In the following space I hope to outline some of my thoughts on the gaming world that center around one little buzzword: mainstream. This may take several installments, but this post will at least serve as a starting point in generating some discussion (add your comments, please!)
It seems to be overriding goal of most leading organizations in the eSports world to bring gaming 'to the mainstream.' The CPL, WSVG, MLG, even media organizations like MTV and TsN have used such language in reference to one of their key objectives in getting involved with organized competitive PC and console gaming. Yet with the CPL faltering somewhat (which cannot be argued with the upstart WSVG making major CPL events mere stops on their tour), and with coverage of these events clearly not garnering the kind of attention that they were intended to grab, that is, the attention of the mainstream (the last major competitive event that was telecasted was the CPL Winter event in New York by MTV), the question still remains if gaming can ever reach 'mainstream' status. Clearly the right formula has yet to be found. However, while that question is not a new inquiry, I feel I might be the first to ask whether gaming should be aiming to garner mainstream attention. But more on that later.
So what exactly is holding gaming back from recieving attention from the masses comparable to that of sports? It could easily be argued that this is the parallel that the trailblazers of competitive gaming are trying to reach. And while this parallel doesn't quite make sense on the 'amateur' online level as has been pointed out many a time on league forums everywhere, when it comes to thinking of gaming on the professional level, this comparison cannot be ignored; it is the model to be aimed for. I feel there are several things that competitive gaming lacks in its current state that is hampering its development as a cultural entity rather than just a novelty profession for some and a hobby for a few more.
One of these elements however is not the lack of 'superstar' personalities. This is clearly one of the things that is developing just fine - with top names signing endorsement deals, getting their names on equipment, etc. But while the public image of the 'gamer' is moving away from the painfully nerdy guy with glasses living in his basement due to these handful of true professional gamers, there's plenty of incidents like this one that could just as easily paint the gamer as an immature, unprofessional idiot. While much the same could be said about a few professional athletes, that is more the exception rather than the rule in pro sports. Browse the forums of any such 'professional' gaming organization, or any place where top gamers online gather for that matter, and you will see much the opposite. The issue here again is not the lack of personalities, but the lack of good personalities.
A more serious issue here, however, is the games themselves. With games becoming increasingly rich in graphics, sound quality, content, and gameplay, it would seem that the games should be the least of worries here; yet the games being played competitively are holding gaming back. No, it's not about the violence. Most games allow you to disable the gore, if any, and reduce the content to little more than a Nerf-gun fight with cartoon-like consequences, safe for any child to watch. The issue is spectatability, and carries two prongs: either the games themselves don't lend to passive spectating very well, or built-in support or mechanisms that make spectating easier are spotty at best, or both. Counter-strike arguably leads the way on the PC end as far as support for spectators with HLTV, which I think is one of the major factors keeping 1.6 on a far inferior engine more popular than its Source-based cousin. However, even so, is CS that fun to sit and watch? What about other games, such as Halo or BF2 or AA, that have less spectator tools; are they more spectator friendly?
Being around the eSports media scene for quite a while now and just through my own observations as well as talks with my colleagues in this field, it has become quite apparent to me that the games being played, while rich in the terms of gameplay and quite rewarding to the player to participate in, hold very little in terms of a rewarding for the gaming spectator, and holds even less for the casual spectator. In other words, you have to be a gamer to fully understand what's going on while spectating today's games. You would have to have played Quake 4 to know just what a crouch slide is and how it can be used. You would have had to have played BF2 to know just what prone spamming is or what squad hopping is and how it's used (or used to be used). Part of the task of fixing it does indeed lay on the shoulders of the developers; all it will take is one developer to build a game with the advancement of the sport in mind over making millions of dollars first (and then they'll make their money anyway) and build a game that is both deep enough to offer rewarding gameplay at the upper eschelons of competitive play while still being simple enough to be grasped and enjoyed by the casual spectator. This is a tall order and I realize is easier said than done on multiple counts. I still hold that it can be done, and it may require looking outside typical gaming genre molds to achieve.
