EPTedit: minor correction with my way with words. damn, must've been pretty late last night.
[D] Automated tournaments and Paying2Play - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Aerox
Malaysia1213 Posts
edit: minor correction with my way with words. damn, must've been pretty late last night. | ||
|
Motiva
United States1774 Posts
 Sure, there may be issues at first, but they're worth it. With proper tweaking and attention this could make SC2 the next true step for e-sports. I'm a huge fan of this idea... I can't say it enough! EDIT: I think the biggest issue that could arise with this would be the legal issues of payment options and all that credit card and of age nonsense... Shouldn't be too difficult as long as some jerks don't call it gambling | ||
|
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
First of all you need an active anti-hack team to check all the replays and make a fair gaming environment. Of course this people have to be from Blizzard, since Blizzard is running the whole thing. Will Blizzard pay an anti-hack team to keep tournaments clean? The current state of hacking on battle.net tells otherwise. Once money is put in between hackers are going to have much more incentive to ruin this for you too. Also if the winner takes the money, one the tournament is done, if the winner is a hacker he can just 'run away' with his money and it will worth for him even if they ban his cdkey (50$ game or much less as you can see from BW today vs money from a 16 tournament. 16 x 10$ = 160$ to make an example. Hacking is a problem but we'll see what blizzard comes up with for SC2.. They have said, and yes it might just be words, that they have a team dedicated to fighting hacks. IF this works they'll generate income which would mean they could justify some more dedicated support. Second you need to get this whole thing diagrammed, which maps can be played? the need a Blizz symbol, since maps can be abused too (hi lastshadow). What about methods to pay for it? You will be stuck with paypal? Maps are obviously not an issue, that's like a super trivial thing as you wouldn't even let the players create the game themselves - they'd click a button and be taken to their assigned game. The money issue I can see a few different ways.. One, they could enable you to deposit $ into your bnet account sort of like pokersites do (but probably keep a much smaller limit, ie there's no point in having people deposit 300 000$ into this :D) then just give you the money that way (and they'd also have to confirm cashouts, so in the case of potential abuse they could freeze the money). There's a few different cashout methods available; neteller, moneybookers (was used for the first TLTour if I remember correctly), paypal, maybe even a bankwire. Third: continuity. TLTour was great but it was only a couple of times and not continuously. Do you think you can get people to pay 15$ or 10$ all day to keep this tournaments filled? The current BW player base is huge, but take away all umsers, fastest players, moneymaps players. You get like the number of Iccup players or PGTour or whatever that are willing to play competitive. Now ask how many of those can or are willing to pay daily or weekly for money tournaments? I don't see money tournaments getting filled to play like "Sit n go" style. Short answer: no, but that's fine. Long answer: First of all, it's SC2 - I expect a gigantic influx of players. 2nd, the tournaments don't need to constantly fill up, maybe there'll only be one going everyday but that's fine because those X players will be quite happy to be able to play. I think we could fill a reasonable amount tho, Koreans seem to like betgames, and while this isn't a betgame per se it does mean they are willing to pay money for their games. I think we could do ok. Fourth: divides the player base. Some people get into tournaments for fun because they are free. Even though they are going to lose, they play because they get the chance to play with someone better or because its fun. Check the BW section, every weekend it gets new threads of new tournaments being announced here. If you divide the player base you are taking that away from those players, and divide the community of [UMS - Money - competitive] into [UMS - money - competitive - more competitive]. The SC2 player base is going to be wtfhuge. But as you said, these money tournaments will not fill up that fast, this means all the [more competitive] players will go play the free ones. I'm not worried about this tbh.. Do you think it's a problem that tournaments are divided into ranks on iccup? I think the problems are way bigger than the good things that can come from it (make some extra money from playing a game). If the game is good and people like it, you will get good players playing each anyway. Money prize tournaments will be held up anyway and with bigger cash prizes. You will get replays of good players playing each other (or vods) too. I think its better to leave this to community sites + sponsors. Only problem being that it is quite impossible to host automated prizemoney tournaments for anyone but blizzard without doing quite a lot of work. IE would need a private server (a la iccup) or a looooot of work creating a website, system for handling transactions, system for automating the games etc. Bigger tournaments with sponsors should still be there. They still are in poker. Also something I haven't mentioned is that sit n go's are generally not winner take all, but pay out top X. Not a big point tho. | ||
|
svenneburner
Sweden64 Posts
| ||
|
MCMcEmcee
United States1609 Posts
I fail to see what's wrong with making it harder for random hypothetical 14 year olds to play in an online tournament with money on the line. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 29 2008 18:07 svenneburner wrote: paying to play in a tournament is just rude, think of the childrens who like to attend who cant and I mean it's nothing wrong with money tournaments but the problem is many people stay out of tournaments who are probably better then those who are in them. All that comes up in my mind if this idea comes through it's probably be like WoW in the end and I tell you thats not so brilliant. The idea is great of one reason, you motivate people to become better and try to earn more cash! Tough shit?  Too harsh? I mean seriously, everyone doesn't have to be able to do everything. The skill issue will be offset by the fact that money will increase skill level. | ||
