|
The Armchair Athleticism critical series is an opinion-base article series regarding the issues and sociocultural deficiencies of the E-Sports and StarCraft scene. All articles are perceptive-base and revolving around my own experiences and understanding of the subculture.
+ Show Spoiler [summary introduction] +The Solo Trail – Unbeaten - Posted on October 20th, 2012Short version of credentials: - Manager of 5 progaming teams (50+ professional players)
- Writer for 11 E-sports websites (5 team sites + 4 organizations: 150+ docs/articles)
- Organizer or Contributor of 11 community events (74,000 viewers/attendants)
- Some video-editing for one or two organizations, nothing big, just twitch.tv highlight-editing, presentational writing, etc.
Why are you starting your own space? I was listening to the suggestions of several friends and I finally started this space after I hit a dead-end in my endeavours in E-Sports. I’m at a point where I am not really affiliated with anyone and now’s a better time than ever to do some opinion topics. Doing my own content meant I would be alone and would work around my own initiative, drive and interest. However, it also meant that I may do something that requires more work than I thought and I would be on my own. It meant that the community reception can be more direct and harsh towards me personally and my views as I would not be backed by some credible organization as when I was writer for some. In the end, this series that took me about a month of writing, editing, verification and re-writing will really be everything I’ve learned, observed and felt throughout my time. I started out with three pieces and ended up going to ten. All of them delve into inspecting the five perspectives of the scene: teams, tournaments, players, spectators and contributors. Ultimately, it aims to really take a strong look into the many issues that inhibit the StarCraft community and E-Sports culture.
Traffic Tournament Jams - Posted on November 27th, 2012
In previous articles, when we spoke more about exposure ranges for players in tournaments, we touched upon what financially supports tournaments: viewership. This reliance keeps tournament afloat, but also has them consistently competing with one another to remain relevant to the common spectator. The problem with these competitions is that they lead to split numbers, but also shrouds unestablished, growing organizations. In contrast to these tournament companies, when game development companies (e.g Blizzard Entertainment) host and organize international tournaments, their three initiatives serve their own end and are more utilitarian:
1. Attracting new viewers and expanding their market pool,
2. Providing a supportive and community-attached front that attracts and impresses onlookers peering from the outside of the E-Sports globe
3. Creating a stable footing for current and future events. Essentially, when development companies do events, it’s to add a friendly face to a digital landscape. Similar to conventions, these events bridge the anonymity of realistic relationships and competition to a real-life stage. What sets Blizzard’s tournaments apart from other organizations and their events is the dependency. Let’s look at how Blizzard depends on StarCraft II:
- Blizzard earns a return through general sales of StarCraft II
- Blizzard earns return through a share of prize-pools/licensing of major tournaments
- Further sales are generated through the longevity of the game and its real-life presence via tournaments, events, etc.
Now what are some ways tournament organizations, relying on Blizzard’s games, survive? Sponsors, attendance, viewers, investors, pay-per-view, HD passes and advertising (all relaying back to viewership dependency). Their sales are not made by the game, but reliant on the game’s status and overall community’s attitude towards it. I think what you’ll find is that due to the scene missing a wide array of incoming money from different directions and areas, most tournament organizations are obliged to adhere to the spectators (titled: community attitude).
In organizing tournaments, there are three major characters you need to prioritize: the spectators, players and yourself: the company hosting and organizing the event. While one would love to adhere to the spectators who only want to see their favourite players rip it up, your own sustainability is based off the survivability of the scene as well as the coming and going of new competitors. Unfortunately, spectators are quite picky: they want to see their favourite players, though properly seeded. They don’t necessarily want “invitationals”, but seeing their favourites reach the championship brackets is always noted in their books: it’s like getting to the good stuff after two days of underground fist-brawling. However, some people like pure open-bracket tournaments, but as we saw at MLG’s Providence of 2011: it can be long, winding and you have to sift through a ton of one-sided matches before the good competitions comes in. Balancing out a good format for your tournament that pleases spectators, but gives fair odds to another major character, the players, can affect your overall financial gain.
