http://www.thecgs.com/
DJWheat was one of the main broadcasters/producers so my thoughts are with you today hombre.
Forum Index > General Games |
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
http://www.thecgs.com/ DJWheat was one of the main broadcasters/producers so my thoughts are with you today hombre. | ||
genwar
Canada537 Posts
| ||
Frits
11782 Posts
| ||
Racenilatr
United States2756 Posts
| ||
hiroxx
Ireland115 Posts
| ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On November 19 2008 05:19 Racenilatr wrote: same. Also that article is sorta still confusing....its a game or a tourney business thingy like gom? It was a pro gaming circuit in the US, with different franchises who had "matches" against eachother by playing a bunch of different games. It was also televised with big payouts and had several international teams as well. It truly is sad that it's closing, but the management made a lot of mistakes that caused the competitive gamer base not to follow it, especially with game selection and how points were handled. EDIT: The plus side is that we may see a resurgence of 1.6. | ||
Mikilatov
United States3897 Posts
| ||
keit
1584 Posts
| ||
Tekin
2711 Posts
| ||
Magic84
Russian Federation1381 Posts
| ||
blabber
United States4448 Posts
| ||
iG.Zeep
Mexico253 Posts
yay!^^ | ||
Racenilatr
United States2756 Posts
On November 19 2008 05:24 Jibba wrote: Show nested quote + On November 19 2008 05:19 Racenilatr wrote: same. Also that article is sorta still confusing....its a game or a tourney business thingy like gom? It was a pro gaming circuit in the US, with different franchises who had "matches" against eachother by playing a bunch of different games. It was also televised with big payouts and had several international teams as well. It truly is sad that it's closing, but the management made a lot of mistakes that caused the competitive gamer base not to follow it, especially with game selection and how points were handled. EDIT: The plus side is that we may see a resurgence of 1.6. shit....than that IS sad | ||
LinkinPork
Canada221 Posts
Their CS rules made no sense. | ||
EtherealDeath
United States8366 Posts
| ||
Senx
Sweden5901 Posts
CGS did nothing but hurt the e-sport scene as it pulled major teams and persons from the e-sport scene just beacuse of money, they forgot to think through the idea in practice, beacuse the way they did it it was pretty much doomed to fail, everyone realized this except the CGS. | ||
GTR
51136 Posts
| ||
GTR
51136 Posts
Will the franchises still continue as normal or will they all disband? I hope to see 3D and coL back into 1.6 full-time (although 3D suck now since they have Source-based players). | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On November 19 2008 06:26 Senx wrote: This is a great day for e-sport, beacuse it proves to people that no matter how much money you put into something you can't succeed without actually having the knowledge and skills to do it. CGS did nothing but hurt the e-sport scene as it pulled major teams and persons from the e-sport scene just beacuse of money, they forgot to think through the idea in practice, beacuse the way they did it it was pretty much doomed to fail, everyone realized this except the CGS. Except in terms of media exposure, it is more proof of "e-sports" failing outside of Korea, even when aided by big sponsors. That is very, very bad. | ||
Senx
Sweden5901 Posts
On November 19 2008 06:29 Jibba wrote: Show nested quote + On November 19 2008 06:26 Senx wrote: This is a great day for e-sport, beacuse it proves to people that no matter how much money you put into something you can't succeed without actually having the knowledge and skills to do it. CGS did nothing but hurt the e-sport scene as it pulled major teams and persons from the e-sport scene just beacuse of money, they forgot to think through the idea in practice, beacuse the way they did it it was pretty much doomed to fail, everyone realized this except the CGS. Except in terms of media exposure, it is more proof of "e-sports" failing outside of Korea, even when aided by big sponsors. That is very, very bad. Its more a proof that money and sponsors doesn't equal success. Having a fake audience, having games that are not even e-sport friendly, choosing games that has no real fanbase, having extremely weird rulesets, majority of the year for nothing but practice(no exposure to the fans) etc. If the CGS was done by someone who actually knows how e-sport works, i'm sure it would succeed, and while they're at it, actually include europe and give them some sort of coverage since its the major e-sport continent. | ||
GTR
51136 Posts
No word on the others, hopefully they will see the light. Some of the Talent Pool that came back from the CGS ksharp, moto, Method, Volcano, zid, Dominator, Stevenson, lari, Da Bears, Garret, tr1p, shaGuar, LiN | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
I can understand that you're bitter about the poor game choices and the fact that it ignored Europe, but you shouldn't be glad because it hurts the chances for future e-sports as well. It would be like cheering for the cancellation of all future WC3 events, because WC3 sucks. That might be true, but WC3 tournaments still benefit the e-sports scene. EDIT: Jax is a tool. | ||
GTR
51136 Posts
I do agree though it would have been best to hold the main coverage in Europe though. But wouldn't it make more sense if BSkyB did European coverage, DTV do US and Star do Asia/Oceania? | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
1 Havanna: It's not only USA teams that we want to see back. I'm pretty sure most of the Brits want to see the old Dignitas team back in action. Can you guys imagine? New dig vs old dig. Would be quite awesome to watch. 2 Grobic: pretty sure no one gives a F U C K about dignitas | ||
liger13
United States1060 Posts
| ||
tiffany
3664 Posts
| ||
Colbi
United States535 Posts
On November 19 2008 06:43 Jibba wrote: Money and sponsors are necessary for e-sports to succeed, but they're not sufficient. CGS dying will make it more difficult to get sponsorship in the future. Explaining to companies that "those CGS guys didn't know what they're doing" isn't going to work, because the companies don't really know much either and CGS has better infrastructure than anyone else. I can understand that you're bitter about the poor game choices and the fact that it ignored Europe, but you shouldn't be glad because it hurts the chances for future e-sports as well. It would be like cheering for the cancellation of all future WC3 events, because WC3 sucks. That might be true, but WC3 tournaments still benefit the e-sports scene. EDIT: Jax is a tool. I very much agree with your first point about the sponsors. CGS dying will probably bring about a more much competitive and interesting scene in the more established gaming communities like CS 1.6, but its going to hurt more than ever trying to find sponsors. Major Companies will now be less prone to put forth the funds to support these gaming teams seeing how they will probably not receive much if not anything in return for their investments. I am assuming in your second point you met that it ignored Europe when CGS first came about. The CGS now or should I say did have franchises in Europe, Asia, and South America. I didn't agree much with the CGS rules or for that matter what games they picked, but I agree with what they said. They were way ahead of their time and unfortunately e-sports have not progressed quite as far as some would like to say (Korea being the exception). All I can say is that companies should listen to the fans when choosing their games, take a careful look at CGS's model and learn from their mistakes if they want to bring something similar to the e-sports scene in the future. | ||
