|
8748 Posts
On July 10 2013 12:45 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2013 12:28 NonY wrote:On July 10 2013 11:23 Plansix wrote:On July 10 2013 11:10 NonY wrote:On July 10 2013 08:41 ProTech wrote:On July 10 2013 02:43 NonY wrote:
My viewer numbers are more affected by what other content is available than how I change my own content. This policy discourages me from streaming at a time like right now, when WCS and Grubby are streaming, because my average viewers will be brought down lower than the maintenance number. But it's not like this displaces my stream to a better time. I practice when I practice and keeping my stream off at competitive times in order to retain my privilege of being featured on TL.net for uncompetitive times is just lost content for the people who want to watch my stream. For the record also, this is not something I do. And it usually takes my stream awhile to peak, and as of late, it has been peaking 4-500 almost every day. I don't give a shit. Why are you telling me this? Damn, Nony, there are days when I think your awesome and then there are days than I wonder about your impulse control and social skills. I'm trying to bring up some serious issues with their policy and he comes along and gives his word that he doesn't avoid competition and then he posts his estimates of stream numbers. First, the policy hasn't been enacted yet and wasn't public knowledge before this, so no shit he hasn't been doing anything to bring his average up. Nobody has. But they might start and that's a problem. Second, he knows TL.net is gathering the exact stats. Why does he tell me what his stream numbers are? Being frank and telling him I don't give a shit isn't dripping with social grace but it's the right thing to do. I don't know what he was up to with that shit but it wasn't helpful. As for the real issue, here's some more free advice. There are nice things streamers do for their viewers that result in less viewers. The thing that gets me the most viewers is playing nonstop ladder games with a positive attitude, playing well, having camera and microphone on and talking a lot. If I'm not performing as well at the moment or I'm not in the mood to talk, but some people would still appreciate me flipping the stream on, then I'd like to turn the stream on even though I get less viewers. If I know I'm going to need to take frequent breaks, I'd like to flip the stream on anyway. Shorter session gives less viewers. Q&A session gives lesser viewers. Playing arcade games gives less viewers. Doing analysis gives less viewers. But sometimes I want to do those things and even though there are less people interested in watching, there are still people who would rather see me do those things than see nothing at all. This is of course added on to the fact that streaming while more popular content is on gives less viewers. The point is that there are downsides to making "average concurrent viewers" the most important determinant. No one should be discouraged from putting content out there. Social graces aside, that was just flat out aggressive. Your 100% correct that the information he provided you is worthless, but just call it that. Or be witty and make some dismissive comment. Or say nothing. Making a comment like the one you did just makes you look like an asshole, which I know your not. But I have been following you since I first listened to State of the Game 3 years ago. Everyone else may not see it that way. Now, you are Nony and may not care and you could just ignore me, but I hope not. Because stuff that like grows and grows and then haunts you later on when people dig it up, and I don't want to see that.
You realize that if I took your advice, then I'd be adjusting my words with the sole purpose of manipulating my readers to think better of me, which would actually make me a much worse person and would make the amount of miscommunication going on that much greater? Every public statement I make should simultaneously be propaganda to fix me firmly within mainstream ideals and tastes? This is some seriously sinister shit you are suggesting. I'd rather be widely misinterpreted than support some mass deception.