The other part of this task, however, lies with myself and my colleagues in the media industry. Gaming media currently is dominated by gamers with their target audience being other gamers. Language used both in print and streaming medias has been largely directed towards the eSports-savvy crowd at the expense of alienating any part of the mainstream that may take interest. This is only compounded by the unnecessarily hostile and cliquish culture and mentality of the gaming community, who would just as easily cast off a newcomer as a 'n00b!' and flame the hell out of them before giving them a hand.
I will leave this entry here, but this topic still has much left to explore. As always, your comments and discussion here on this topic would be greatly appreciated - please post your views!
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
Here comes the flood
Teams have begun to drop BF2.
This is nothing new; teams have been dropping the BF series seemingly since it hit the shelves. First it was old :42/Nam teams who didn't like the quicker pace of play, pilots disappointed with the jets (and rightfully so), people who couldn't seem to handle the squad system/hopping - then the threats from numerous teams and individuals on league forums everywhere that they were going to drop the game when the new 1.x patch was going to hit (and then not following through on it). But this wave of drops that has started is entirely new.
People are just getting sick of this game. It hasn't been a year and people are already getting the feeling that this game is just plain played out.
This phenomenon is clearly only at the competition level, however. The pub community is stronger than ever and continues to grow. Hop in any populated ranked server and browse the ranks quickly. Lieutenants are not at all uncommon and people are reaching some serious ranks. I wouldn't be able to tell you or estimate the number of points required to reach some of those levels, but my point is that some folks that just enjoy pubbing are really enjoying pubbing. It could be that the whole ranking system with its MMORPG-like 'leveling' aspect with the ranks provides a goal for folks to work towards and so keeps them playing. But what I think is more likely is the fact that the gameplay is just more fun in a large, public server kind of setting. This is also manifested in the relative success of the BF2 Combat 'Tour of Duty' community, which specializes in large-scale coordinated 30v30 play.
A quick examination of two design elements are convincing enough to me that this game was never built with competition in mind. (This is a point that most folks don't need convincing of, but requires illustrating.) The first of these elements is the cursed 'random cone of fire,' which was basically implemented so that people that were less skilled at the FPS-style games didn't get totally rocked for the first few weeks that they played. The issue is that it puts a tangible ceiling on the skill of the well-practiced competition player; no matter how well someone can aim and lead a target, there's no telling how far off the mark that bullet they're about to fire is going to fly. That issue alone can kill a game competitively. (Think CS would have been nearly as popular with a 'random cone of fire?' Heh.) Add in the fact that all the maps included in the game were clearly built with 64-player public server play in mind, and you've got a knock-out combo. The maps used in competition on all levels and in all formats are not fully designed and realized for play at that level, instead they're canibalized versions of the full 64-player map with some flags moved around and less vehicles. This has a slight impact on pub play (only slight because the flow of play is much less coordinated within each team), but the impact on competitive play is huge. All competition is going on in maps that were not particularly thought out fully in terms of 8v8 play; instead the designers just shrink down the area of map to be played in and plunk 4 flags down.
The comparison I wish to make here is between BF2 and :42, one of which is seeing its top teams drop out of competition out of boredom after two seasons and hasn't even been on the shelves for a year yet, the other which saw 6 seasons of solid competition and kept people scrimming and pubbing for nearly two years. The difference, I think, is that :42 did not have the two things outlined in the previous paragraph. The maps were the maps - no scaling. Instead of building the maps super huge for 64 player play, the maps were built to encourage rich play whether there was 10 players in a server or 40. Also, when you put your crosshairs on something and fired, that's where your shot went.
This is not to say that :42 was built for competition in mind, because it wasn't either. It just happened to be a bit more condusive for it. But what BF2 lacks in this aspect is fueling the bordeom that are making teams drop. BF2 just doesn't have the same hook that the original did and this is the manifestation of it. And while seeing these teams drop is no reason to panic - a few teams dropping is certainly not going to kill the competitive community around BF2 - but it's a sign. Either some new teams that aren't quite so bored need to step up huge and keep pushing the envelope as far as competitive vigor, or this is the beginning of the end for BF2. We all know that once top teams and even championship teams start jumping ship, the overall level of competition and value of league titles become devalued. And when teams defending titles (such as HOT in 12v12) see no reason to stick around and defend it, that's a big sign that the recent pullouts are only going to accelerate.