Senx
Sweden5901 Posts
On November 19 2008 06:43 Jibba wrote: Money and sponsors are necessary for e-sports to succeed, but they're not sufficient. CGS dying will make it more difficult to get sponsorship in the future. Explaining to companies that "those CGS guys didn't know what they're doing" isn't going to work, because the companies don't really know much either and CGS has better infrastructure than anyone else. I can understand that you're bitter about the poor game choices and the fact that it ignored Europe, but you shouldn't be glad because it hurts the chances for future e-sports as well. It would be like cheering for the cancellation of all future WC3 events, because WC3 sucks. That might be true, but WC3 tournaments still benefit the e-sports scene. EDIT: Jax is a tool. Companies know alot more about e-sport than you think, AMD, Intel, razor etc has been sponsoring e-sport events for about 8 years starting with CPL. There's a reason why they are always in every event. So no i really don't buy that argument at all. If an tournament organizer KNOWS what they are doing they will sponsor it, no doubt about. But yea, they will be more hesitant with rich dreamers that don't actually know what they are doing. And no its not like im cheering for the cancellation of future WC3 events, beacuse those organizers knows wtf they are doing. Poorly run events and tournaments does not help e-sport, it only does damage beacuse the general audience believes what they are seeing. That what they're seeing is what e-sport is about, when its not, beacuse they have no references to compare it to. | ||
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
if you pick games the sponsors want, you get money, but the competive gaming community isnt going to be invested in DoA. If you pick thriving community games, you get a viewership, but no sponsors to invest | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
Males shave. Gillette makes razors. (and I guess they have a female line of products as wel ;p) Pepsi sponsors a ton of Chinese progamers (Pepsi.Sky anyone?) and sponsored a KPGA Tour way back in the day - perfect audience and no need for sponsor-tailored games. I really don't get it ;o | ||
white_box921
United Kingdom967 Posts
You need solid games which a fix fan base who will buy the product from the sponsor and watch the matches, but then these games don't really require any computer which you can get these days (sc for example). Also the games aren't exactly going to make more sale because the people watching would have bought the game already, unlike lets say WoW where people who have never played it before might just subscribe to it after seeing it on TV. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
There's a huge difference between a clean organization with bad games and a sloppy organization with good games. CGS was a very professional group that made e-sports look good, and were bringing in the rest of corporate America like Subway, Pepsi, DirecTV, etc. It's simply ridiculous how you can consider this a good thing. Now we're back to Intel/AMD/Nvidia (which are all getting hammered in the economy) sponsorships only, which can only support tournaments, not a league or even multiple teams. | ||
Senx
Sweden5901 Posts
On November 19 2008 07:13 fusionsdf wrote: hmm if you pick games the sponsors want, you get money, but the competive gaming community isnt going to be invested in DoA. If you pick thriving community games, you get a viewership, but no sponsors to invest Usually the sponsors want the games that gives them the most exposure for their products.. = thriving community games. | ||
white_box921
United Kingdom967 Posts
On November 19 2008 07:23 FrozenArbiter wrote: I don't get why you'd have to go for tech related sponsors. Most competitive gamers are male. Males shave. Gillette makes razors. (and I guess they have a female line of products as wel ;p) Pepsi sponsors a ton of Chinese progamers (Pepsi.Sky anyone?) and sponsored a KPGA Tour way back in the day - perfect audience and no need for sponsor-tailored games. I really don't get it ;o I agree, I am sure you can get Red Bull (or something similar) to sponsor. All you need to do is post a so call research claim or interview of top player saying Red bull increases your game on gotfrag and there will be stupid bitches drinking it whole day | ||
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
no more CSS matches to watch T____T | ||
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
| ||
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
| ||
pachi
Melbourne5338 Posts
On November 19 2008 07:23 Senx wrote: Show nested quote + On November 19 2008 07:13 fusionsdf wrote: hmm if you pick games the sponsors want, you get money, but the competive gaming community isnt going to be invested in DoA. If you pick thriving community games, you get a viewership, but no sponsors to invest Usually the sponsors want the games that gives them the most exposure for their products.. = thriving community games. Letting Sponsors run tournaments usually = Bad tournament because Sponsors don't know how to run tournaments / Confused community because Sponsors don't care about anything but their money / Abused community because Sponsors really don't care about anything but their money. | ||
Senx
Sweden5901 Posts
On November 19 2008 08:28 pachi wrote: Show nested quote + On November 19 2008 07:23 Senx wrote: On November 19 2008 07:13 fusionsdf wrote: hmm if you pick games the sponsors want, you get money, but the competive gaming community isnt going to be invested in DoA. If you pick thriving community games, you get a viewership, but no sponsors to invest Usually the sponsors want the games that gives them the most exposure for their products.. = thriving community games. Letting Sponsors run tournaments usually = Bad tournament because Sponsors don't know how to run tournaments / Confused community because Sponsors don't care about anything but their money / Abused community because Sponsors really don't care about anything but their money. Yeah that is true, but sponsors don't run the tournaments, thank god. | ||
Realpenguin
8253 Posts
CSS was the only decent game they decided to show. DJWheat is awesome, but making him cast a game like DOA4 is just shameful. On November 19 2008 07:13 fusionsdf wrote: + Show Spoiler + hmm if you pick games the sponsors want, you get money, but the competive gaming community isnt going to be invested in DoA. If you pick thriving community games, you get a viewership, but no sponsors to invest lool, that's true | ||
crazie-penguin
United States1253 Posts
On November 19 2008 06:29 GTR-2-Go wrote: Seriously, CGS sucked. Will the franchises still continue as normal or will they all disband? I hope to see 3D and coL back into 1.6 full-time (although 3D suck now since they have Source-based players). what happened to all the 1.6 players? I thought they migrated to Source with the team> | ||
