|
On April 12 2011 13:17 ander wrote:
Wouldn't a model similar to UFC work? Tournaments like NASL, you pay money for an entire season; more or less a pay-per-view. I think you could have something like that on digital TV or whatever you want; pay your $25 for NASL, get the entire season's games. It could even be just the identical internet stream, just on TV. It seems that we can all agree that we want to avoid what CGS did, and the only way for SC2 to become a legitimate sport it to avoid skewing it into something it's not. If broadcasted at all, it needs to avoid any kind of normal NA TV structure. The only people who will watch will be people who would watch anyways. The only way to draw more viewers would be to dumb it down into something stupid that anyone from TL would hate (see CGS).
This is a good idea to be honest; have it available to watch via stream, TV and VOD's. The quality and quantity of content would have to go up in order for this model to work, but it's feasible in my opinion.
|
Right on Kennigit, you described my SC2 experience perfectly. I came to SC2 because I loved the starcraft universe and I wanted to see more storyline. I became enthralled by multiplayer, and had to become better, much better. I found team liquid, when googling starcraft 2 strategy. Through team liquid I found esports and the community, and I haven't left since.
If you had found me back at the initial purchase of SC2, before I knew anything about starcraft esports, I would never have cared about some random game on TV since I barely watch it anyways. Esports would have meant absolutely nothing to me.
Even now, the main reason I watch tournaments is because I just log onto TL whenever I have time to see if any tournaments are going on at the moment, without this site I would find NOTHING, and I wouldn't search too hard to find it either. Your analysis seems spot on to me, my experiences match what you said pretty well I would say.
|
great write up! at first I did not understand why TV would be so bad but you make valid points. However, I believe SC2 is not like WC3, CS 1.6, or DotA. I believe it is more and can do better than it's predecessors. No esport game has had a major (I said major, like BW in Korea major) running in TV, I hope that one day SC2 will break that curse in the West. You are so right in saying that there is a different element, a social and interactive element, within esports online. So true! However, why can't we have both? Online tourneys with streams and a little TV. We will see.
|
I think perhaps SC2 might be still not refined enough in many departments to be televised consistently, but having a special program here and there for a major tournament wouldn't be so bad.
|
On April 12 2011 12:08 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:lol... Show nested quote +2. Able to target core demographic and casuals simultaneously.
The very strategic nature of Starcraft alienates a lot of viewers. I think we have made huge strides opening the door over the past few years via the work of Day[9], Husky, the SC2GG guys – but it's really not enough. As a viewer, I need to be able to be flicking by a station and within 2-3 minutes understand exactly whats going on even if i've never played. Again though, i believe there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to suggest that "hardcore" games are not able to target hardcore games and casual TV audiences simultaneously. You are able to tune into a sport like football and know the strategy and how to play it? I sure don't know all the basic rules to pretty much every major sport. Also, when he said "IPTV" i thought it stood for IGN Proleague TV for a second, aww ;( lol
you know that they need to get the ball in the end zone for 7 points and do plays n shit don't you? Someone unfamilier w/ starcraft wouldn't know that you ahve to mine anything to get units, wouldn't know why somethign that 1 dude did was gosu or anything like that. They just don't have the experience to ever know what makes sc really hard.
|
Story telling is great and all, I just hope it doesn't evolve into a cesspit of drama and testosterone. Mainstream television already has that covered pretty well...
|
On April 12 2011 15:42 ixi.genocide wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2011 12:08 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:lol... 2. Able to target core demographic and casuals simultaneously.
The very strategic nature of Starcraft alienates a lot of viewers. I think we have made huge strides opening the door over the past few years via the work of Day[9], Husky, the SC2GG guys – but it's really not enough. As a viewer, I need to be able to be flicking by a station and within 2-3 minutes understand exactly whats going on even if i've never played. Again though, i believe there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to suggest that "hardcore" games are not able to target hardcore games and casual TV audiences simultaneously. You are able to tune into a sport like football and know the strategy and how to play it? I sure don't know all the basic rules to pretty much every major sport. Also, when he said "IPTV" i thought it stood for IGN Proleague TV for a second, aww ;( lol you know that they need to get the ball in the end zone for 7 points and do plays n shit don't you? Someone unfamilier w/ starcraft wouldn't know that you ahve to mine anything to get units, wouldn't know why somethign that 1 dude did was gosu or anything like that. They just don't have the experience to ever know what makes sc really hard.
I was so confused with your post until I realised you were talking about handegg. IMO, handegg is not that easy to understand - it's relatively technical with its stops/starts (great for advertisers, not great for normal viewers who will flick through the channels if nothing is interesting). On the other hand, sports like football, basketball and tennis are very easy to understand and have very few rules, therein lying their elegance.