This is also preceding news I recieved from an inside source that 1.3 is scheduled to hit today. After all the outcry over what was to be changed by it within the competitive community, I wouldn't be suprised if we saw CAL-M collapse right in on itself. Not that I'm predicting it...I just wouldn't be suprised.
So is this the end for BF2? Nah. Technically, BF:Nam or :42 haven't died yet with folks still playing 5v5 over at Teamwarfare. But is BF2 gonna be suckin some serious wind here over the next month? You bet.
This is nothing new; teams have been dropping the BF series seemingly since it hit the shelves. First it was old :42/Nam teams who didn't like the quicker pace of play, pilots disappointed with the jets (and rightfully so), people who couldn't seem to handle the squad system/hopping - then the threats from numerous teams and individuals on league forums everywhere that they were going to drop the game when the new 1.x patch was going to hit (and then not following through on it). But this wave of drops that has started is entirely new.
People are just getting sick of this game. It hasn't been a year and people are already getting the feeling that this game is just plain played out.
This phenomenon is clearly only at the competition level, however. The pub community is stronger than ever and continues to grow. Hop in any populated ranked server and browse the ranks quickly. Lieutenants are not at all uncommon and people are reaching some serious ranks. I wouldn't be able to tell you or estimate the number of points required to reach some of those levels, but my point is that some folks that just enjoy pubbing are really enjoying pubbing. It could be that the whole ranking system with its MMORPG-like 'leveling' aspect with the ranks provides a goal for folks to work towards and so keeps them playing. But what I think is more likely is the fact that the gameplay is just more fun in a large, public server kind of setting. This is also manifested in the relative success of the BF2 Combat 'Tour of Duty' community, which specializes in large-scale coordinated 30v30 play.
A quick examination of two design elements are convincing enough to me that this game was never built with competition in mind. (This is a point that most folks don't need convincing of, but requires illustrating.) The first of these elements is the cursed 'random cone of fire,' which was basically implemented so that people that were less skilled at the FPS-style games didn't get totally rocked for the first few weeks that they played. The issue is that it puts a tangible ceiling on the skill of the well-practiced competition player; no matter how well someone can aim and lead a target, there's no telling how far off the mark that bullet they're about to fire is going to fly. That issue alone can kill a game competitively. (Think CS would have been nearly as popular with a 'random cone of fire?' Heh.) Add in the fact that all the maps included in the game were clearly built with 64-player public server play in mind, and you've got a knock-out combo. The maps used in competition on all levels and in all formats are not fully designed and realized for play at that level, instead they're canibalized versions of the full 64-player map with some flags moved around and less vehicles. This has a slight impact on pub play (only slight because the flow of play is much less coordinated within each team), but the impact on competitive play is huge. All competition is going on in maps that were not particularly thought out fully in terms of 8v8 play; instead the designers just shrink down the area of map to be played in and plunk 4 flags down.
The comparison I wish to make here is between BF2 and :42, one of which is seeing its top teams drop out of competition out of boredom after two seasons and hasn't even been on the shelves for a year yet, the other which saw 6 seasons of solid competition and kept people scrimming and pubbing for nearly two years. The difference, I think, is that :42 did not have the two things outlined in the previous paragraph. The maps were the maps - no scaling. Instead of building the maps super huge for 64 player play, the maps were built to encourage rich play whether there was 10 players in a server or 40. Also, when you put your crosshairs on something and fired, that's where your shot went.
This is not to say that :42 was built for competition in mind, because it wasn't either. It just happened to be a bit more condusive for it. But what BF2 lacks in this aspect is fueling the bordeom that are making teams drop. BF2 just doesn't have the same hook that the original did and this is the manifestation of it. And while seeing these teams drop is no reason to panic - a few teams dropping is certainly not going to kill the competitive community around BF2 - but it's a sign. Either some new teams that aren't quite so bored need to step up huge and keep pushing the envelope as far as competitive vigor, or this is the beginning of the end for BF2. We all know that once top teams and even championship teams start jumping ship, the overall level of competition and value of league titles become devalued. And when teams defending titles (such as HOT in 12v12) see no reason to stick around and defend it, that's a big sign that the recent pullouts are only going to accelerate.
This is also preceding news I recieved from an inside source that 1.3 is scheduled to hit today. After all the outcry over what was to be changed by it within the competitive community, I wouldn't be suprised if we saw CAL-M collapse right in on itself. Not that I'm predicting it...I just wouldn't be suprised.