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
On November 19 2008 05:04 Kennigit wrote: I wasn't a big fan of some of their game selections but this is a sad day for western esports - CGS shuts down. http://www.thecgs.com/ DJWheat was one of the main broadcasters/producers so my thoughts are with you today hombre. Wouldn't it be an idea whose time came too late? Especially when in the first line they say it was ahead of its time. This error in syntax leaves me with no sympathy for them or their business | ||
SayaSP
Laos5494 Posts
| ||
thoraxe
United States1449 Posts
| ||
prOxi.swAMi
Australia3091 Posts
| ||
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On November 19 2008 09:29 prOxi.swAMi wrote: CGS is lame, who cares. It's not about the company...its about the people. Jason Lake sold off alot of investment and moved his family to L.A. for this dream - A lot of jobless people as a results of this :\ . | ||
Racenilatr
United States2756 Posts
| ||
Ack1027
United States7873 Posts
On November 19 2008 10:42 Racenilatr wrote: at least it wont leave as many people jobless as if General Motors doesnt get a bailout O_O Seriously? | ||
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
In particular, I see that CGS (like WCG) picked DoA4 to be one of their games, presumably because it is "mainstream" and/or backed by Microsoft's sponsorship. Honestly, it is hard to think of a worse fighting game for competitive purposes. Instead of DoA4, let's suppose they chose a GOOD competitive fighting game, like one of the following: + Show Spoiler [Street Fighter 3: Third Strike] + + Show Spoiler [Street Fighter 4] + I've shown videos like these, with great games plus great commentary, to people who don't even play any fighting games at all, and pretty much everyone enjoys watching them. I strongly recommend everyone try watching at least one and see what you think. IMO the Street Fighter 3: Third Strike video is easier to follow, since it's harder to see what's going on in the semi-3D Street Fighter 4. Now, compare these to CGS's DoA4 finals, and decide for yourself which games are superior. + Show Spoiler [Dead or Alive 4] + Lastly, my condolences to all the guys who put their hearts into CGS to see it work, but despite their best abilities, a few key people made terrible business decisions that doomed the company to failure. | ||
Mazer
Canada1086 Posts
I'm a coL fan and I'd imagine they'll probably return to 1.6 full time now (they just won the CGS Pro:AM for 1.6 that had a few decent teams in it). Will be curious to see how they'll stack up against the international teams (mym, mtw, eSTRO etc.), I doubt they're up to those standards at this point though. Will miss the CSS game casts though. | ||
Roxen000
1226 Posts
| ||
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
| ||
Alizee-
United States845 Posts
The other big disappointment is that these are big corporations, not teams that will change name, players, etc. every other week as can be seen on gotfrag headlines. No, these are companies that likely won't make the same mistake twice. Needless to say this will bolster MLG's efforts, but anyone that gives half a damn about e-sports shouldn't be so blind as to consider this a good thing. Remember CPL died, CGS is dead, and well WCG isn't in the best of shape so tell me, how is this a good thing? | ||
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On November 19 2008 17:16 Mazer wrote: I never really thought they had the right formula and it seemed like the whole idea wasn't catching on at all unfortunately. I do wish the CGS could have lasted though. Overall, it was a step in the right direction for e-sports even if it was pretty flawed. "A step in the right direction"? I've heard that some people / organizations would like to make Chess an Olympic sport. Now, let's not debate whether or not it should be one. Instead, consider this: if an organization managed to make Sorry! an Olympic sport for one year, then the game was kicked out afterwards, would you say that the organization "took a step in the right direction" for people who want to see Chess in the Olympics? | ||
hugitout
United States379 Posts
| ||
lololol
5198 Posts
| ||
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On November 19 2008 17:58 {88}iNcontroL wrote: Bill307 WCG doesn't "pick" games they get paid to offer the games they do. Yes they can turn down games etc.. but I am guessing the scenario is that financially it would be ludicrous for them to turn away a microsoft sponsor over a "better" fighting game (that may or may not have even made a bid on WCG). Point taken. WCG probably made the right decision. I guess we're just lucky that Blizzard must be paying them to include StarCraft, but that's for another discussion. On the other hand, neither Evo in the US nor Tougeki / Super Battle Opera in Japan depend on fighting game companies to sponsor their events: Evo's funds come 100% from entry fees ($10 / person) and DVD sales, while I believe DVD sales account for at least a large portion of SBO's funds. (DVDs consisting of match footage from the event, that is.) So you can't say that major sponsorship from the game companies themselves is necessary for a big, successful competitive gaming event. The TSL might even be another example. Anyway, this also gets me thinking: let's assume CGS "picked" DoA4 for similar reasons as WCG. Then it was definitely a step in the wrong direction for e-sports. We want to show potential sponsors that large numbers of people will take interest in watching sponsored competitions. Having shallow, unimpressive games like DoA4 in the line-up will show them the exact opposite. Not to mention the problem of allowing the game companies to control which games will be played competitively. | ||
Mazer
Canada1086 Posts
On November 19 2008 18:45 Bill307 wrote: Anyway, this also gets me thinking: let's assume CGS "picked" DoA4 for similar reasons as WCG. Then it was definitely a step in the wrong direction for e-sports. We want to show potential sponsors that large numbers of people will take interest in watching sponsored competitions. Having shallow, unimpressive games like DoA4 in the line-up will show them the exact opposite. Not to mention the problem of allowing the game companies to control which games will be played competitively. On November 19 2008 18:06 Bill307 wrote: I've heard that some people / organizations would like to make Chess an Olympic sport. Now, let's not debate whether or not it should be one. Instead, consider this: if an organization managed to make Sorry! an Olympic sport for one year, then the game was kicked out afterwards, would you say that the organization "took a step in the right direction" for people who want to see Chess in the Olympics? I never defended their choice of games. Some of the them were pretty brutal, DOA4 most noticeably. I was referring to the overall idea of having multi-game "franchises" compete with each other with the matches being casted live for anyone on their couch to watch. Trying to bring e-sports to the mainstream in N. America. Definitely not a step backwards in my eyes. | ||
R3condite
Korea (South)1541 Posts
frankly i think bad game selection was the problem not it being too far ahead... | ||
FaZ-
