridiculous IP system and they use it to the fullest extent. I think this discussion though is kinda getting too far from what's happening here. Basically, Riot has the legal authority to do this and they used it in a reasonable way here. The main thing I'm afraid of is that it's not really a fair system and the more popular players are basically untouchable no matter what they do. How more popular do you need to get? He's on one of the most well-known pro teams and plays for them in every tournament. Not a fair system? 9 tribunal trips, 8 punishments. Any reasonable person would agree you should learn your lesson after that or something like this is going to happen, no matter who you are. I dunno I think Riot may be a lot more lenient with someone like Dyrus who has a huge fan following. They may still ban him if he goes super out of line but somehow I think he will get more chances. If that's the case and people are worried, then maybe they should create a player union like NHLPA, NBAPA, etc. Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:44 onlywonderboy wrote:On December 05 2012 09:38 Skithiryx wrote:On December 05 2012 09:26 Serpico wrote:On December 05 2012 09:25 iinsom wrote:
I cant see how this is an issue?
He was warned sufficient times (8 is massive, at work i get 3 verbal warnings, 1 written warning them im out) and this is his job, then he should treat it as such and be a professional about it. Solo queue isn't his job. He's salaried by RIOT, everything to do with League is now technically his "job" It'd be like if in your job you went out to lunch still wearing a badge/uniform and completely badmouth your company and how terrible it is etc yet when you were at the job you acted all prim and proper, you represent the company, your behaviours are associated to the company. I don't honestly understand anyones points in trying to defend this, even without the salary acting like that shouldn't be accepted at any level & why would you ever want someone like him in your SoloQ game, he's the exact same as any of the ragey kids but he just happens to have ELO, good riddance. He isn't salaried by Riot, he was going to be, but they haven't signed any contracts yet. I guess my biggest issue is I'm trying to compare it to traditional sports, but since you have to agree to the EULA to play LoL, whereas you don't to practice football, it falls apart for me where Riot has more power. In football there are different levels of rules, but the NFL can't suspend you before you sign a contract since you aren't part of the league. As several other people have said, isn't the suspension more like Riot not wanting to hire/draft IWD into their championship series?
It would be good if the players can have an organization for themselves but the push is gonna have to come from a player who's really passionate about it. Their teams and Riot definitely won't help them unionize lol. Also it's even more mixed up given guys like HSGG and Regi who are players and management. I think the way esports is structured presents a lot of barriers to this kind of player org.
|
On December 05 2012 09:52 JBright wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2012 09:41 Slow Motion wrote:On December 05 2012 09:39 Atokad wrote:On December 05 2012 09:33 Slow Motion wrote:On December 05 2012 09:28 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 09:21 Ketara wrote:On December 05 2012 08:57 overt wrote:On December 05 2012 08:52 Ketara wrote:
Anybody who says this is a bad thing or that Riot has too much power isn't thinking straight I feel. I still stand by the belief that what someone does in pub play shouldn't impact their ability to play competitively. This doesn't make any sense. IWD is a public figure for the game and for Riot in general. The way he acts in solo queue has an impact on what people think of the game, and he should be punished appropriately. Preventing him from participating in tournaments is an appropriate punishment just like it would be appropriate for a Disneyland employee to get fired from Disneyland for going around and telling people Disneyland is a terrible place. Except that's not how it works in any other eSport ever. Mostly because the developer's don't completely control the entire competitive scene. Valve might punish DotA2 players and not allow them to come to the international but they could still play at every other DotA2 event. Because Riot sponsors nearly every LAN and has incorporated every LAN into their championship series a ban from competitive play means that your career as a pro gamer is over. Like the level of control that Riot has on their scene is equivalent to what KeSPA had. Riot just hasn't abused their power. Yet. Yes this amount of control Riot has over the game is horrible policy and borderline unconstitutional. However, this is the system we are stuck with in the U.S. and most of the world (until lobbyists for movies, music, etc. somehow don't control Congress lololol). Not really Riot's fault they are gifted with this ridiculous IP system and they use it to the fullest extent. I think this discussion though is kinda getting too far from what's happening here. Basically, Riot has the legal authority to do this and they used it in a reasonable way here. The main thing I'm afraid of is that it's not really a fair system and the more popular players are basically untouchable no matter what they do. How more popular do you need to get? He's on one of the most well-known pro teams and plays for them in every tournament. Not a fair system? 9 tribunal trips, 8 punishments. Any reasonable person would agree you should learn your lesson after that or something like this is going to happen, no matter who you are. I dunno I think Riot may be a lot more lenient with someone like Dyrus who has a huge fan following. They may still ban him if he goes super out of line but somehow I think he will get more chances. If that's the case and people are worried, then maybe they should create a player union like NHLPA, NBAPA, etc. There will always be a power struggle between the owners (Riot) and the players so there may as well be a central player organization to help each other out.
I think that a player union would be really good going forward but I don't think it'll happen. Riot would likely be opposed to a player union and for good reasons.
Unless it was a player union owned and operated by Riot which would be completely pointless lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