Players are another aspect to consider: they want fairness and good playing conditions so they can win. Sometimes, wanting to win means boring or short games which doesn’t exactly thrill the viewers. How do you please fans, have them return to your tournaments each and every year as well as entice them to perhaps pay for some products or services when your tournament’s grand finale is a six-minute match? FXO’s Josh Dentrinos has been asking these sorts of questions for a long time now:
“So whats next for E-Sports? Well, you are going to start getting charged for the content. Anyone who thinks the content being made should be considered free because “twitch lets them play ads that’s enough” should probably start researching what kind of money actually can come out of that and that’s no attack on twitch, they do a great job and are doing a great job at ting to provide a service to the community that allows things to last longer and grow.”
What we’ve been seeing more is the leading tournaments and events trying to take up all the months on the calendar. The reason for this is due to competition with neighboring major events and the guarantee to make a return of investment (even if at a net loss). The long-term aim for these major leagues is to be an established integral part of the culture as well as ensuring their lead as a major organization within the year. Let’s look at progress for MLG: originally, MLG had three events in 2010 as they tested the StarCraft 2 water. Then they made bold moves and doubled that number to 6 major city events (and 3 invitationals). This year, they’re going for bigger:
- Winter: EU/KR/NA Qualifiers, Arena, Championship
- Spring: Open Online Qualifiers, Arena 1, Invite Qualifiers, Arena 2, Championship
- Summer: Open and Invite Qualifiers, Arena, Championship
- Fall: Open and Invite Qualifiers, MVP Invitiational, Championship
That’s smart and very aggressive. They have a good hold on the North-American side of the world and they’re really using what lead they got in the middle of 2011 (MLG Anaheim) to really take advantage of the scene and spectators. Let’s take a look at it again: in 2011, MLG was about eighteen days + three invitationals (broadcasted over about thirty days each). Approximately three months of content and about 2 months’ nights of player’s playing these matches before broadcasting. In 2012, we’re looking at double that and more in terms of content and time for both spectators to digest the amount of tournaments as well as how many qualifiers, arenas and championships players have to play (as well as the MVP Invitational).
Now add DreamHack to the mix as well as GSL, IEM and the NASL. If we threw in IGN Pro League’s showmatches (IPL Fight Club), team leagues (Premier, Contender and Amateur) and the qualifiers of the major tournament (IPL 3-4-5, MLG, IEM, GSL, NASL open), you’re looking at a near full annual schedule of events. Some pay-per-view, some entirely free, all revolving around nearly the same usual players and the same base of viewers who try to absorb everything.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xTyg6.png) Amount of tournaments within the year 2012, excluding IPL Showmatches & 3-tier Team-League system (42 teams) – information courtesy of Liquipedia
The problem is the scene becomes a boiling tournament-filled hotpot. Even if we were to routinely interchange players (different regions, different champions), the significance of each tournament with another one a few months away limits the feeling of achievement and a ‘talked legacy’ (‘Talked legacy’ being the missing discussion amongst the community of who is the best player). This is because of an equally-sized and valued tournament coming soon after one finished. Following tournaments either reinforce a point-of-view or simply flips the table and rescrambles the question of “who is the best player around?”. Neither are good proponents of good discussions; the roots to what ultimately becomes “hype” or excitement when the two compared players fight it out.
In addition, tournaments mean more opponents and less specialty in plays. The emphasis on good macromanagement in-game, mentality and overall strategy becomes more demanded than training or preparing specifically for an opponent and their strategy (a la GSL or NASL). Endurance starts playing a larger value than one’s ability to really assess their opponent as well as out-think them. These tournaments potentially slow down strategy and competitive innovation for refining in mechanics and overall ability to play the game.
With so many tournaments and opportunity, top teams don’t necessarily need to prioritize leagues when the prize-pool becomes nearly the same. Not to forget that the amount of preparation demanded in tournaments is greatly reduced and easier to cover than the analytical approach of studying your opponent for league matches. The equation goes as: more risk, but more reward in less time for tournaments than leagues, which greatly reduces a league’s importance (with the GSL being an exception).