United States186 Posts
They used: FIFA DOA4 Project Gotham Racing (4?) CS (Source... with a completely new and lame format) I really don't think that any company which tries to merge multiple games and appeal to a huge audience is ever going to be truly successful. If they had chosen maybe CS 1.6 and say Halo 3 and built upon those two communities, arguably the largest foreign gaming scenes, they would have had a chance to survive. With Microsoft paying for poor games (Competitive 2v2 Racing...?), a very luck based (RPS) fighting game that most of the players didn't prefer, and CS:Source, which most competitive players don't prefer to 1.6, and FIFA... the appeal to watch just wasn't there. In a new incarnation, I could see SC2 CS2 (If announced, and released) and the newest console shooter (GoW2 comes to mind, at the moment) being successful together. The casual games like FIFA and Racing are just never going to be a hit among serious gamers, and the other games that are highly competitive aren't immediately going to be a hit with casual gamers. They needed to make a choice, and they didn't do so. | ||
OGzan
United States289 Posts
| ||
WorldComunist8
United States5 Posts
Admins who banned me: I don't think you're stupid. I fucked up, and I know that. I deserved that ban, and I'm not pleading to be un-banned. Ban me again after this. However, I beg as an ambassador of eSports, leave this post. I couldn't go without saying a part on this, considering I had been making it a part of my life lately. That said. I had the wonderful privilege in the past two to three weeks of immersing myself in the world of the CGS. The reason? Originally, I wanted to see if and how SC could be involved. Then I became fascinated with it, and friendly with several people. I realized many things in this time. 1) Game choice did not ruin this league. We, the fans, did. We decided that because our favorite game was not involved, we wouldn't give a damn. SC wasn't in it, so half of us didn't watch. Understandable. Source was chosen over 1.6. Get over it and watch it and support this cause. For the other 3 games, they were trying to make it multi-dimensional. Whether they were the right or wrong choices didn't matter. They were learning. There were plans on changing the games anyways before next season. You can't start a revolution with one group. They needed the support of everyone to get going. Not just the fans of the chosen games. 2) To the 1.6 die-hards out there. Source was chosen. Some of the best 1.6 players left 1.6 for this. The fact of the matter is, Source is what the developers want, and by fighting and only playing 1.6, you hurt the community. You don't provide the developers with the necessary material to create a better game next time around. If anyone is sending the community a giant step backwards, it is those of you refusing to move forward. 3) This hurts the foreign eSports community as a whole. eSports outside of Korea will either succeed or fail as a whole. Not just one or two games. You will never see StarCraft succeed in the West alone. Nor will WarCraft. Or CounterStrike. You need unity among the eSports community. You don't have to go play all of the games, but tune in, learn about the game and watch. As it stands right now, we don't have mainstream support. We're all we've got. 4) We need to worry as SC fans about SC2. Look at the CounterStrike community. A major league shut down two days ago, and many are blaming it on a community divide. Why is that community divided? CounterStrike: Source is claimed to be not as competitive as CounterStrike 1.6. StarCraft 2 is only in development, but what do we hear? It's not as competitive. They say history repeats itself, but I never thought it to be this close. If anything let this be a lesson. No one league is invincible. You could click tomorrow and the OSL, MSL, TG-Sambo or Proleague could be gone. Just remember that. | ||
GTR
51136 Posts
On November 20 2008 18:24 WorldComunist8 wrote: 2) To the 1.6 die-hards out there. Source was chosen. Some of the best 1.6 players left 1.6 for this. The fact of the matter is, Source is what the developers want, and by fighting and only playing 1.6, you hurt the community. You don't provide the developers with the necessary material to create a better game next time around. Stop talking out of your ass. 1) Source was only chosen because it was the only viable team-based FPS which was pretty enough to be broadcasted on television, while receiving viewers. It was obvious, if they didn't pick a game that looked good, no one would come watch (DoA over various other good fighting games etc is another example). 2) One of the reasons why 1.6 players left the 1.6 scene because they were bound to a contract and could not play non-CGS games competitively outside of the CGS circuit. Although there was an exception to this rule (coL playing in CEVO with 1.6), it could have been simply avoided by shaping this rule around to suit the teams needs. Personally though, I think US CS has prospered from the leaving of coL, JMC, EG, 3D etc by garnering new talents such as the players from GG, EG and X30 (who were previously under-looked due to the performances of coL, 3D etc). 3) The main reason though I think is it was for the money. If I remember correctly, the initial salary per year was 30,000+? After the first season though, it lowered to 25,000 or so. I might be wrong here though. It was an insurance basically, that, even if the players do not perform well, the CGS will be able to compensate and pay the players. 4) If Source is what Valve wanted to aim as the new CS competitive game, why introduce Dynamic Pricing? (Thankfully that could be disabled). Why introduce buying guns without having to buy ammo? Why do a stupid, MR10, 16k Start Money system? CGS and Valve basically dumbed down CS to the point where it isn't even worth watching. I enjoy watching the pistol round, and to be honest, I think it is one of the most strategical rounds next to the first rifle round. I get excited when teams miraculously win their eco rounds. I don't enjoy 5 players with full grenades/armor on the first round. Most of the thinking required behind CS with the money management was basically lost with the new system being introduced. 5) What material are you talking about? The ill-fated CSPromod was a step in the right direction, yet a step in the wrong direction. It is best for Valve to produce something similar to this, as it is 1.6 game play wise, yet Source graphic wise, a good combination if you want a game which everyone knows/agrees with yet is broadcast able. | ||
WorldComunist8
United States5 Posts
I also agree Promod was a step in both directions. I think it would have been beneficial in that, yes it would've bridged the gap between the two. Bad because you're creating a third party in the mess. As for Valve making a new game, who knows? I believe they're busy fighting Live for Windows or whatever the hell that new platform is. | ||
GTR
51136 Posts
Would have been better to watch and no stupid Belle playing. | ||
WorldComunist8
United States5 Posts
| ||
Alizee-
United States845 Posts