|
On July 11 2013 00:57 NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2013 12:45 Plansix wrote:On July 10 2013 12:28 NonY wrote:On July 10 2013 11:23 Plansix wrote:On July 10 2013 11:10 NonY wrote:On July 10 2013 08:41 ProTech wrote:On July 10 2013 02:43 NonY wrote:
My viewer numbers are more affected by what other content is available than how I change my own content. This policy discourages me from streaming at a time like right now, when WCS and Grubby are streaming, because my average viewers will be brought down lower than the maintenance number. But it's not like this displaces my stream to a better time. I practice when I practice and keeping my stream off at competitive times in order to retain my privilege of being featured on TL.net for uncompetitive times is just lost content for the people who want to watch my stream. For the record also, this is not something I do. And it usually takes my stream awhile to peak, and as of late, it has been peaking 4-500 almost every day. I don't give a shit. Why are you telling me this? Damn, Nony, there are days when I think your awesome and then there are days than I wonder about your impulse control and social skills. I'm trying to bring up some serious issues with their policy and he comes along and gives his word that he doesn't avoid competition and then he posts his estimates of stream numbers. First, the policy hasn't been enacted yet and wasn't public knowledge before this, so no shit he hasn't been doing anything to bring his average up. Nobody has. But they might start and that's a problem. Second, he knows TL.net is gathering the exact stats. Why does he tell me what his stream numbers are? Being frank and telling him I don't give a shit isn't dripping with social grace but it's the right thing to do. I don't know what he was up to with that shit but it wasn't helpful. As for the real issue, here's some more free advice. There are nice things streamers do for their viewers that result in less viewers. The thing that gets me the most viewers is playing nonstop ladder games with a positive attitude, playing well, having camera and microphone on and talking a lot. If I'm not performing as well at the moment or I'm not in the mood to talk, but some people would still appreciate me flipping the stream on, then I'd like to turn the stream on even though I get less viewers. If I know I'm going to need to take frequent breaks, I'd like to flip the stream on anyway. Shorter session gives less viewers. Q&A session gives lesser viewers. Playing arcade games gives less viewers. Doing analysis gives less viewers. But sometimes I want to do those things and even though there are less people interested in watching, there are still people who would rather see me do those things than see nothing at all. This is of course added on to the fact that streaming while more popular content is on gives less viewers. The point is that there are downsides to making "average concurrent viewers" the most important determinant. No one should be discouraged from putting content out there. Social graces aside, that was just flat out aggressive. Your 100% correct that the information he provided you is worthless, but just call it that. Or be witty and make some dismissive comment. Or say nothing. Making a comment like the one you did just makes you look like an asshole, which I know your not. But I have been following you since I first listened to State of the Game 3 years ago. Everyone else may not see it that way. Now, you are Nony and may not care and you could just ignore me, but I hope not. Because stuff that like grows and grows and then haunts you later on when people dig it up, and I don't want to see that. You realize that if I took your advice, then I'd be adjusting my words with the sole purpose of manipulating my readers to think better of me, which would actually make me a much worse person and would make the amount of miscommunication going on that much greater? Every public statement I make should simultaneously be propaganda to fix me firmly within mainstream ideals and tastes? This is some seriously sinister shit you are suggesting. I'd rather be widely misinterpreted than support some mass deception.
I would say that is a little dramatic and not really what I was suggesting at all. There is no minulaption involved in putting your best face forward and we have all see the funny, witty side of Nony. It also a single statement on the internet and not worth an all out debate over. Your a grown man and you can act any way you please. I was just saying that as a fan, sometimes statements like that are a little off putting.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
While I understand the concern about people adjusting their behavior to game the system, it's not something that is very likely to have any kind of major impact. Streamers making sure not to stream against big name tournaments like WCS and the like, this already happens with a lot of our up-and-coming features. Desrow and Blitz both were very careful and planned about their streaming for months (maybe even a full year) when they knew they were right on the edge of our notability/skill standards, and neither of them have to worry about it now having successfully grown their fanbase past the point of uncertainty. There is also the chance that encouraging people to stream during non-crowded times creates more good content at all hours which is a positive situation for our users and fans.
As to being able to stream what you want instead of laddering, I don't see this causing issues either. Streaming fun games every so often isn't going to have a major effect over the long haul, and since we're not looking at things on a small/weekly basis this won't come into play. It's not like anyone wants to stream themselves playing only UMS, and the vast majority of people streaming keep a good balance of these things already, since there is direct monetary incentive from twitch to keep high viewer counts, so it's unlikely to bring any change.
|
This would be more difficult analysis to do, but wouldn't it make sense for TL to consider when someone was streaming in addition to how many viewers they had? 500 viewers at 5 AM is not equal to 500 viewers in prime viewing hours. Even if you didn't go the extra mile to account for streams occurring at the same time as major tournaments, at least accounting for different times of day could help ensure TL staff is seeing the full picture when deciding whether to feature a streamer. If two North American streamers have similar appeal, but one tends to stream at 6 PM PST and the other at 5 AM PST, the viewer counts will be different, but by looking at the times they usually streamed, you could easily see they are, in fact, similarly deserving of being featured.