SC2 is definitely not ready for mainstream TV. I don't know about cable TV since almost nobody watches cable TV in Australia.
|
I wrote pretty much the exact same article in January -_-
Oh well.
|
Having shown pro SC2 (mostly GSL) to friends, I have to say that I doubt that it really has the appeal to be viable on television. Even some of my friends who have played the game don't care about or understand the genius behind what progamers are actually doing, they just think it's boring unless there's a battle going on. Casual players obviously know what each unit does, but they find it boring to see "oh he hallucinated an immortal" when they don't really understand why it's clever, and the threshold for understanding what makes that interesting is way too high for television. It's the same reason that chess isn't on TV, and while Starcraft has explosions and stuff, 90% of the gameplay isn't appealing to a non-hardcore audience.
|
On April 12 2011 13:47 Innovation wrote:
Kennigit is right....if we try to push SC2 on to network or cable television it will simply fail again.
"Trying to push SC2 on to a network" is also a totally stupid american way of doing it. "The numbers" are GLOBAL numbers and not US numbers and the fluctuation in them really doesnt make it worthwile for any TV station. Those same stations would obviously want to "monopolize" the content to be the only provider, but that also means people will be locked out because they simply cant get that channel.
Simple common sense why TV wont work for eSport ... it is global and not national.
|
On April 12 2011 16:07 frequency wrote:
I wrote pretty much the exact same article in January -_-
Oh well.
Those damn upload caps strike again!
|
Wow the points you make about the future of SC2 streaming / broadcasting are spot on! I dont think that the viewing experience will be the same without going on TL and discussing the players tactics and the overall game. Lets get more events like clash of the titans instead, there they managed to hype it up like it realy was a boxing match ( the story part you talked about)
|
Tag, very good article Kennegit. Good to finally clear up some of these points to people that just don't understand this side of the argument.
|
On April 12 2011 16:14 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2011 13:47 Innovation wrote:
Kennigit is right....if we try to push SC2 on to network or cable television it will simply fail again. "Trying to push SC2 on to a network" is also a totally stupid american way of doing it. "The numbers" are GLOBAL numbers and not US numbers and the fluctuation in them really doesnt make it worthwile for any TV station. Those same stations would obviously want to "monopolize" the content to be the only provider, but that also means people will be locked out because they simply cant get that channel. Simple common sense why TV wont work for eSport ... it is global and not national.
Uh, he was saying it wouldn't work. And why do you have to put "stupid american" in there? It has nothing to do with the post... Sc2 won't work on TV because there is no way to get audiences to watch it who have never played or know about the game, they would be lost in the lingo. Getting SC2 on TV is like getting Metalcore on the radio, it's just not everyones cup of tea.
|
I definitely agree with many of the points made, especially those focusing on the authors flawed logic and perspective, but I also disagree with some things that you and Wheat said.
On April 12 2011 11:18 Kennigit wrote:
I'll refer to “dick” as “the author”
The author sure is a...ok i'm done.
Uhh.. am I misinterpreting this, or are you calling the author of the article a dick (or at least implying it). If that's the case... I'm not sure why, but its definitely unwarranted, and not the best way to start out a post in which you want to appear professional... that's just my opinion and does not to pertain to the discussion itself, so feel free to ignore it if you would like.
On April 12 2011 11:18 Kennigit wrote:
2) When broadcasting a "new" product, one needs to keep things simple (read: dumbed down) in order to attract a casual base immediately. If you cannot prove potential success within a few broadcasts you are done (see midseason cancelations of every show on network TV ever).
This leaves the existing hardcore fan raged while still the broadcast remains confusing to the casual demo. Why? Because Esports broadcasts on Television have proven one thing, you can target a casual market, or you can pray that your existing hardcore demographic transfer over - you cannot have both. Any marketing or business student will explain to you that this is ultimately doomed to fail or enjoy only marginal success.
I just can't agree with this. Tasteless has said many times that he focuses on the "noobier" parts of the game, explaining many simple (and ultimately obvious) facts to the audience, and him and Artosis do a great job of appealing to both groups. Regardless, keeping the casts "hardcore" friendly can still appeal to more casual gamers. Maybe we won't get the 70 year old grandpa's interested if they have to figure out a bit, but just like with many sports, there will be plenty of terminology you have to know if you want to understand the game.
When I first watched football (American Football) I didn't hear the announcer explain how the game is played or get a very basic explanation as to why something was the best decision, they simply spoke about the game as they would with another fan, and eventually the viewer picks up on it. Of course SC2 is much more complex... but I wouldn't say it is TOO complex. I am NOT referring to the intricacies in strategy, the meta game, etc... I am talking about from a casual viewers perspective (even like those who watch now). What it basically boils down to is both sides building a base and killing each other, with the announcers talking about their decisions.