Some players present themselves very well and are worthy of respect, others act like dumb kids who play games all day and when you present anything as a sport or competition especially on tv, you need professionalism. Also remember if CGS were to be huge, they would inevitably have to get viewers from elsewhere...there are usually around 150k players at anytime for source and 1.6 combined. So let's say that there's roughly 1 million active players, even if all the fairly active players(casual, competitive, and in between)all watched counter-strike that's only 1 million...world wide. Needless to say the inevitable must occur and that is to draw viewers from other sources and that's where you have to watch and not just bitch because "your" game didn't make it. As much as people wanna say "I don't give a damn about those games" the truth of the matter is that if companies didn't give a damn, you wouldn't get more than a penny for playing games, so why some gamers get this holier than thou thing going on where they feel they DESERVE money because they play X game is a crock of shit. I'm not admitting there weren't flaws in CGS, really I can find flaws in nearly anything, but you take the good with the bad and weigh it out in the end to see if it works. I hope they come back or ESPN/MLG get things rollin, otherwise it'll be a shaky situation. I know many on this site would love for Korea to branch out, but I think the reality is they just don't have the size that some other areas of the world have. American/European companies are comparatively massive to the Korean channels and so if there's gonna be the whole global e-sports thing, I wouldn't put watermelons into their basket. | ||
SilverSkyLark
Philippines8437 Posts
| ||
Chef
10810 Posts
So if I were to contrast my conclusion against theirs, I would say they're half right. It was too early, because only now is everyone (well, not to the extent of South Korea because of a lack of popularity for PC Bangs, but still) starting to have really fast internet, and it's becoming primitive not to own a home PC. The computer savviness being socially acceptable is more or less a reality, but you could give it another 5 years to be fully attuned (basically every student is doing their research on the internet, and has learned that computers are awesome things to be good with, even apart from MSN ). But what North America will never have, is complete focus on one video game. Seriously, South Korea was a fluke. FPS shooters get banned, and an incredibly anticipated RTS is released right in time. Blizzard would seriously have to lobby just to make this happen in any other country, and obviously they don't care to (not with their profits largely coming from WoW). PS: I didn't read any of the other posts, but I feel my contribution was worth submitting because I highly doubt anyone else has been doing their university term paper on such a random topic. I might ask my teacher if I can post my essay on the internet after I hand it in. I've already done my oral presentation, and I could post the script for that too if I ask permission. | ||
MayorITC
Korea (South)798 Posts
You really don't know what you're talking about. Yes there are tons of Koreans who play Starcraft, but there's tons of Koreans who play other games. E-sports thrives in Korea not because we narrowed our focus to a single game but rather because of the sheer number of gamers in Korea. | ||
[-Bluewolf-]
United States609 Posts
On November 20 2008 18:24 WorldComunist8 wrote: 1) Game choice did not ruin this league. We, the fans, did. We decided that because our favorite game was not involved, we wouldn't give a damn. SC wasn't in it, so half of us didn't watch. Understandable. Source was chosen over 1.6. Get over it and watch it and support this cause. For the other 3 games, they were trying to make it multi-dimensional. Whether they were the right or wrong choices didn't matter. They were learning. There were plans on changing the games anyways before next season. You can't start a revolution with one group. They needed the support of everyone to get going. Not just the fans of the chosen games. I disagree. The game's CGS choose were boring to watch - especially with the rule sets chosen for them. People in CGS keep claiming others know nothing about what is watchable - and keep bitching when people outside CGS don't watch it. It doesn't take much to see that the claim of those involved in CGS has a logical fallacy - especially when Tasteless' first English pro-league cast can get millions of viewers internationally. I'm not about to watch utter boring crap just so that I can support a league that keeps blindly choosing to show crap. Don't take my word for it - just look at the comments from even some of the casual gaming sites: http://kotaku.com/5092536/another-pro-gaming-league-goes-under and http://www.joystiq.com/2008/11/18/r-i-p-championship-gaming-series/ . Simply put: The games were boring to watch, at least with the rule sets CGS decided to use, and so yes, they are partially responsible for the death of that league. | ||
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 20 2008 22:58 MayorITC wrote: Pretty sure FPS are not banned in Korea considering I've seen CS and Sudden Attack matches on TV for the past six years. You really don't know what you're talking about. Yes there are tons of Koreans who play Starcraft, but there's tons of Koreans who play other games. E-sports thrives in Korea not because we narrowed our focus to a single game but rather because of the sheer number of gamers in Korea. Note that he said "were" banned, which as far as I know is true. They are not banned now, but 10 years ago (or a little more perhaps) they were. As were a lot of japanese console games I think? Also, yes, nowadays there are just a ton of different games being played in Korea, but 10 years ago... I wasn't there myself, but what I've been told is that back then, pretty much everyone played SC, like 90% of the computers in PC Cafe's would have SC running all the time. On November 20 2008 19:57 Alizee- wrote: I actually found the franchises to be an excellent idea. Why? Well simply put, because these are games and prior to things like CGS there wasn't any big money other than tournament wins. So naturally if you're making money from tournaments you'll try to get on the best team and inbetween tournaments it doesn't matter. As a result? Lots of team reforms, lots of roster changes, etc. It introduced much needed stability in, lets face it, a rather unprofessional community. Some players present themselves very well and are worthy of respect, others act like dumb kids who play games all day and when you present anything as a sport or competition especially on tv, you need professionalism. Also remember if CGS were to be huge, they would inevitably have to get viewers from elsewhere...there are usually around 150k players at anytime for source and 1.6 combined. So let's say that there's roughly 1 million active players, even if all the fairly active players(casual, competitive, and in between)all watched counter-strike that's only 1 million...world wide. Needless to say the inevitable must occur and that is to draw viewers from other sources and that's where you have to watch and not just bitch because "your" game didn't make it. As much as people wanna say "I don't give a damn about those games" the truth of the matter is that if companies didn't give a damn, you wouldn't get more than a penny for playing games, so why some gamers get this holier than thou thing going on