It's kind of too bad that there's no system for only featuring someone when they're doing particular things. That is, someone's laddering stream might be a high quality stream that draws viewers and deserves to be featured; but other times when they decide to play custom games with a few of their bigger fans, you don't exactly want to discourage them from doing that, but it's also not why they're featured. Then viewer numbers during these custom game sessions could be ignored, and only numbers from their ladder sessions would actually be considered for featuring purposes. Anyone who favorited their stream would still see when they were streaming custom games, but there's not much reason to feature that.
|
The most obvious is to not use arithmetic mean. Maybe cut the lowest 25% of viewing periods, and then take the average of that, or work out how much time is spent above the required level.
There are ways to compensate for variability of viewers and competition, it will just be a case of the TL guys making something that they are comfortable with, and then hopefully explaining it to the users, or using more metrics than simply outright viewer numbers, such as share of overall non-competition viewers etc.
|
8748 Posts
On July 11 2013 05:36 Heyoka wrote:
While I understand the concern about people adjusting their behavior to game the system, it's not something that is very likely to have any kind of major impact. Streamers making sure not to stream against big name tournaments like WCS and the like, this already happens with a lot of our up-and-coming features. Desrow and Blitz both were very careful and planned about their streaming for months (maybe even a full year) when they knew they were right on the edge of our notability/skill standards, and neither of them have to worry about it now having successfully grown their fanbase past the point of uncertainty. There is also the chance that encouraging people to stream during non-crowded times creates more good content at all hours which is a positive situation for our users and fans.
This is saying that the old system did nothing to address this issue and so it's fine that the new system does nothing to address this issue, either?
And additionally it's saying that it's a good thing to make WCS players' practice schedules slaves to when their streams will get most viewers?
On July 11 2013 05:36 Heyoka wrote:
As to being able to stream what you want instead of laddering, I don't see this causing issues either. Streaming fun games every so often isn't going to have a major effect over the long haul, and since we're not looking at things on a small/weekly basis this won't come into play. It's not like anyone wants to stream themselves playing only UMS, and the vast majority of people streaming keep a good balance of these things already, since there is direct monetary incentive from twitch to keep high viewer counts, so it's unlikely to bring any change.
Some of the language and arguments used earlier in this thread make it seem like it's a good thing for streamers to do everything they can to increase their average concurrent viewers stat, but only idealistic changes were listed like "show more personality" and "have good production" and "interact with viewers". I list some more things that affect average concurrent viewers and you just declare them insignificant. How am I supposed to respond to this? If you don't know that streaming 2 hour sessions gets significantly lower viewers than streaming 5 hour sessions, then I'm at a loss.
As you said, Twitch already provides incentive for increasing average concurrent viewers. Why does TL want to multiply its significance? By using other standards, you can encourage a variety of content.
|
On July 11 2013 05:36 Heyoka wrote:
...the vast majority of people streaming keep a good balance of these things already, since there is direct monetary incentive from twitch to keep high viewer counts, so it's unlikely to bring any change.
I don't think this is right. There's always been some incentive from Twitch to have high viewer counts, but being featured or not on TL can make or break you as a streamer. So if you know you're being considered for a TL Featured Stream, and there's some cheap tricks you can do to inflate your viewer numbers without actually improving stream quality, surely that's a much stronger incentive than a couple extra bucks from each ad you run. We probably don't want to create an incentive to only stream in the time windows that will draw the most viewers, or to never stream anything but ladder, or to avoid streaming during tournaments. Ideally we'd like to encourage people to stream as much as possible, and if they want to do something like custom games with fans that won't draw as many viewers, that's not necessarily bad, either.