|
MCMcEmcee
United States1609 Posts
On June 29 2008 19:49 FrozenArbiter wrote: The skill issue will be offset by the fact that money will increase skill level. Exactly. People will up their game to make that money. Case in point, Korean pro Starcraft. Progaming in general, really. They're professional because they get paid, they get paid because they're good, they get good because they want to get paid. | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
If they game was 18+ and released as MA or whatever then maybe it would work. | ||
|
edahl
Norway483 Posts
I really do think observers should be able to tap in though, or else it creates nothing for anyone but the people paying and playing, and I guess that's where it resembles gambling: If you can't watch, it doesn't create anything, and there is no real economy to it, only trading dollars. I'm not really sure if I put it presicely. A bit tired :-) | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
I guess having replays or a delayed feed could work. I don't think small tournaments such as these have to be for anyone but the ones playing (but bigger ones kinda do), but I don't think it would do any harm. | ||
|
stenole
Norway868 Posts
Of course, all you poker people can day dream about these features. Edit: Wrote this before reading through the thread, and after reading, I just want to reiterate the relevance of hacking. Because the game dynamics are calculated client side, the hacker has access to all the game information and ability to automate actions. Not to mention how would the system react to lag or disconnect. In an online environment there is no way to guard against these things, and a determined hacker can cause these things for the opponent or himself. Without a staffed tourney administration, these things will go unchecked. And having an anti hack crew working to catch the cheaters will not catch offenders immediately and many will probably go undetected over time. And once an offender is caught, money has already traded hands. The cheater can disappear and make a new account with a newly bought game. Is Blizzard responsible for the losses of the people who got cheated? If not, the people playing will have to legally agree to take financial losses due to illegal means. | ||
|
arctangent
United States4 Posts
I guess some people might see this as gambling, but legally, if the prize is announced before a tournament, rather than the entry fee determining the prize, is not considered gambling (at least thats what they told us when we tried to host a tournament at school). Also, gambling is more luck whereas starcraft is about skill and getting better. Of course, there is may be some skill in gambling and some luck in starcraft, but the design and player intent is usually different. Its also fun to play starcaft competitively to get better. Even when you loose you may have gained something. In contrast, gambling is more like a thrill that stupid people who do not understand statistics enjoy. I probably wont have enough time to invest on this because of school, but it sounds like an interesting feature to have. | ||
|
Jank
United States308 Posts
| ||
|
architecture
United States643 Posts
WE made SC into what it is today. WE made the private ladders and leagues that keep amateur SC alive. What Blizzard needs to do is to give the framework for us to make our own tournaments, leagues, etc. They can have their own - I'm all up for that, but it certainly will die the same way support/ladders for every game (Blizzard or not) has died. Only if they give us the ability to support the game will SC2 be alive in 10 years. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 30 2008 08:05 stenole wrote: Introducing gambling into a game marketed towards teenagers seems unethical. Also how do you suggest an American based company can host a gambling service when there are laws against hosting regular gambling sites? I think it would be very bad to try to make SC2 into a community of gambling addicts and skilled players who prey on them like poker is. Also putting money on the line in online RTS games is not smart considering there is always potential for hacks. Of course, all you poker people can day dream about these features. Sigh.. How is this gambling? Maybe in the most literal definition of the word (ie "gambling: playing a game for money"), but if that's the case then chess tournaments = gambling, bw LANs = gambling, in fact almost any pay to play LAN = gambling. Secondly, as I've mentioned in the thread, I'm fairly certain IF it was considered gambling, it would fall under the same category as, say, Fantasy Sports - which is permissable. It's a skill game and not a game of chance after all -.- I somehow don't see people going broke from playing 5$ tournaments, sorry. As for hacks.. Blizzard said they have a dedicated anti-hack team these days, if something like this worked it would be generating income meaning they could afford to put some more effort into it. Hacking and image are probably the hardest things to overcome, especially seeing how even a lot of people on here seem to think paying to play in a tournament = gambling._. I used poker terms because 1) I play poker 2) it's the only online system I'm familiar with that has non-stop automated tournaments. If I had known MTG hosted online pay2play tournaments I'd have used that ok?! Edit: Wrote this before reading through the thread, and after reading, I just want to reiterate the relevance of hacking. Because the game dynamics are calculated client side, the hacker has access to all the game information and ability to automate actions. Not to mention how would the system react to lag or disconnect. In an online environment there is no way to guard against these things, and a determined hacker can cause these things for the opponent or himself. Without a staffed tourney administration, these things will go unchecked. And having an anti hack crew working to catch the cheaters will not catch offenders immediately and many will probably go undetected over time. And once an offender is caught, money has already traded hands. The cheater can disappear and make a new account with a newly bought game. Is Blizzard responsible for the losses of the people who got cheated? If not, the people playing will have to legally agree to take financial losses due to illegal means. Simple: Do not transfer money until any complaints from the tournament have been reviewed. | ||