where they feel they DESERVE money because they play X game is a crock of shit. I'm not admitting there weren't flaws in CGS, really I can find flaws in nearly anything, but you take the good with the bad and weigh it out in the end to see if it works. I hope they come back or ESPN/MLG get things rollin, otherwise it'll be a shaky situation. I know many on this site would love for Korea to branch out, but I think the reality is they just don't have the size that some other areas of the world have. American/European companies are comparatively massive to the Korean channels and so if there's gonna be the whole global e-sports thing, I wouldn't put watermelons into their basket. Ok, I honestly never really paid the CGS enough attention to even be sure what their lineup was, it didn't seem to include any game I was interested in. Hell, I don't even know where I would watch it if I wanted to. But honestly look at the games they have for their lineup: DoA4 - .............. It's an embarassment. (Note: I actually don't know if the actual game is fun, I just hate the whole "I know, let's put gigantic breasts in the game!" deal, I think it makes gaming look stupid) Fifa 08 - No thanks, I barely watch real football. WoW - ... Forza something. - Why would I ever watch this over real racing? I don't even watch real racing for fucks sake. CS:Source - I guess I'd watch if it was on TV. Like, if I could get something like this on TV there are just so many games I'd be interested in watching. Apart from the obvious SC I'd also watch Quake, WC3, probably CS, Street Fighter, Tekken, Super Smash. Hell, even games like Halo I'd probably watch if it was on TV and I've never seen Halo played or played it. On November 20 2008 19:41 WorldComunist8 wrote: The franchise system was interesting. I liked certain aspects and didn't like others. I was not bothered by the fact that Source was included, and I wasn't about to say "Hey, you guys suck, you're doing it all wrong". The problem was, it wasn't truly a "franchise". They still had to go out to LA no matter who was playing. Location based would've been better, IMO. Plus some depth and a longer season. Note, I still support what they were trying to do whole-heartedly. As I said, they tried to do what needs to be done: unite the sports and succeed as an industry, not as a game. I still hold to the fact that outside of Korea, eSports won't succeed any other way. It's too small of a market and inter-dependent on everyone rather than just one group. E-Sports seems to be succeeding just fine in China, and not doing too poorly in Germany. | ||
Chef
10810 Posts
On November 20 2008 22:58 MayorITC wrote: Pretty sure FPS are not banned in Korea considering I've seen CS and Sudden Attack matches on TV for the past six years. You really don't know what you're talking about. Yes there are tons of Koreans who play Starcraft, but there's tons of Koreans who play other games. E-sports thrives in Korea not because we narrowed our focus to a single game but rather because of the sheer number of gamers in Korea. Pretty sure 6 years ago it wasn't 1998. You really don't know what you're talking about. My source is from Grrrr's interview on Geartest, but for some frustrating reason, the site is down. http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=sGr&q=geartest patry interview&btnG=Search&meta= | ||
Alizee-
United States845 Posts
On November 20 2008 23:01 [-Bluewolf-] wrote: People in CGS keep claiming others know nothing about what is watchable - and keep bitching when people outside CGS don't watch it. It doesn't take much to see that the claim of those involved in CGS has a logical fallacy - especially when Tasteless' first English pro-league cast can get millions of viewers internationally. As I recall it was around a million, not millions and it was either 40 or 60% Korean viewers so you got your number a little misrepresented, not that I'm trying to discredit tasteless because he's fuckin awesome, I'm just saying that vaguely claiming millions internationally as though none were Koreans(when in fact like I said I think it was no less than 40%). So yeah, I don't know what CGS got for viewers, I just don't like seeing people giving them any credit even though as I and others have said the game choices weren't the best. Although even though I think watching WoW arena is silly, MLG has it, GomTV has it...so not every game you dislike is guaranteed to be doomed. | ||
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
On November 20 2008 22:58 MayorITC wrote: Pretty sure FPS are not banned in Korea considering I've seen CS and Sudden Attack matches on TV for the past six years. You really don't know what you're talking about. Yes there are tons of Koreans who play Starcraft, but there's tons of Koreans who play other games. E-sports thrives in Korea not because we narrowed our focus to a single game but rather because of the sheer number of gamers in Korea. yes, because korea has more gamers than the US concentration maybe, but definitely not sheer numbers lol | ||
Mazer
Canada1086 Posts
On November 20 2008 19:03 GTR-2-Go wrote: Stop talking out of your ass. 1) Source was only chosen because it was the only viable team-based FPS which was pretty enough to be broadcasted on television, while receiving viewers. It was obvious, if they didn't pick a game that looked good, no one would come watch (DoA over various other good fighting games etc is another example). Agree. On November 20 2008 19:03 GTR-2-Go wrote: 2) One of the reasons why 1.6 players left the 1.6 scene because they were bound to a contract and could not play non-CGS games competitively outside of the CGS circuit. Although there was an exception to this rule (coL playing in CEVO with 1.6), it could have been simply avoided by shaping this rule around to suit the teams needs. Personally though, I think US CS has prospered from the leaving of coL, JMC, EG, 3D etc by garnering new talents such as the players from GG, EG and X30 (who were previously under-looked due to the performances of coL, 3D etc). Well yeah, some of the lesser US teams have come into the spotlight. But on an international stage, Europe (and some Asian teams) are still dominating. On November 20 2008 19:03 GTR-2-Go wrote: 3) The main reason though I think is it was for the money. If I remember correctly, the initial salary per year was 30,000+? After the first season though, it lowered to 25,000 or so. I might be wrong here though. It was an insurance basically, that, even if the players do not perform well, the CGS will be able to compensate and pay the players. Can't really comment much on this, but I would argue that a system similar to any professional league where better players can sign with a team for more money would be the optimal way to go eventually (franchise salary cap, maybe a min also so nobody is going without food). Probably wouldn't work too well with so few franchises. Teams basically live as families and dropping/trading players doesn't seem too probable to happen. On November 20 2008 19:03 GTR-2-Go wrote: 4) If Source is what Valve wanted to aim as the new CS competitive game, why introduce Dynamic Pricing? (Thankfully that could be disabled). Why introduce buying guns without having to buy ammo? Why do a stupid, MR10, 16k Start Money system? CGS and Valve basically dumbed down CS to the point where it isn't even worth watching. I enjoy watching the pistol round, and to be honest, I think it is one of the most strategical rounds next to the first rifle round. I get excited when teams miraculously win their eco rounds. I don't enjoy 5 players with full grenades/armor on the first round. Most of the thinking required behind CS with the money management was basically lost with the new system being introduced. Dynamic Pricing was just a random (dumb) idea thrown in. It was obviously never meant for competitive play and I doubt anyone actually scrimmed with it implemented. Don't even see why that was even mentioned. Buying ammo isn't much of a game changer as it affect everyone equally. I mean, either we all have to buy ammo, or we all get full ammo with our guns. I guess the leading team keeps some more momentum with the 1.6 style but who dictates if that's necessarily good or bad? Not much of a factor with $16k either. As for their ruleset choice, the idea was to have fast rounds, fast halves, with a lot of action. 