It seems like for viewing hours you'd want to divide the data into a) streaming during NA prime time, b) streaming during EU prime time, c) streaming during Korea prime time, d) streaming during dead periods, and e) streaming at the same time as a premier tournament, as defined by Liquipedia. Then you can look at averages for each, although some of them might not have any data. So if someone has a low average viewer count overall, but they do quite well during NA prime time hours and they just usually stream during dead hours, that should be treated differently than someone who has low average viewers despite streaming mostly at good times. If it was known TL did an analysis like this, then the incentive to game the system would drop significantly (although there'd still be a big incentive to lengthen your streaming sessions, which I don't know how to fix).
|
On July 10 2013 11:20 mindspike wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2013 19:44 kaluro wrote:On July 08 2013 12:03 Ms.Spyte wrote:On July 08 2013 09:26 kaluro wrote:On July 08 2013 05:30 Blitz wrote:
I think its a bit presumptuous to say that being a female gets you viewers. The novelty of it wears off for most people quite quickly. If you just offer looks, unless you're ultra nerd tier / loner, it'll get old staring at a girl playing a game at a mediocre / awful level. I think it helps to bring people in at first sure, but you still have to be moderately entertaining and decent to retain an audience. Plenty of female streamers that get 100-300 viewers, but it takes skill and at least some talent to get past that threshold of just being a female streamer. Sucks to undermine achievements based on being a girl gamer TT Lets look at it differently. I'll take myself for example: I am a mid masters zerg player that has a really aggressive playstyle and doesn't play by the book at all. I run a 720p 60fps stream with HQ sound, custom UI, HD cam and everything. I get what, 40 viewers on a good day. My guess is that if I were to be a cute girl, I would be hitting >100 viewers, at the very least. What lead me to this guess is that most of the female streams that are out there which I have watched, have less to offer than a lot of male counterpart streams, yet the females get 10 times the viewers, if not more. Their skill level would be worse, the stream quality would be worse and the commentary insight would be inferior. I have no problem with female streamer, hell I encourage them even! and I mean no disrespect to them either. But at the lower tier streams (as in viewers, since superb quality streams can still only have small viewer amounts), being a female gives you such a significant boost in viewercount, that you can't possibly say it has no correlation. It doesn't look like you stream often, 12 times total, about 2 streams a month. I averaged much less than 100 viewers for my first few months, streaming 3-5 times a week. It took me two years to get to where I am now, I started in November 2011. Quality is good to have, but I'd argue that the most important thing in developing a fanbase is streaming consistently and interacting with chat, which I understand is difficult because I'm a full time student and chat is not always kind. Females don't get 10x as many viewers as males, that's kind of silly to say, very few break 1k, and a lot sit at <100. Streaming can be stressful, but those that succeed work hard at either improving as a player or improving as a streamer. I stream 3 times a week almost every week, for at least a couple of hours  For some reason my VODs dont get put up on the twitch servers most of the time, even though I am allowing people to view my past broadcasts  So yeah only 2 VOds from july, 2 from february and 2 from january are up, awkwardly. Here is a more accurate view of how often I stream: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=371903¤tpage=5Everytime I stream, I put down a bump message there, mostly 3 times a week - except for june where I was reallly busy. I started streaming in December 2011, for the first time. That was on 720p 30fps while I was still diamond. I have been masters for the past 5 seasons and have been upping my stream quality by purchasing a capture card and going 720p 60fps. I did a lot of quality tweaking and took notice of a lot of feedback I got from viewers and other streamers, so I put effort in too =P. even using a dual screen set-up now so I can read the chat on the fly and interact. Also, I'm not complaining I have little viewers or using the fact I'm not female as an excuse, I'm just going to keep working on my stream and see where it goes ;-)! I merely wanted to throw my experience in that a lot of low tier female streams seem to have a bit higher viewers than male counterparts. Okay maybe not 10x as much, but double - perhaps? This is for low tier streamers only, I often check out the bottom streams. Also, thanks for taking the time to reply! I would say everything else being equal that a female will get 2-3x the viewers of a male. Its silly to talk as if there's something wrong with this though. They 'deserve' this advantage because the market dictates it. There's a lower supply of female streamers. It's simple supply and demand. 2-3x is hardly anything anyways. You could also complain that good looking streamers get more viewers than ugly ones but that wouldn't be very productive either now would it? You're in an entertainment industry. There are a lot of variables at play that have nothing to do with
how you play starcraft.
Agreed. I merely joined in on the discussion - I am not judging or upset at females having the far superiority  !
They have a niche variable, good for them, best of luck to them!