So is this the end for BF2? Nah. Technically, BF:Nam or :42 haven't died yet with folks still playing 5v5 over at Teamwarfare. But is BF2 gonna be suckin some serious wind here over the next month? You bet.
Saturday, May 13, 2006
Some waves, maybe.
I don't really know who all frequents this place, if anybody. I apologize for the lack of new stuff lately. I've been caught up the past few days with typical stuff, work, school, etc.
However, some extremely interesting stuff has gone down as of late in the casting world that deserves a few comments; it all centers around GotFrag, and it's got the communities around the major competition platforms at CAL buzzing.
GotFrag on Thursday announced plans to launch 'GotFragTV' in a few months. Behind this new branch of GotFrag, a company that up until now has specialized in online print content exclusively, is a deal with the CPL in which they bought the streaming rights to all CPL competitions, including rights to matches played through CAL. How much the deal was worth or any further details haven't been annouced, including what games they're planning on covering or who they have staffing the outfit (if anyone at this point).
This deal is not only something that is going to alter the shoutcasting scene in the short-term but sets a precedent that will change the dynamic of the industry permanently. A tangible ceiling has been set for anybody just trying to put together their own independent stab at the whole shoutcasting thing. Sure, you'll be able to cast the low profile stuff, but if you want to get anywhere in terms of major LAN tournaments which equates to the kind of exposure any casting company would set as their goal when setting out, you're gonna need some capital to get there.
The effect that this will have on the eSports world as a whole is immense. Coverage of major events are moving away from hobbyist sort of endeavors and towards more polished, serious, commercial efforts and will soon be considered as much as a profession as the actual gaming being covered. Frankly, I think it's about time. It's not that those involved in eSports media have entirely gone unpaid to this point - it's not unheard of - but this is a clear sign that the industry is moving in a very new direction.
This direction is a good one if GotFrag is responsible with spearheading it. It's gonna take getting the right personalities in there for the casting, making sure the production quality of the video and audio is extremely well done, and that everything is absolutely solid on the techincal end. If they fail at any one of those things, they're going to be faced with a very surly competitive community that already have their favorite casting companies or personalities elsewhere, and who are going to be extremely pissed if GotFrag wedges in on something that another company can outshine them in. In BF2, for instance, if EGLN and TGBF continue to cover CAL (which, honestly, I wouldn't do considering some of GotFrag's new stipulations on CAL coverage by other entities that I've caught wind of) and are doing the same quality work that both organizations are known for, and then GFTV (GotFragTV) trumps them out of the playoff matches at the end of the season, they'd better make sure they're doing a damn good job of it or it's not going to be good for GotFrag or for the CAL. It's much the same thing that I discussed in my first post on this blog regarding TsN and the WT.
I'm not trying to ensue that GF will screw this up. They've been around for around 4 years now and have done extremely well; I have relative confidence that they'll do the job that they've now required of themselves. However, no company is infalliable; this industry is no different.
I guess all there is to do now is...wait.
However, some extremely interesting stuff has gone down as of late in the casting world that deserves a few comments; it all centers around GotFrag, and it's got the communities around the major competition platforms at CAL buzzing.
GotFrag on Thursday announced plans to launch 'GotFragTV' in a few months. Behind this new branch of GotFrag, a company that up until now has specialized in online print content exclusively, is a deal with the CPL in which they bought the streaming rights to all CPL competitions, including rights to matches played through CAL. How much the deal was worth or any further details haven't been annouced, including what games they're planning on covering or who they have staffing the outfit (if anyone at this point).
This deal is not only something that is going to alter the shoutcasting scene in the short-term but sets a precedent that will change the dynamic of the industry permanently. A tangible ceiling has been set for anybody just trying to put together their own independent stab at the whole shoutcasting thing. Sure, you'll be able to cast the low profile stuff, but if you want to get anywhere in terms of major LAN tournaments which equates to the kind of exposure any casting company would set as their goal when setting out, you're gonna need some capital to get there.