2x10 rounds at 1:20 give you a more controllable length of match time which is needed for broadcasting purposes. Yes, I'm not a big fan as this restricts a lot of strats that require more time to execute but I just don't see how 2x15 (or 2x10) 3:00 rounds can be done. I *love* pistol rounds also, but losing that round generally leads to another 3-4 losses. With only 10 rounds per half, that puts way too much importance on winning that one round. In 1.6 tourneys/leagues/etc., pistol round works because you still have 14 rounds after that and have a chance to rally. I think they made a lot of logical choices, it's just that people have gotten so used to 1.6, changes like this seem so far out and are shunned. On November 20 2008 19:03 GTR-2-Go wrote: 5) What material are you talking about? The ill-fated CSPromod was a step in the right direction, yet a step in the wrong direction. It is best for Valve to produce something similar to this, as it is 1.6 game play wise, yet Source graphic wise, a good combination if you want a game which everyone knows/agrees with yet is broadcast able. Yea, Valve definitely dropped the ball here. I can't say I hate CS:S mechanics but there clearly are some flaws that should have been identified and fixed several years ago. | ||
cava
United States1035 Posts
| ||
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On November 20 2008 18:24 WorldComunist8 wrote: 1) Game choice did not ruin this league. We, the fans, did. We decided that because our favorite game was not involved, we wouldn't give a damn. SC wasn't in it, so half of us didn't watch. Understandable. Source was chosen over 1.6. Get over it and watch it and support this cause. For the other 3 games, they were trying to make it multi-dimensional. Whether they were the right or wrong choices didn't matter. They were learning. There were plans on changing the games anyways before next season. You can't start a revolution with one group. They needed the support of everyone to get going. Not just the fans of the chosen games. ROFL So like, if Heroes gets cancelled after this season, then it's not the fault of the writers for writing ridiculous storylines that make people hate to watch the show, it's our fault for not watching anyway! The stupidity of this logic is mind-boggling. | ||
MayorITC
Korea (South)798 Posts
Source: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6163609.html Thyis is further evident by the fact that there are FPS games that were available in Korea since 1998. Rainbow Six was released in 1998 and was an instant hit at PC Bangs. For awhile it even shared the limelight on TV with Starcraft. Anyway, this is all a deviation from the main point. Starcraft is hardly the focal point of the Korean gaming industry (not to be confused with the e-sport industry). While Starcraft may be the dominant game in Korean e-sports that doesn't necessarily equate to it being the dominant game in Korea. MMORPGs actually have a larger share in the Korean gaming industry. However, due to the nature of MMORPGs it's hard to convert it into an e-sport as exemplified by WoW. Thus you can't say that e-sport is successful in Korea because they honed in on a single game because it's simply not true. There are so many different games that were broadcoasted in Korea in the past 10 years. Diablo II, Starcraft, Crazy Arcade, Sudden Attack, Rainbow Six, Counter Strike, and hell, even Tetris Online. The Korean culture made games as a whole extremely popular in the country. But Starcraft being championed above all other games on TV has nothing to do with the Korean culture, but more with the nature of the game itself. And to conclude all of this post by tying it into the topic. If you want a few select games to thrive as an e-sport, you have to embrace the entire gaming industry. It has nothing to do with liking a specific title more; choosing Starcraft over DoA 4 or America choosing baseball over soccer. Because before people even elevated one sport over another, they had to address the basic issue: Is America willing to accept sports as a form of commercialized entertainment? | ||
Quesadilla
United States1812 Posts
| ||
Ack1027
United States7873 Posts
On November 21 2008 09:51 MayorITC wrote: I also lived in Korea during 1998. I also worked part-time at a PC Bang so I'm fully aware of which games were banned and which games were not. Let me repeat what I said earlier: FPS games were never banned in Korea. Games that had any political reference to North Korea and South Korea were banned regardless of game genre. Source: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6163609.html Thyis is further evident by the fact that there are FPS games that were available in Korea since 1998. Rainbow Six was released in 1998 and was an instant hit at PC Bangs. For awhile it even shared the limelight on TV with Starcraft. Anyway, this is all a deviation from the main point. Starcraft is hardly the focal point of the Korean gaming industry (not to be confused with the e-sport industry). While Starcraft may be the dominant game in Korean e-sports that doesn't necessarily equate to it being the dominant game in Korea. MMORPGs actually have a larger share in the Korean gaming industry. However, due to the nature of MMORPGs it's hard to convert it into an e-sport as exemplified by WoW. Thus you can't say that e-sport is successful in Korea because they honed in on a single game because it's simply not true. There are so many different games that were broadcoasted in Korea in the past 10 years. Diablo II, Starcraft, Crazy Arcade, Sudden Attack, Rainbow Six, Counter Strike, and hell, even Tetris Online. The Korean culture made games as a whole extremely popular in the country. But Starcraft being championed above all other games on TV has nothing to do with the Korean culture, but more with the nature of the game itself. And to conclude all of this post by tying it into the topic. If you want a few select games to thrive as an e-sport, you have to embrace the entire gaming industry. It has nothing to do with liking a specific title more; choosing Starcraft over DoA 4 or America choosing baseball over soccer. Because before people even elevated one sport over another, they had to address the basic issue: Is America willing to accept sports as a form of commercialized entertainment? Front page this shit. Now. