On October 19 2011 14:57 ih8Australia wrote: Casters need to be professional at all times, you have Tasteless who talks about "gay", "penis" and says "fuck" too much on his twitter and also tries to be humorous all the time. Trying to be funny is not a bad thing but this is a professional sport here and I rather see "professionalism" not talking about dragon ballz, digimon, yugioh or pokemon or what ever. Maybe see a jock watching it and Tasteless starts to talking about Squirle or what ever he will think "WTF IS THIS?" Solution:
Jason LEE's his voice is perfect. Listening to him makes it feel like its a sport and not just a game. He gets really excited like the Korean commentators when something is about to happen and if i recall he makes the people spectating behind him turn around because he is so loud and excited... something that i never see from artosis and tasteless. His main weakness is his knowledge of the game, but with training and guidance he can easily be the man for the job.
Also the quality of the tournament has to be improved. Compare camera angle shots between professional Korean and Western starcraft tournaments. Whats the difference? The cameras for the western version NEVER MOVES. It might change to another camera but its the same thing it never moves at all, and simple camera movement camera technique can create drawing effects for the viewers. GSL always zooms in and out of something in the intro with some music and MLG. Just a still CAM that just changes to the player announcers and all..
I personally does not care if people have a life outside their jobs. It is not like we will see his tweets on a cast... I don't really know why you so desperately want to copy the current models (for anything, not just export). A lot a people (like in OWT for instance) seems to think that our current way of thinking is bad. If we can have a "sport" casted by people who seems human and not playing a role, then hurray! Also I don't care about the "looks like". First I want to see the game, then I want to have a good time with the casters in the mean time. I don't want to look smart or classy when I watch something...
On October 18 2011 06:01 divito wrote: Television simply isn't the medium for our generation. Money has been leaving TV slowly for years. As long as we keep consistent on our consumption end, being streaming and torrents, slowly more money will come online.
Many businesses are increasingly savvy at adjusting to things, and this will be no exception. TV will not save Starcraft or be a boon to Starcraft.
SC2 will grow just fine being on the internet, TV will most probebly ruin SC2 as it is now and turn it into some mainstream bullshit you get on tv thies days. Its a good post, but its made from an us/canadian tv stand point, tv in the eu is alot different (yes i have seen alot of us tv).
[QUOTE]On October 18 2011 05:52 Shiori wrote: Fucking retarded post, no offense. Selling out to attract a demographic isn't exactly what I'd call good for Starcraft. Sc2 isn't about attracting the frat boy group. Incontrol is worthless as a player and, if anything, should take up casting full time, because he does have some charisma.
Not having analysis completely destroys the experience for anyone who isn't just flicking through the channels. Perhaps you need to stop thinking that gamers need to pretend to be something they're not. Gamers aren't the problem. The problem is that there has existed a permeating stigma about the sorts of people gamers are. This stigma is unjustified and can only be rectified properly by changing the way society sees gamers, not by changing gamers and having everyone fake it.
Like it or not, the people who play Sc2 have more in common with Artosis than they do with Incontrol, and that isn't a bad thing. There are all sorts of emerging markets and demographics, but you want us to pretend to be bros so we can snipe some of the CoD crowd.
No thanks.
I have to agree with this guy. I guess televising sc2 wouldnt be bad, but giving it the "mainstream makeover" would be just...idiotic.thats the main thing i, and i believe, many others dislike about tv, everything is dumbed down, mainstreamy and boring.
besides, whats the big deal about getting sc2 on tv anyways? "internet killed the video star" Television is a dying concept, conquer the interwebs!
Artosis I never said Artosis shouldn't be involved. I simply said he shouldn't be a caster. If you read the entire post, you'd see I'm advocating Artosis being an expert of sorts. Someone that comes on between games to provide in-depth analysis on what happened in the previous game. Sort of like a half-time show where the commentators breakdown the game and go into the specifics. This adds a ton of production value as well (replays of previous action etc.). Why won't he be a good caster? Anyone that watches the GSL knows Artosis tends to go off on nerdy rants. He'll spend 5 minutes talking about some video game from the early 90s that the late 90s/2000s generation has no idea about. I love it (because I can relate to what he's saying). But most people can't. A mainstream audience can't. And so he just doesn't belong as a caster.