The effect that this will have on the eSports world as a whole is immense. Coverage of major events are moving away from hobbyist sort of endeavors and towards more polished, serious, commercial efforts and will soon be considered as much as a profession as the actual gaming being covered. Frankly, I think it's about time. It's not that those involved in eSports media have entirely gone unpaid to this point - it's not unheard of - but this is a clear sign that the industry is moving in a very new direction.
This direction is a good one if GotFrag is responsible with spearheading it. It's gonna take getting the right personalities in there for the casting, making sure the production quality of the video and audio is extremely well done, and that everything is absolutely solid on the techincal end. If they fail at any one of those things, they're going to be faced with a very surly competitive community that already have their favorite casting companies or personalities elsewhere, and who are going to be extremely pissed if GotFrag wedges in on something that another company can outshine them in. In BF2, for instance, if EGLN and TGBF continue to cover CAL (which, honestly, I wouldn't do considering some of GotFrag's new stipulations on CAL coverage by other entities that I've caught wind of) and are doing the same quality work that both organizations are known for, and then GFTV (GotFragTV) trumps them out of the playoff matches at the end of the season, they'd better make sure they're doing a damn good job of it or it's not going to be good for GotFrag or for the CAL. It's much the same thing that I discussed in my first post on this blog regarding TsN and the WT.
I'm not trying to ensue that GF will screw this up. They've been around for around 4 years now and have done extremely well; I have relative confidence that they'll do the job that they've now required of themselves. However, no company is infalliable; this industry is no different.
I guess all there is to do now is...wait.
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
2142
(Today is the day of the numbers.)
A comment on the BF2 forums at CAL that I read earlier today sparked this entry, and entirely because of it's baseless nature. The comment ensued that the 1.3 patch was meant to drive people away from BF2 and into 2142.
Frankly, if 2142 is gonna need that much help to get off the shelves, they might as well shelf the entire project and do something else. Let's look at the entire process behind that hypothetical situation: a company craps up a game to encourage people to buy their other crappy game. Now folks end up with two crappy games. End result: end of franchise.
As far as I'm concerned, BF2 should have been the end of the franchise anyway, if they weren't going to do a remake on :42 on a prettier, more solid engine. Instead, with 2142 they're going to go head-to-head with id Software, releasing basically the same product after id will be finished with theirs. If they don't want to take humongous losses on 2142, they better damn well make sure they're releasing a solid game with no blatantly retarded (and seemingly unfixable) bugs. Release a modified BF2 (which judging from the gameplay videos already out there, is what's happening here), and bye-bye BF. The hype for Quake Wars is already immense and is ensuring that 2142 is going to either (surpass QW and actually be a quality product out of the box and) be a classic or be a blower (which is more likely).
Either way, I'm not shelling out anything towards it until I see some good press from the folks that know - those of you reading these posts. I saw PCGamer had a recent 'EXCLUSIVE LOOK' at 2142. I was laughing to the point where people on the other side of the racks at Borders were looking at me funny. They did the same cover story BS for 'Nam. What a great game that turned out to be.
Clearly some folks at Dice need to go play some :42 for a week and remember what it felt like before they design another game.
A comment on the BF2 forums at CAL that I read earlier today sparked this entry, and entirely because of it's baseless nature. The comment ensued that the 1.3 patch was meant to drive people away from BF2 and into 2142.
Frankly, if 2142 is gonna need that much help to get off the shelves, they might as well shelf the entire project and do something else. Let's look at the entire process behind that hypothetical situation: a company craps up a game to encourage people to buy their other crappy game. Now folks end up with two crappy games. End result: end of franchise.
As far as I'm concerned, BF2 should have been the end of the franchise anyway, if they weren't going to do a remake on :42 on a prettier, more solid engine. Instead, with 2142 they're going to go head-to-head with id Software, releasing basically the same product after id will be finished with theirs. If they don't want to take humongous losses on 2142, they better damn well make sure they're releasing a solid game with no blatantly retarded (and seemingly unfixable) bugs. Release a modified BF2 (which judging from the gameplay videos already out there, is what's happening here), and bye-bye BF. The hype for Quake Wars is already immense and is ensuring that 2142 is going to either (surpass QW and actually be a quality product out of the box and) be a classic or be a blower (which is more likely).
Either way, I'm not shelling out anything towards it until I see some good press from the folks that know - those of you reading these posts. I saw PCGamer had a recent 'EXCLUSIVE LOOK' at 2142. I was laughing to the point where people on the other side of the racks at Borders were looking at me funny. They did the same cover story BS for 'Nam. What a great game that turned out to be.