Even if you don't understand exactly why they get each unit the very first time, it's fine because you can still enjoy watching the game... and you can pick up on it slowly. I only say this because one of my friend recently (entirely on his own) came across sc2 even though he never plays PC games and has begun watching games from many casters even though he knew nothing of the game and still doesn't play it.
To summarize... I think that saying "SC2 is too complex... anyone who listens to Tastosis and doesn't play the game will not enjoy it at all" is completely false. Maybe it wasn't worded exactly like that, but that seems to be the general idea of what is being said. Since Artosis gives a deep analysis of the game, it must be boring to watch, but I disagree. It is easy for viewers to enjoy what they can see and understand, as well as listen to the play by play commentary while hearing the excitement in the casters voices.
Why Starcraft should never be on Western Television.
In order for a TV game show to be viable, it needs a few things which Starcraft cannot provide without being shit.
1. Easy to edit while maintaining the narrative. Unlike a broadcasted strategy game like poker where the scene (television scene, not community) is compact (1 hand, 1 hand, commercial, 1 hand, 2 hands, commercial etc.) and easily interchangeable, Starcraft does not allow quick or easy editing decisions. Without former Starcraft players on hand in an editing both, you would be left with a chopped down product – missed building placements, missed timings, and a raging viewer base. This isn't really a negotiable point. Games would HAVE to be edited and cut to allows for a commercial in the middle. A TV station simply cant run a 45 minute game without commercials in North America and still remain profitable.
I think this is an absolutely terrible argument. We can already follow what the players are doing off screen with things like a production tab, and if for some reason it were necessary, you could have extra viewers in the game to spot anything that might be necessary... though I don't think so.
If you are going to say something like "well we can't see exactly where the building placement is" can we see that on a stream if they aren't looking there (just as it would be on TV?) No. Why isn't this an issue at all? It's simple, something minuscule like a building placement just isn't important enough... especially if the viewers can see that it is being built due to the production tab.
Despite that you might say something like "well people will complain anyway even if it doesn't seem to be a big deal, and it just won't be possible to fix" but the fact is you can say that for anything. When I have watched poker, they weren't able to show 2 players facial expressions at the same time during a conversation, and you could say "Poker is not good for TV because when two people were talking, you couldn't see both their facial expressions" and then people could go somewhere and complain about it. I guess the point I am getting at is, claiming that a small issue is a contributing factor as to why it shouldn't be on TV is just ridiculous to me.
As for the 45 minute thing... some sports already do this... I believe Soccer for example. They can run adds around the border and casters can plug sponsors throughout. Also if they have it pre broadcasted they can cut to commercial breaks in.
Overall I simply think this entire comment is weak. The one thing I kind of skipped over was "missed timings" which I guess I will address quickly. Timings can easily be noticed by a good caster, and can also be seen by spectators with the production tab... regardless, sports announcers miss small details for many of the players who are away from all the attention ALL THE TIME and it isn't a big deal... AT ALL.
I think you are over-analyzing the situation. Most people won't rage if they didn't see what time the +1 upgrade started, especially if there would be a large casual audience... and some people will bitch and moan about anything, so if you are looking to please everyone with anything, you will always fail.
2. Able to target core demographic and casuals simultaneously.
The very strategic nature of Starcraft alienates a lot of viewers. I think we have made huge strides opening the door over the past few years via the work of Day[9], Husky, the SC2GG guys – but it's really not enough. As a viewer, I need to be able to be flicking by a station and within 2-3 minutes understand exactly whats going on even if i've never played. Again though, i believe there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to suggest that "hardcore" games are not able to target hardcore and casual TV audiences simultaneously.
I already addressed this a bit above (2 quotes up) but I quickly wanted to say that I do agree people flipping away after 2-3 mins of not understanding what's going on may be a problem, but once again the same can be said for football. If the casters do a good job of keeping the game exciting and explaining what is going on play by play, it can still be interesting to people who have no clue what is going on. You don't have to know how to play football to be excited by it... same with SC2.
3. Social Networking
While Teamliquid can't take full credit for any one production's success, the nature of having a very central hub where one can come and find live events quickly is a huge benefit to live broadcasts. Social media hubs like facebook/twitter and sites like reddit also contibute heavily, but I find it ignorant to suggest that this would be scalable when applied to a television. The social platform which impassions viewers on Teamliquid simply doesn't exist on television. The Starcraft Esports scene is very niche despite it's size – do not mistake size for accessibility. These new viewers came to esports via the promise of Starcraft 2's launch, they found Esports along the way.