Previously we mentioned the shrouding of major tournaments and its effect on smaller competitions and leagues; unfortunately, there are so many competitions demanding so many international fans their full attention, you start diminishing developing tournaments and leagues trying to attract new viewers (and the attention of prosperous teams). Any smaller tournament trying to obtain the top-ranked teams will have to swim through the nightmares of scheduling and fitting their tournament within an overfished market. When it comes to Koreans, that’s a double layer and language barrier to hurdle over (God bless ESV’s Korean Weekly).
All in all, what Dota 2 lacks is what StarCraft II has too much of: exposure. With so many tournaments you face these summarizing problems in many facets of the three main characters named above (Tournament organizers, players, eye-strained spectators).
- Root problem: Due to the limited forms of return of investment through service sales (HD, PPV, etc.), tournaments organizations aggressively up the number of tournaments. Competition amongst other major tournaments also urges organizers to push out more content to establish themselves as the top event within a year. This effect causes a year-long monopoly amongst the top national and international tournaments (NA, EU, Asia).
- Branching problem 1: Due to this monopoly of tournaments, spectators become bogged down with the amount of prestige in tournaments and can no longer value champions within a professional tournament circuit or via an array of major tournaments.
- Branching problem 2: With an influx of major tournaments, a player’s time is divided to preparing for all kinds of opponents as well as specific opponents in leagues. Preparation diminishes, strategy becomes stale and repetitive to what works most of the time.
- Branching problem 3: Budding tournaments and host organizations are clouded over by the big dogs trying to scrape by. This squashes unknown players’ opportunities to be exposed, removes competition and distances ‘indie’ tournament organizations from major events.
- Branching problem 4: The amount of free content available dimishes the money major organizations can scrape by with. If you include the target audiences general income and willingness to spend and you find a very starved and begging market.
I would say these highlighted issues are probably the core of what prevents growth in many areas of this subculture. If someone were to ask me a solution, I’d just say: we need more viewers, more money/investors and more cycling of players, major, medium and ‘indie’ events. If intrigued and they asked me “how?” I just wouldn’t know. The obvious answer would be that people need to spend more, but for the sake “to grow E-Sports”? That may be a bit too utilitarian, not practical and throwing more money at a problem from real people does not necessarily mean solutions bloom. In the end, what tournaments are causing is due to their own strain and difficulty to sustain. We’re only drowning in content because others thirst for means to expand in new and different ways. All in all, there is a traffic jam of tournaments due to unsatisfied individual needs.
|
This informed series of written pieces could not have been achieved without the help and opinions of my peers and friends. Below are the people I wish to thank for their insight, accuracy/consistency check or expert opinion on the numerous topics: thank you
- Brad Carney (Lefty)
- Chris Chan (Founder of ChanManV's Production)
- Eric Grady (Cyber-Sports Network's Director of Events - Usurp)
- Flo Yao (Quantic Gaming’s Progamer - Flo)
- Jacqueline Geller (eSports Network Coordinator of Blizzard)
- John Clark (Cyber-Sports Network Executive Director of Operations)
- Josh Dentrinos (FXOpen’s Director - Boss)
- Marc McEntegart (Team Liquid Writer - SirJolt)
- Matt Weber (Team Liquid Administrator - Heyoka)
- Payam Toghyan (ROOT Gaming Progamer - TT1)
- Shawn Simon (Team Liquid Progamer - Sheth)
- Steven Bonnell II (Progamer/Entertainer - Destiny)
- Thomas Shifrer (ESFI World Senior Journalist)
If you'd like more information about the series (more pieces about different aspects of the scene will be released periodically), to contact me privately or to generously give me some siteviews on my website, you can follow the following link:
You can also follow me on Twitter where I tweet public news and information about the scene including roster changes, controversy and/or overall E-Sports news: @TorteDeLini
Thank you very much and I appreciate all feedback or corrections.
|
Nice read, I also agree that with the amount of big tournaments going on these days, being crowned a champion doesn't have as much prestige as it used to.
|
|
|
Great work again Torte <3 Making me think about things I'll never think about otherwise.
|
Thank you Azera.
I'm about 1/2 way through my series and I just really wish I got more feedback or discussionl.
|
I enjoy reading these. Thanks.
|
It's definitely hard to stay abreast of everything that's happening with so much going on. Big thanks to all those working in the background to keep this thing going and growing.
|
Shouldn't this be worded "Tournament Traffic Jams"?