Clearly some folks at Dice need to go play some :42 for a week and remember what it felt like before they design another game.
1.3
This post is going to be a short one as I've gotta run to work in 20 mins or so. Forgive me.
But first, thanks are in order for those who have stopped by and read my initial posting, and especially those who commented. The impetus to post here regularly has been reinforced. Now for the main topic, which has been at the center of a few discussions: The upcoming 1.3 patch.
The outcry over the planned BF2 1.3 patch within the competitive BF2 community has been centering around the changes being made to the squad system. The squad hop is a tactic used by every remotely successful BF2 team to date in every format, and so the competitve community is reacting with good reason; this single change will impact the way the game is played more than any other change made via patch to date. And this guy thinks it's an incredibly good thing. The flow of matchplay in 8v8 and 12v12 will be much more controlled, providing for an environment where key tactical planning will carry great rewards.
While most folks can't see past the fact that they'll no longer be able to choose any one of their teammates to spawn in on just seconds before the respawn, and then cry foul because it appears that gameplay will slow down, this is merely a kneejerk reaction. Further analysis will find that teams will have to adopt policies with more tactical direction and the role of the commander will be augmented; 'pushing' a squad leader far behind enemy lines will have to be planned more around a minute in advance rather than a few seconds. Large firefights and teams moving as more cohesive wholes will be seen in matchplay instead of entire teams popping up at random points on the map. It's a style of gameplay that has not been seen since :42 and frankly, I love it.
It seems that the 'squeaky wheel' pub community actually got something right for once, and I think we may actually see a small competitive revival for this game over the summer, instead of the decline that a lot of folks (including myself) have been anticipating. I seem to remember a lot of teams (regardless of competitive merit) drop this game mainly because of the squad hop tactic. We may see a good deal of those folks return, for better or worse.
The 1.3 patch, on the other hand, will be absolutely destructive to the 5v5 format. Currently the largest format out there in terms of the number of teams participating in it, the changes to the squad system in this case could end 5v5's run as an enjoyable if not viable mode of gameplay. And really, it's up to Teamwarfare to save it. They must show some impetus and support for this format in trying to bring in some custom maps tailored specifically to the format or they'll see their most popular competition (next to CS) die out, and in a big way.
I must run. Later tonight: 2142.
But first, thanks are in order for those who have stopped by and read my initial posting, and especially those who commented. The impetus to post here regularly has been reinforced. Now for the main topic, which has been at the center of a few discussions: The upcoming 1.3 patch.
The outcry over the planned BF2 1.3 patch within the competitive BF2 community has been centering around the changes being made to the squad system. The squad hop is a tactic used by every remotely successful BF2 team to date in every format, and so the competitve community is reacting with good reason; this single change will impact the way the game is played more than any other change made via patch to date. And this guy thinks it's an incredibly good thing. The flow of matchplay in 8v8 and 12v12 will be much more controlled, providing for an environment where key tactical planning will carry great rewards.
While most folks can't see past the fact that they'll no longer be able to choose any one of their teammates to spawn in on just seconds before the respawn, and then cry foul because it appears that gameplay will slow down, this is merely a kneejerk reaction. Further analysis will find that teams will have to adopt policies with more tactical direction and the role of the commander will be augmented; 'pushing' a squad leader far behind enemy lines will have to be planned more around a minute in advance rather than a few seconds. Large firefights and teams moving as more cohesive wholes will be seen in matchplay instead of entire teams popping up at random points on the map. It's a style of gameplay that has not been seen since :42 and frankly, I love it.
It seems that the 'squeaky wheel' pub community actually got something right for once, and I think we may actually see a small competitive revival for this game over the summer, instead of the decline that a lot of folks (including myself) have been anticipating. I seem to remember a lot of teams (regardless of competitive merit) drop this game mainly because of the squad hop tactic. We may see a good deal of those folks return, for better or worse.
The 1.3 patch, on the other hand, will be absolutely destructive to the 5v5 format. Currently the largest format out there in terms of the number of teams participating in it, the changes to the squad system in this case could end 5v5's run as an enjoyable if not viable mode of gameplay. And really, it's up to Teamwarfare to save it. They must show some impetus and support for this format in trying to bring in some custom maps tailored specifically to the format or they'll see their most popular competition (next to CS) die out, and in a big way.