I won't bother quoting the rest, but I will say I mostly agree with it. Having a place to meet up socially is a big factor, but I do want to go back to the football argument once again. I believe that if people could get involved in a community while watching football, it would be even more appealing.
What I am saying is that the added social benefits that you mentioned we have here on TL.net is definitely a great way of improving esports viewing, and while I do understand that views from hardcore viewers would likely go down if it were on TV (at least over time... as a single event on TV would probably be very exciting and attract many viewers) I don't think it is the best argument to make against putting it on TV other than to say "look... we may have X viewers, but we would probably have less than X viewers because many of those X viewers are watching because they enjoy talking about it on TL while they watch" or something along those lines.
I'm going to leave it at that. I'm feeling sick and I took some Nyquil so I'm surprised I made it through all that. Hopefully it made sense... I really don't have the energy to proofread it now though... I will probably proofread it tomorrow and laugh at myself as I do so... so if some of it doesn't make sense today and you feel like responding to other parts, then feel free to wait. 
|
United States4796 Posts
I think the author (dick) of the article has some points but you refute them well, Kennigit.
|
On April 12 2011 16:29 Yergidy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2011 16:14 Rabiator wrote:On April 12 2011 13:47 Innovation wrote:
Kennigit is right....if we try to push SC2 on to network or cable television it will simply fail again. "Trying to push SC2 on to a network" is also a totally stupid american way of doing it. "The numbers" are GLOBAL numbers and not US numbers and the fluctuation in them really doesnt make it worthwile for any TV station. Those same stations would obviously want to "monopolize" the content to be the only provider, but that also means people will be locked out because they simply cant get that channel. Simple common sense why TV wont work for eSport ... it is global and not national. Uh, he was saying it wouldn't work. And why do you have to put "stupid american" in there? It has nothing to do with the post... Sc2 won't work on TV because there is no way to get audiences to watch it who have never played or know about the game, they would be lost in the lingo. Getting SC2 on TV is like getting Metalcore on the radio, it's just not everyones cup of tea.
"Stupid american" has everything to do with the topic, because only the USA matters for most citizens (and apparently "dick" - the author of that article which Kennigit criticized - is one of them) of the USA. They invented globalization but are too lazy to adjust to it if something truly global comes along.
Btw. ... I am fully agreeing with Kennigit and Innovation in that it wont work because it has to work in ALL countries with a significant potential viewership and not simply the US.
|
On April 12 2011 16:13 corpuscle wrote:
Having shown pro SC2 (mostly GSL) to friends, I have to say that I doubt that it really has the appeal to be viable on television. Even some of my friends who have played the game don't care about or understand the genius behind what progamers are actually doing, they just think it's boring unless there's a battle going on. Casual players obviously know what each unit does, but they find it boring to see "oh he hallucinated an immortal" when they don't really understand why it's clever, and the threshold for understanding what makes that interesting is way too high for television. It's the same reason that chess isn't on TV, and while Starcraft has explosions and stuff, 90% of the gameplay isn't appealing to a non-hardcore audience.
I honestly think people are on a high horse when it comes to SC2. I have a friend who doesn't play SC2 but enjoys watching games (he will probably buy it soon, but he has been watching for about 4-5 months now) and he is perfectly capable of figuring things out on his own. I don't think it takes a genius who has played the game extensively to figure out that the hallucination is meant to soak up damage... it's just common sense an intuition. Besides, that would be the caster's job to explain why it is so clever and act interested in it so the viewer can recognize it is an exciting moment.
|
On April 12 2011 11:52 Baerinho wrote:
i am a 29 year old german, i got a huge ass TV, and i only plug it in every 2nd year for the Soccer european championship and the Worldcup, thats it....
And even that is fading with more and more HQ streams even by the Broadcasting Stations being provided.
The way isnt bringing internet streams to the TV,i fully expect TV to get closer to the Internet streams.
I'm pretty much in the same boat. I have a huge Samsung sitting in my living room, but I only really use it watch Blu-rays, play my consoles or stream Netflix (an internet related service, hurr). Major sporting events are watched at my friend's house.
|
Starcraft 2 viewership numbers aren't really anything to write home about. CPL events were doing 100k viewers easily in 2007 when there were no services like justin.tv or ustream to help them out.
These are over-exaggerations. CPL only had one main event in 2007 which was lackluster. CPL prime was probably around 04-05 but even then, HLTV spectators were around 30k, not like the "easily 100k" you mentioned.
I am pretty sure current sc2 viewership is the largest any e-sport (outside BW) has ever seen. If you count GSL then there is no question about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