They still have to work their ass off to bring a good stream to the table of course, it's not like they can put on their cam and peak >1k viewers every time 
|
8748 Posts
Is this not open for discussion?
|
On July 16 2013 04:03 NonY wrote:
Is this not open for discussion?
If you don't mind my asking, what's your solution for how featured streams should work? I guess you don't have to have one, but it would make your criticisms of the proposed policy stronger if you had an alternative policy in mind. As far as I can tell your criticisms are largely correct, but the new system is still probably an improvement, even if it isn't perfect.
|
On July 16 2013 04:59 ChristianS wrote:If you don't mind my asking, what's your solution for how featured streams should work? I guess you don't have to have one, but it would make your criticisms of the proposed policy stronger if you had an alternative policy in mind. As far as I can tell your criticisms are largely correct, but the new system is still probably an improvement, even if it isn't perfect.
lol, for real??
plz tell me what goes up against people having to totally change their stream behavior?
|
On July 11 2013 20:24 ChristianS wrote:
This would be more difficult analysis to do, but wouldn't it make sense for TL to consider when someone was streaming in addition to how many viewers they had? 500 viewers at 5 AM is not equal to 500 viewers in prime viewing hours. Even if you didn't go the extra mile to account for streams occurring at the same time as major tournaments, at least accounting for different times of day could help ensure TL staff is seeing the full picture when deciding whether to feature a streamer. If two North American streamers have similar appeal, but one tends to stream at 6 PM PST and the other at 5 AM PST, the viewer counts will be different, but by looking at the times they usually streamed, you could easily see they are, in fact, similarly deserving of being featured.
It's kind of too bad that there's no system for only featuring someone when they're doing particular things. That is, someone's laddering stream might be a high quality stream that draws viewers and deserves to be featured; but other times when they decide to play custom games with a few of their bigger fans, you don't exactly want to discourage them from doing that, but it's also not why they're featured. Then viewer numbers during these custom game sessions could be ignored, and only numbers from their ladder sessions would actually be considered for featuring purposes. Anyone who favorited their stream would still see when they were streaming custom games, but there's not much reason to feature that.
I hope you got the memo about different timezones on our planet.
|
On July 16 2013 05:14 sabas123 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2013 04:59 ChristianS wrote:On July 16 2013 04:03 NonY wrote:
Is this not open for discussion? If you don't mind my asking, what's your solution for how featured streams should work? I guess you don't have to have one, but it would make your criticisms of the proposed policy stronger if you had an alternative policy in mind. As far as I can tell your criticisms are largely correct, but the new system is still probably an improvement, even if it isn't perfect. lol, for real?? plz tell me what goes up against people having to totally change their stream behavior?
The new system seems to go a lot further toward having a consistently applied policy for who will and will not be featured. That means both that streamers who are not featured can know with some certainty what it would take to get featured, and streamers who are currently featured are under some pressure to maintain quality streams. At least in theory, that's a step in the right direction. Some of the incentives aren't great, but hopefully there are ways for the policy to be modified so as to reduce those effects.
On July 16 2013 05:34 grs wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 20:24 ChristianS wrote:
This would be more difficult analysis to do, but wouldn't it make sense for TL to consider when someone was streaming in addition to how many viewers they had? 500 viewers at 5 AM is not equal to 500 viewers in prime viewing hours. Even if you didn't go the extra mile to account for streams occurring at the same time as major tournaments, at least accounting for different times of day could help ensure TL staff is seeing the full picture when deciding whether to feature a streamer. If two North American streamers have similar appeal, but one tends to stream at 6 PM PST and the other at 5 AM PST, the viewer counts will be different, but by looking at the times they usually streamed, you could easily see they are, in fact, similarly deserving of being featured.
It's kind of too bad that there's no system for only featuring someone when they're doing particular things. That is, someone's laddering stream might be a high quality stream that draws viewers and deserves to be featured; but other times when they decide to play custom games with a few of their bigger fans, you don't exactly want to discourage them from doing that, but it's also not why they're featured. Then viewer numbers during these custom game sessions could be ignored, and only numbers from their ladder sessions would actually be considered for featuring purposes. Anyone who favorited their stream would still see when they were streaming custom games, but there's not much reason to feature that. I hope you got the memo about different timezones on our planet.