|
caution.slip
United States775 Posts
Having these money based tournaments motivates blizzard and the players. Blizzard will spend more effort making the game hackfree because they'll be constantly making money as long as these tournaments are going on, and players will up their game because they get to win money CharlieMurphy June 30 2008 04:19 I like all your ideas but these games are aimed at kids and teens mostly. Parents aren't gonna want their kids using their credit cards to play in tournaments and shit. Blizzard probably doesn't wanna deal with the stigma/bad publicity like you said. If they game was 18+ and released as MA or whatever then maybe it would work. Where do you see that? http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2004-05-12-gamer-demographics_x.htm age of average gamer: 29 age of average buyer: 36 Anyways to propose an idea to prevent "pros" constantly raking in, you could have different divisions, based on whatever system SC2 is going to use to rank players on the AMM. Maybe only players within 5 ranks of each other can be in any tournament. I think it should be a requirement that a player's account should have a minimum required number of games played before being allowed to enter, preventing smurf accounts. However if break into different divisions, this raises the problem of pros smurfing on their friends' lower division account. There would probably have to be a board of review at blizzard that would compare the tournament games to the players previous games (possibly blizzard saves one replay from a player every 10th game as a record, or a term of use of entering a tournament is to keep a record of all your games) I mean its definitely possible, it just needs proper checks and regulations, but it also needs to be simple enough for people to use it | ||
|
teacake
Afghanistan12 Posts
It would probably magnify everything that is wrong up up to a whole new level. I would predict unprecedented hacking, smurfing, unfair play, think of poker rings, manner would disappear altogether. When I played warcraft ladder you would often face people begging you to let them win at the end of the match to curse that they hope you die of cancer and other charming sentiments. I hate to think how they will behave if money if thrown into the equation. It would also divide the userbase to those those with and without credit cards (or at least those with the common sense not to enter the tournament at all) and foster a feeling of those that don't play for cash are second class citizens of b.net, while the kids look resentfully at the button that takes them into the exclusive area that they are forbidden from. If you think back to when starcraft was crazy big I remember reading endless threads of kids who were failing exams because they were addicted to SC. Now imagine it wasn't just study time but all their money too.. Professionalism may "improve" skill level to a certain degree, but it ruins sportsmanship. Just look at professional football player taking a dive. That doesn't happen on my Saturday morning games, because we are all playing for the LOVE OF THE GAME. edit.. if you have to have a financial incentive to play a game there is probably something wrong with it. It is not a very good game. There is a small bit of fun to be had from playing poker with matchsticks, but it is not fun for long. Poker is not a card game it is a money game. Do you want SC to be a RTS or a Real-time-money-pit? | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
I don't really appreciate your condescending attitude ("or at least those with the common sense not to enter the tournament at all" <- wtf? | ||
|
teacake
Afghanistan12 Posts
What i mean is that if you are entering the tournament with the intention of winning money you are going to be disappointed. I think a lot of people think that if they buy-in then somehow that elevates their status, like "hey I'm a pro now too!" The reality is they have just ripped up $5 for the same experience they could get in a standard match. $5 doesn;t sound like much, but when have you ever sat down and just played one match. If these are going to be tournaments on demand I can see a lot of people losing a lot of money. My other point is that the fun of starcraft is able to carry its own weight while playing for money is a separate game in itself. Nearly all games that successfully operate on the transaction of money are usually considerably easier to play than sc and have lot more to do with chance than skill. hence why card-counters are removed from black jack tables because they turned it into a game of skill. If it is a game of skill you would have to be insane to enter any games other than you are certain to win. I assume it would put a lot of people off. The same way no one wanted to play Stu Ungar at Gin Rummy. (This could also possibly explain the demise of gin rummy too if people considered it a game of skill and not luck, but I don't really know much about casino trends.) Of course no one ever lost money overestimating human gullibility... edit. I wouldn't object to tournaments with prize money provided by sponsors or whatever. I am only concerned with implementing a scheme where ordinary battle.net player put their own money at risk on a regular basis. But, hey, if enough of you want it. | ||
| ||