Also, good work on the article. I really agree with the part about how the fact that more tournaments makes preparation less important is detrimental to the game. It just takes a whole level off the depth of the game that I find really interesting.
|
Something that always come's up with the whole b****a discussion's (no I will not speak it's name) is that previously in BW there would only be a set amount of games that could be played, and a few tournaments with months in between, therefore a period of dominance could last a lot longer as a player. Now with a tournament every week, we see players burst into sight, dominate for a few weeks and then vanish again. No period of dominance can be built up as they play so often in so many timezones it's inevitable they'll burn out quicker or be figured out quicker as there's 200+ replays to analyse instead of 8. For a few months MC was untouchable, but he played so many games and tournaments it's as if he played 2 years of BW in the span of 2 months.
It's hard as a spectator to have that hype and that build up when you get to see DRG v MKP in a final every 2 weeks (earlier this year) than if you saw them come together in 2 finals 6 months apart like Flash and JD.
I realise this is a result of the rapid expansion, and the lack of a unifying body etc.
Maybe it'll be different once the actual SC2 pro-league is underway. At least then we can have the occasional "what if" matches between Kespa and GSL players. But currently, everyone plays everyone on camera every other week. It's hard to really care as a spectator, because if player A loses this week, not to worry, he'll be in another final next week.
|
On November 28 2012 10:57 Gingerninja wrote:
Something that always come's up with the whole b****a discussion's (no I will not speak it's name) is that previously in BW there would only be a set amount of games that could be played, and a few tournaments with months in between, therefore a period of dominance could last a lot longer as a player. Now with a tournament every week, we see players burst into sight, dominate for a few weeks and then vanish again. No period of dominance can be built up as they play so often in so many timezones it's inevitable they'll burn out quicker or be figured out quicker as there's 200+ replays to analyse instead of 8. For a few months MC was untouchable, but he played so many games and tournaments it's as if he played 2 years of BW in the span of 2 months.
It's hard as a spectator to have that hype and that build up when you get to see DRG v MKP in a final every 2 weeks (earlier this year) than if you saw them come together in 2 finals 6 months apart like Flash and JD.
I realise this is a result of the rapid expansion, and the lack of a unifying body etc.
Maybe it'll be different once the actual SC2 pro-league is underway. At least then we can have the occasional "what if" matches between Kespa and GSL players. But currently, everyone plays everyone on camera every other week. It's hard to really care as a spectator, because if player A loses this week, not to worry, he'll be in another final next week.
Very well put. There definitely is an over-saturation, in my opinion, of large scale tournaments currently. We just had DH and IEM on the same weekend, WCS before that, now WCG(shitty I know) and IPL 5 on the same weekend, GSL is still ongoing, and SPL is about to start up at the beginning of the 2nd week of December. While it is amazing that there is a gazillion different tournaments with good prize pools all the time, it really starts to become redundant and hurts the prestige of some of the events. Because a lot of the players try to go to every tournament they can(MC, for example) it starts to have a negative affect on the quality of games provided.
|
Thanks for the discussions and posts, it really means a lot seeing readers discuss!
|
Thanks for the shout out!
One of the key ingredients for all that is described in your post is lack of organisational transparency as well.
The world does not know what GOMTV's viewership numbers are (but recently can guess due to them using twitch).
The world does not know what MLG's true viewership numbers are. I refuse to believe figures that are not given with a statistical document. I could literally claim that I get 1000000 viewers in a post. Although not as believable a claim, I feel that more solid evidence should be provided publicly.
The over saturation of tournaments has created the illusion that SC2 is bigger than it actually is. Thats not saying its not big, its saying that it seems bigger than it is. The over saturation is actually a mechanism occurring only after projections are not met. That is, after organisers tried to make something work, it was not as successful as first thought, so stretching it out so that there is more broadcast up time occurs to fill the gaps.
The only way to solve this problem is for blizzard to regulate.. But its impossible to regulate the internet.
|
Have to agree with BoSs when it comes to the hard numbers.
Where are your possible solutions? It's like Grubby's notes all over again except he went the extra mile.