Yes, what about them? Just because there are different timezones doesn't mean there aren't better and worse times to stream. 9AM EDT is 3PM CEST and 10PM KST. None of those are exactly ideal times. Now consider that some streamers might only appeal to particular audiences (for example, an NA streamer that has minimal European following and probably next to zero Korean following). In that case the time he or she streams would have a big impact on their viewer numbers, even though stream quality didn't change. So by considering the time he or she streams when analyzing their viewer numbers, you can prevent incentivizing them to only stream at peak hours, rather than streaming as often as possible.
|
On July 16 2013 06:29 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2013 05:14 sabas123 wrote:On July 16 2013 04:59 ChristianS wrote:On July 16 2013 04:03 NonY wrote:
Is this not open for discussion? If you don't mind my asking, what's your solution for how featured streams should work? I guess you don't have to have one, but it would make your criticisms of the proposed policy stronger if you had an alternative policy in mind. As far as I can tell your criticisms are largely correct, but the new system is still probably an improvement, even if it isn't perfect. lol, for real?? plz tell me what goes up against people having to totally change their stream behavior? The new system seems to go a lot further toward having a consistently applied policy for who will and will not be featured. That means both that streamers who are not featured can know with some certainty what it would take to get featured, and streamers who are currently featured are under some pressure to maintain quality streams. At least in theory, that's a step in the right direction. Some of the incentives aren't great, but hopefully there are ways for the policy to be modified so as to reduce those effects. Show nested quote +On July 16 2013 05:34 grs wrote:On July 11 2013 20:24 ChristianS wrote:
This would be more difficult analysis to do, but wouldn't it make sense for TL to consider when someone was streaming in addition to how many viewers they had? 500 viewers at 5 AM is not equal to 500 viewers in prime viewing hours. Even if you didn't go the extra mile to account for streams occurring at the same time as major tournaments, at least accounting for different times of day could help ensure TL staff is seeing the full picture when deciding whether to feature a streamer. If two North American streamers have similar appeal, but one tends to stream at 6 PM PST and the other at 5 AM PST, the viewer counts will be different, but by looking at the times they usually streamed, you could easily see they are, in fact, similarly deserving of being featured.
It's kind of too bad that there's no system for only featuring someone when they're doing particular things. That is, someone's laddering stream might be a high quality stream that draws viewers and deserves to be featured; but other times when they decide to play custom games with a few of their bigger fans, you don't exactly want to discourage them from doing that, but it's also not why they're featured. Then viewer numbers during these custom game sessions could be ignored, and only numbers from their ladder sessions would actually be considered for featuring purposes. Anyone who favorited their stream would still see when they were streaming custom games, but there's not much reason to feature that. I hope you got the memo about different timezones on our planet. Yes, what about them? Just because there are different timezones doesn't mean there aren't better and worse times to stream. 9AM EDT is 3PM CEST and 10PM KST. None of those are exactly ideal times. Now consider that some streamers might only appeal to particular audiences (for example, an NA streamer that has minimal European following and probably next to zero Korean following). In that case the time he or she streams would have a big impact on their viewer numbers, even though stream quality didn't change. So by considering the time he or she streams when analyzing their viewer numbers, you can prevent incentivizing them to only stream at peak hours, rather than streaming as often as possible.
And what would the benefit of that be? People getting featured because they stream at "bad times" with 50 viewers?
|
On July 16 2013 06:29 ChristianS wrote:
Just because there are different timezones doesn't mean there aren't better and worse times to stream.