Artosis I never said Artosis shouldn't be involved. I simply said he shouldn't be a caster. If you read the entire post, you'd see I'm advocating Artosis being an expert of sorts. Someone that comes on between games to provide in-depth analysis on what happened in the previous game. Sort of like a half-time show where the commentators breakdown the game and go into the specifics. This adds a ton of production value as well (replays of previous action etc.). Why won't he be a good caster? Anyone that watches the GSL knows Artosis tends to go off on nerdy rants. He'll spend 5 minutes talking about some video game from the early 90s that the late 90s/2000s generation has no idea about. I love it (because I can relate to what he's saying). But most people can't. A mainstream audience can't. And so he just doesn't belong as a caster.
no. Artosis is the best caster in the world.
great. But he wouldn't do much for a TV audience. That is the OP's argument. Where's yours?
Artosis I never said Artosis shouldn't be involved. I simply said he shouldn't be a caster. If you read the entire post, you'd see I'm advocating Artosis being an expert of sorts. Someone that comes on between games to provide in-depth analysis on what happened in the previous game. Sort of like a half-time show where the commentators breakdown the game and go into the specifics. This adds a ton of production value as well (replays of previous action etc.). Why won't he be a good caster? Anyone that watches the GSL knows Artosis tends to go off on nerdy rants. He'll spend 5 minutes talking about some video game from the early 90s that the late 90s/2000s generation has no idea about. I love it (because I can relate to what he's saying). But most people can't. A mainstream audience can't. And so he just doesn't belong as a caster.
no. Artosis is the best caster in the world.
great. But he wouldn't do much for a TV audience. That is the OP's argument. Where's yours?
It would seem pretty obvious to me that if youre gonna introduce a scene like this to the mainstream tv viewers you would have someone considered the best caster in the scene, to cast it?
Artosis I never said Artosis shouldn't be involved. I simply said he shouldn't be a caster. If you read the entire post, you'd see I'm advocating Artosis being an expert of sorts. Someone that comes on between games to provide in-depth analysis on what happened in the previous game. Sort of like a half-time show where the commentators breakdown the game and go into the specifics. This adds a ton of production value as well (replays of previous action etc.). Why won't he be a good caster? Anyone that watches the GSL knows Artosis tends to go off on nerdy rants. He'll spend 5 minutes talking about some video game from the early 90s that the late 90s/2000s generation has no idea about. I love it (because I can relate to what he's saying). But most people can't. A mainstream audience can't. And so he just doesn't belong as a caster.
no. Artosis is the best caster in the world.
great. But he wouldn't do much for a TV audience. That is the OP's argument. Where's yours?
It would seem pretty obvious to me that if youre gonna introduce a scene like this to the mainstream tv viewers you would have someone considered the best caster in the scene, to cast it?
/facepalm , may be rude but i couldnt come up with a more summarizing thing to say
Shouldn't the best casters be the ones who have already proven themselves by gaining widespread popularity? Husky and Day9 brought in tons of new viewers to Starcraft, and everyone who watches GSL likes Tasteless and Artosis, so how can any of them be bad choices? Your entire argument rests on the idea that some of them are too "nerdy." What does that even mean? Do you believe that the market of males-who-don't-play-Starcraft consist entirely of the beer chugging bro/jock stereotype? Honestly, the best people to decide how to market Starcraft are the pros... actual marketers. Guys who go out and research their demographic and find out what needs to be done. Blizzard is insanely popular, and with the blunt force of Activision behind them, they can market - and they won't be hurt by the "nerdiness" of Artosis.
Personally, I think the Plott brothers have some of the best voices for the job, because they just sound like professional commentators to me. However, the volume of Day9's voice would have to be carefully moderated, lol. Catspajamas also has that same quality, imo, of a caster-like voice. Doesn't necessarily have much bearing on who the best casters are tho
That said, your other analysis was interesting, like the possibility of showing games and then creating a live-lag of a few minutes in order for commercials. Of course, scheduling is still hell thanks to variable length games, but maybe that won't be too much of a problem if it's on a channel with nothing else being shown during "dead hours" of the day (it's not like anybody's going to give prime time to starcraft anyway, not now at least)
Lastly... CASTERS DO NOT NEED TO DUMB DOWN THEIR ANALYSIS.
Sorry I don't normally use caps, but I had to. Even a noob who has no idea what's going on can listen in to in depth analysis and still appreciate it, even if it's murky.
"He's playing mindgames with his opponent, because he's known for going six gate rush on this map, to which his opponent is metagaming with a blah blah counter, so he's meta-meta gaming with a blah blah build..." ^ Stuff like that (pretend that it was actually coherent) is absolutely fine. High level players will nod their head and follow, low level players will learn, and new audiences will be like "Woah, that's cool, counter counters! To something. I don't know what six gate means. But I didn't know you could have mind games like this in Starcraft." Or whatever. The point is to have that information out there. This means you have to have low level nooby info out there as well "Stalkers can shoot air as well as ground" as well as the more in depth stuff, so the information will be out there for anybody to glean
I haven't owned a TV for 5 years... Why do some people bang on about it having to be on TV all the time?... during the beta we heard this over and over again, but the sc2 audience are all PC gamers, online with internet access and live stream has perfectly filled that void. What do people hope to accomplish by taking the intelligent game to idiot box?... its highly unlikely we'll get a million people in USA tuning into to watch the games that they don't understand. Unless it was a prolonged period of hand holding and explaining what minerals are and what gas is and how much the units cost and what each unit does and why kill the rocks and how a player plays the game, but then you alienate all the sc2 fans that don't want to hear this newbie talk.... suffice to say I think it'll be a big a flop on TV for sure.