Honestly I think this all ties back into what I said about building towards a unified league and world circuit, which we're hearing more organizers talk about in their partnerships.
Sure, they don't like the idea of adopting similar formats because they want to have their own signature on it and believe it's good for the sceen to have variety. They all say the same thing.
BoSs I don't think the developers have to become the regulators at all.
I think it should be everyone who has a piece in the pie.
I think there should be certain requirements teams meet like when it comes down to getting the approval from the BBB to make a team eligible to compete on the World Circuit and this would be made up of the current teams, organizers/hosts, Blizzard and stream providers/cable providers (OGN/Own3d/Twitch/etc.).
Then your Global Team League could form and we could have a world circuit where you would get to see these players play.
I would also bring back Pro Gamer Licenses as well.
For every major tournament there can be an amateur tournament to try and qualify for a pro gamer badge/license. One of the few ways a player can be drafted by a Pro Team.
I have a bunch of ideas in my head, but I don't see them happening because there are way too many players and I know an association like KeSPA would never let it see the day.
They're all power hungry in a way, but as soon as they realize it's better to work together and come up with some new policies the better the scene will be better off.
|
I'm all for regulation, but I dont think we're at a point that really urges for it necessarily. At least not in the areas that matter most.
|
This was a good article, it really made me think. I like how it advances a theory on the state of the industry that to my knowledge has not been part of the public domain before. It's also nice to see FXOBoSs, a major esports insider, validate Torte's critical point about major tournament organizers saturating the scene with more and more games and events as a result of unsatisfied initial projections.
Considering that viewership numbers are the root of the problem, the critical question as the industry goes forward is how to attract and retain more viewers. At one point Torte touches on the point that maybe the tournament organizers are preventing growth through the oversaturation of events. On the other hand, Destiny in his much publicized post argued that Starcraft 2 itself needs to attract and retain more players (especially casual players) in order to increase tournament viewership. It's very interesting to think about what will be the key drivers of viewership going forward - i.e. the solution that Torte implies is a very difficult question to answer.
I would argue that the only core buildable viewerbase is players of the game, but NOT casual custom players as Destiny argues. Any new viewer would need to invest a fair amount of time in order to understand the game to a point where it can be appreciated and enjoyed as a spectator sport. Players of 1v1 are far more likely to be attracted to the esport side because the most appealing aspect of watching professional play is the strategy of the game. So certainly the game itself needs to attract more players, and I think Blizzard is doing great things with HotS in terms of the UI and all the new features.
The community and tournament scene can definitely to a certain amount to increase exposure of the game though. As for the traffic jam of tournaments, I would argue that the competition is a good thing which will be the only way to separate the cream of the crop and therefore decrease the number of events and amount of content. Eventually some of the premier leagues will inevitably have to close their doors, or at least downsize considerably (and I can't imagine the drama storm that will erupt on TL and Reddit). MLG is clearly taking significant steps to make itself sustainable and separate itself from the (North American) pack, which is probably a good thing in the long run.
P.S. please change the thread title to "Tournament Traffic Jams" lol.
|
Thanks, that means a lot!
My next article is very much attached to tournaments and retaining viewership and I feel you will be very satisfied with it because it coincide a lot with my issues here. Saturation is only there when there is so much similarity!
Stay Tuned!
|
Sounds good, I will look forward to it. I think you will gradually get more readers and commenters, it's just that there are fewer people inclined to think about and engage in an intellectual discussion (on the other hand, when they get the opportunity to complain about or criticize something, then EVERYONE has a post to make). But it's nice to see the rare thread that requires critical thinking...and it would be even nicer if more people were willing to think critically  .
|
On December 01 2012 00:01 Doodsmack wrote:Sounds good, I will look forward to it. I think you will gradually get more readers and commenters, it's just that there are fewer people inclined to think about and engage in an intellectual discussion (on the other hand, when they get the opportunity to complain about or criticize something, then EVERYONE has a post to make). But it's nice to see the rare thread that requires critical thinking...and it would be even nicer if more people were willing to think critically .
Yes, I hope for the same, but thank you very much for the encouragement :D!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kwkQa.png)