Actually, there are worse times to stream. The most stream viewers come from Europe, so if you want to maximize your viewers, you stream at times that are convenient for Europeans.
|
On July 16 2013 06:38 grs wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2013 06:29 ChristianS wrote:On July 16 2013 05:14 sabas123 wrote:On July 16 2013 04:59 ChristianS wrote:On July 16 2013 04:03 NonY wrote:
Is this not open for discussion? If you don't mind my asking, what's your solution for how featured streams should work? I guess you don't have to have one, but it would make your criticisms of the proposed policy stronger if you had an alternative policy in mind. As far as I can tell your criticisms are largely correct, but the new system is still probably an improvement, even if it isn't perfect. lol, for real?? plz tell me what goes up against people having to totally change their stream behavior? The new system seems to go a lot further toward having a consistently applied policy for who will and will not be featured. That means both that streamers who are not featured can know with some certainty what it would take to get featured, and streamers who are currently featured are under some pressure to maintain quality streams. At least in theory, that's a step in the right direction. Some of the incentives aren't great, but hopefully there are ways for the policy to be modified so as to reduce those effects. On July 16 2013 05:34 grs wrote:On July 11 2013 20:24 ChristianS wrote:
This would be more difficult analysis to do, but wouldn't it make sense for TL to consider when someone was streaming in addition to how many viewers they had? 500 viewers at 5 AM is not equal to 500 viewers in prime viewing hours. Even if you didn't go the extra mile to account for streams occurring at the same time as major tournaments, at least accounting for different times of day could help ensure TL staff is seeing the full picture when deciding whether to feature a streamer. If two North American streamers have similar appeal, but one tends to stream at 6 PM PST and the other at 5 AM PST, the viewer counts will be different, but by looking at the times they usually streamed, you could easily see they are, in fact, similarly deserving of being featured.
It's kind of too bad that there's no system for only featuring someone when they're doing particular things. That is, someone's laddering stream might be a high quality stream that draws viewers and deserves to be featured; but other times when they decide to play custom games with a few of their bigger fans, you don't exactly want to discourage them from doing that, but it's also not why they're featured. Then viewer numbers during these custom game sessions could be ignored, and only numbers from their ladder sessions would actually be considered for featuring purposes. Anyone who favorited their stream would still see when they were streaming custom games, but there's not much reason to feature that. I hope you got the memo about different timezones on our planet. Yes, what about them? Just because there are different timezones doesn't mean there aren't better and worse times to stream. 9AM EDT is 3PM CEST and 10PM KST. None of those are exactly ideal times. Now consider that some streamers might only appeal to particular audiences (for example, an NA streamer that has minimal European following and probably next to zero Korean following). In that case the time he or she streams would have a big impact on their viewer numbers, even though stream quality didn't change. So by considering the time he or she streams when analyzing their viewer numbers, you can prevent incentivizing them to only stream at peak hours, rather than streaming as often as possible. And what would the benefit of that be? People getting featured because they stream at "bad times" with 50 viewers?
The benefit being that people who could draw good viewer numbers by streaming at good times can stream at bad times without hurting their chances of being featured. As Nony has been pointing out on the last few pages, it would be bad to discourage people from streaming at bad times because they won't have as many viewers and their average viewer count goes down.
Example: Bob only streams a couple hours a day at peak hours, and pulls 1500 viewers whenever he does. As such he has an average viewer count of 1500, and he stands a good chance of getting featured. If he decides to stream 8 hours a day, a 2 hour session during prime time that pulls 1500 viewers and a 6 hour session late at night that pulls 400 viewers, then his average viewer count is under 700 viewers. If it weren't for the Featured Streams list he wouldn't mind streaming for the smaller number of viewers, but because he wants to get featured he needs a high average viewer count, so he decides against streaming more often, and anyone who was wanting to watch streams during that time is out of luck.
|
That is exactly my concern with this new proposed emphasis on the average viewer count. The number of hours per streamer will decrease as they will be so incentivized to stream ONLY during prime time.
|
On July 16 2013 06:42 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2013 06:29 ChristianS wrote:
Just because there are different timezones doesn't mean there aren't better and worse times to stream. Actually, there are worse times to stream. The most stream viewers come from Europe, so if you want to maximize your viewers, you stream at times that are convenient for Europeans.
I've been streaming for 2 years and this statement 100% accurate.
|
i rly wonder how long its need to feature Hui's Stream, often he has like 800+ viewers.
Right now as example there are 8 featured streams and only dragon has more viewers then hui xD
|
It's been over a month since the proposed changes and, frankly, I don't see much change. As Drake stated, there are some streamers with many more viewers than those who are now featured and, to be honest, I haven't seen any "results" from them as far as tournaments.
When will these changes take place?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