On October 20 2011 04:14 aka_star wrote: I haven't owned a TV for 5 years... Why do some people bang on about it having to be on TV all the time?... during the beta we heard this over and over again, but the sc2 audience are all PC gamers, online with internet access and live stream has perfectly filled that void. What do people hope to accomplish by taking the intelligent game to idiot box?... its highly unlikely we'll get a million people in USA tuning into to watch the games that they don't understand. Unless it was a prolonged period of hand holding and explaining what minerals are and what gas is and how much the units cost and what each unit does and why kill the rocks and how a player plays the game, but then you alienate all the sc2 fans that don't want to hear this newbie talk.... suffice to say I think it'll be a big a flop on TV for sure.
Exactly this. There is no reason to put sc2 on ESPN or some other network because those who give a darn about sc2 anyways are already watching it through streams or vods on their computers or Ipods, pads, phones, etc...
Yet, there are still those out there hell bent on making sc2 on tv... but why? Who would watch it? How would you market it to people when those same people who moderately care barley watch t.v. anyways outside of a very few select programs? Honestly if I had a choice to watch any video game on either a TV or a internet connect device, I would go with the device 100% of the time.
And thats not such a bad thing, its because sc2 is so easily available on the internet is why its been able to flourish. But the moment you put it on a network, the rules change drastically, often for the worse.
In my opinion. There is one Saving Grace that broadcasting SC2 for a mainstream TV audience has over Current Web Live Streaming...
The power of post-editing.
if SC2 was given a 1-2 hour chunk of airtime, we could made sure only the best and most exciting games were shown. and edit in for commercials. something we cannot do live.
We could assure that TV viewers get the best experience possible watching on TV that they can. and if they want to see more... there's always VOD's.
same thing as with poker. they never go hand-for-hand... so why try to go game-for-game?
hell... 1 MLG could be nearly 2-3 weeks of content for a SC2 Show.
The biggest problem with the OP's post is that he's trying to market the game to a disinterested audience. IOW, he's targeting the wrong market for this business.
You aren't going to sell Hunting Rifles to more women by painting them pink, OP.
I agree in the sense that television would obviously give SC2 a much wider exposure. But i completely disagree with "selling out" to do so, like not featuring certain casters/personalities because you are worried about what people may think. True, the online community will never go away, but if you change the way its presented too much you may end up with two seperate communities, those that like TV starcraft and those who like online starcraft. I am much less worried about making people like it, i think TV would be better used to reach out to those who may like it as it is but have not been exposed to it.
On October 20 2011 05:28 Theeakoz wrote: I agree, doing it cant hurt us so why not give it a try.. ? Its actually quite smart to do so.
Doing it CAN hurt us.
One failed venture can set back the timeline for future success by DECADES.
The business world is one filled with fear of failure. If someone tries to force a brand before its time, and it fails. No one with capital will go near it until the memory of that failure fades.
Firstly, I'm not convinced we need Television to bring SC2 into the mainstream. The television audience is shrinking (and getting older), not growing, and the internet streaming audience is growing, not shrinking (and the vast majority made of the age-group we're looking for). If we're looking for GROWTH in E-Sports, the organizers need to do a better job of marketing their product online.
On a personal level, I know a lot of people that would watch Sc2 tournaments if they were exposed, but since they have to go out of their way to find out where/how to watch the tournaments, and when they do, they run the risk of hitting dead air (audience shots with music on repeat), they just don't bother.
The last MLG went a long way towards filling that dead air. The BETA streams were a huge success in my mind, but you had to pay for them. Now, they just need to do a better job of getting the word out. They need hype videos, and they need to expand WHERE they market their product. Because right now, all of their marketing centers around the "usual suspects". Gaming websites and forums, and twitter. And not even heavily trafficked gaming websites (for instance Gamestop/Gamefaqs are filled with braindead 14-17 year olds who have no clue how to watch these things, save for a few posters in the forums).
Anyway, I'm getting long-winded here, but my only point is that we don't need Television to bring SC2 into the mainstream, we just need better online exposure.
EPT