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 21 2008 09:51 MayorITC wrote: I also lived in Korea during 1998. I also worked part-time at a PC Bang so I'm fully aware of which games were banned and which games were not. Let me repeat what I said earlier: FPS games were never banned in Korea. Games that had any political reference to North Korea and South Korea were banned regardless of game genre. Source: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6163609.html Thyis is further evident by the fact that there are FPS games that were available in Korea since 1998. Rainbow Six was released in 1998 and was an instant hit at PC Bangs. For awhile it even shared the limelight on TV with Starcraft. Anyway, this is all a deviation from the main point. Starcraft is hardly the focal point of the Korean gaming industry (not to be confused with the e-sport industry). While Starcraft may be the dominant game in Korean e-sports that doesn't necessarily equate to it being the dominant game in Korea. MMORPGs actually have a larger share in the Korean gaming industry. However, due to the nature of MMORPGs it's hard to convert it into an e-sport as exemplified by WoW. Thus you can't say that e-sport is successful in Korea because they honed in on a single game because it's simply not true. There are so many different games that were broadcoasted in Korea in the past 10 years. Diablo II, Starcraft, Crazy Arcade, Sudden Attack, Rainbow Six, Counter Strike, and hell, even Tetris Online. The Korean culture made games as a whole extremely popular in the country. But Starcraft being championed above all other games on TV has nothing to do with the Korean culture, but more with the nature of the game itself. And to conclude all of this post by tying it into the topic. If you want a few select games to thrive as an e-sport, you have to embrace the entire gaming industry. It has nothing to do with liking a specific title more; choosing Starcraft over DoA 4 or America choosing baseball over soccer. Because before people even elevated one sport over another, they had to address the basic issue: Is America willing to accept sports as a form of commercialized entertainment? I see, I guess the misunderstanding came from people seeing certain FPS games banned and assuming all were. Sorry. | ||
Chef
10810 Posts
On November 21 2008 09:51 MayorITC wrote: I also lived in Korea during 1998. I also worked part-time at a PC Bang so I'm fully aware of which games were banned and which games were not. Let me repeat what I said earlier: FPS games were never banned in Korea. Games that had any political reference to North Korea and South Korea were banned regardless of game genre. Source: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6163609.html Thyis is further evident by the fact that there are FPS games that were available in Korea since 1998. Rainbow Six was released in 1998 and was an instant hit at PC Bangs. For awhile it even shared the limelight on TV with Starcraft. Anyway, this is all a deviation from the main point. Starcraft is hardly the focal point of the Korean gaming industry (not to be confused with the e-sport industry). While Starcraft may be the dominant game in Korean e-sports that doesn't necessarily equate to it being the dominant game in Korea. MMORPGs actually have a larger share in the Korean gaming industry. However, due to the nature of MMORPGs it's hard to convert it into an e-sport as exemplified by WoW. Thus you can't say that e-sport is successful in Korea because they honed in on a single game because it's simply not true. There are so many different games that were broadcoasted in Korea in the past 10 years. Diablo II, Starcraft, Crazy Arcade, Sudden Attack, Rainbow Six, Counter Strike, and hell, even Tetris Online. The Korean culture made games as a whole extremely popular in the country. But Starcraft being championed above all other games on TV has nothing to do with the Korean culture, but more with the nature of the game itself. And to conclude all of this post by tying it into the topic. If you want a few select games to thrive as an e-sport, you have to embrace the entire gaming industry. It has nothing to do with liking a specific title more; choosing Starcraft over DoA 4 or America choosing baseball over soccer. Because before people even elevated one sport over another, they had to address the basic issue: Is America willing to accept sports as a form of commercialized entertainment? I apologise. I did do research, but I live in Canada and can't read Korean, so it was limited. I guess my source was just wrong. I just find it really weird that South Korea is the only nation to ever go this far with video games, and this seemed like such a perfect answer. Now I sort of have to conclude it's just a matter of time for all nations to catch up technologically with S.K. if they want an eSports industry with realistic player careers. Maybe that's true, I don't know. I just know it's hardly academic to say, "Well, you know, South Koreans are genetically inclined to play lots and lots of video games. It's just in their blood. Game country." Nationalist bullshit doesn't cut it. It doesn't even make sense... Every young male in Canada plays video games too... And it's never become like South Korea... We had StarCraft too, why didn't it stick out too? Baaah. | ||
Chef
10810 Posts
He says "Everybody in [South] Korea plays games," said Patry, who speaks fluent Korean in addition to his native French and English. When he moved to South Korea five years ago, "FPS [first-person shooter] games were illegal at the time. That is one reason why StarCraft became so popular. Blizzard [StarCraft's publisher] gets more than half of its StarCraft sales from [South] Korea." I have to hand in my term paper in 6 hours, so obviously I don't expect a respond before then, but I would appreciate for my own interest some information regarding this. Was he simply mistaken or taken out of context? Or is there truth that more games than just North Korean conflict games were banned? I'm going to write in my paper than only North Korean conflict games were banned, I think, which alters my conclusion to say that eSports isn't that far away in countries outside South Korea, which is of course different from my initial idea that South Korea was simply an amazing fluke. Cheeeers.... | ||
tiffany
3664 Posts
| ||
LuMaLo
Germany26 Posts
| ||
| ||
The PiG Daily
Best Games of SC
Clem vs Rogue
Reynor vs ClemLIVE!
Reynor vs Classic
Dark vs ReBellioN
herO vs TBD
PiGStarcraft647
[ Submit Event ] |
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Other Games tarik_tv66089 gofns30354 summit1g10133 sgares593 shahzam542 WinterStarcraft481 Maynarde118 NuckleDu113 ViBE44 Organizations Other Games StarCraft 2 Other Games StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2 • gosughost_ 30 StarCraft: Brood War• practicex 16 • Kozan • LaughNgamez Trovo • Poblha • aXEnki • Migwel • intothetv • Gussbus • Laughngamez YouTube • IndyKCrew Dota 2 League of Legends |
ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
GSL Code S
Maru vs TY
Creator vs SHIN
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
Online Event
ESL Pro Tour
[ Show More ] Hatchery Cup
BSL
ESL Pro Tour
Sparkling Tuna Cup
ESL Pro Tour
BSL
ESL Pro Tour
|
|