I must run. Later tonight: 2142.
Monday, May 08, 2006
First post, initial thoughts; and the firestarter
Welcome to my blog. This is my first stab at this sort of thing. I plan to make this a regular column/rant block of mine, but as is with all big ideas, it will be easier said than done. I've wanted to do something like this for some time now, but typically the idea would strike when I was away from the machine or without time to get it set up; then when I did have some downtime, I instead fretted it away getting owned in the grill repeatedly in Source by some of my old EGLN buddies. Fortunately (or unfortunately, IMO, for whoever decides to read this regularly), both the idea and the freetime required collided this afternoon and this is their lovechild. Don't worry, the smell will dissipate after a little while.
The 'kindling' of sorts for getting this off the ground was my need to get my two cents on the recent casting debacle over at the BF2WT out there without making a debacle of myself on public forums. With my current position being as it is - which is a relative state of limbo as far as eSports and the media goes - it's not entirely prudent for me to be that big of an exposed critic on what all is going on. But I, like most folks, just want to tell it how it is; this is where I'll do it.
Look, Stealth (head administrator of the WT) and I have had our run-ins before, remotely. Back a few months when EGLN was becoming EGLN out of BFRadio, we were having our 'launch party' and were trying to get listeners and idlers on our stream and on our IRC channel. #bf2 on Gamesurge is a fairly popular channel comprised of BF2 players, so it seemed a good choice to advertise our launch and prize giveaways based on idlers. I was promptly banned by Stealth for the advert and he set the Gamesurge cops on us for advertising some idling contest. While we were out of bounds (as we found out after the fact, reading the TOS carefully FTW), the reaction was kinda harsh...
As I see it, the recent riot over at WT and the subsequent response is just another manifestation of the same hardheaded character I saw out of Stealth just a few months back. What doesn't make any sense to me is how someone who has enough business sense to bring in sponsors to furnish prizes to a combined tune of 20 grand would make such a baffling decision to continue to ride the sinking ship that is (and has been) BF2 coverage at TsN. Harry is a good guy and an equally good caster, however it's clear that BF2 has not been a priority for TsN for months now, and while TsN outshines any other organization in existance currently in many other areas, BF2 coverage is not one of them; manifested most clearly in the dismal state of the stream being served up for the coverage of the recent c7 vs HOT match.
From what I read, TGBF (or BFGeeks, or BFTV, whatever you want to call them) didn't go about it the right way themselves. Instead of keeping their protests to themselves, their own website, or their comms and close contacts; instead we saw a machismo, biker-dude style move to hop in the server and just start casting. Clearly they had some cooperation from the teams, and I'm not going to speculate on how much the teams encouraged it, but it was a move made in poor taste nontheless, and TGBF made it. I'm all for competition in the shoutcasting industry and their look at the medium is entertaining and somewhat refreshing, but you can't expect to get very far if you blatantly burn bridges like that.
Similar could be said for the World Tournament. Granted, shoutcasting is a non-essential element of online sporting events; matches and tournaments have been and will continue to be played without the presense of a media organization following every match. However, you can't argue the benefits of media coverage of your event, it increases exposure within the community and also provides any sponsors an opportunity for increased exposure as well. But these benefits only come through quality media coverage, and it's painfully clear, taking into consideration the entire situation, that WT will not be recieving the quality coverage that a tournament of that calibur deserves unless something moves; that something being a rethinking by Stealth, an adjustment by TsN, or the trifecta of TGBF eating crow, Stealth accepting an apology, and Stealth letting TGBF in.
As it has always seemed to be within BF2, sadly, what's best for the community here is the most remote possibility.
Until next time.
The 'kindling' of sorts for getting this off the ground was my need to get my two cents on the recent casting debacle over at the BF2WT out there without making a debacle of myself on public forums. With my current position being as it is - which is a relative state of limbo as far as eSports and the media goes - it's not entirely prudent for me to be that big of an exposed critic on what all is going on. But I, like most folks, just want to tell it how it is; this is where I'll do it.
Look, Stealth (head administrator of the WT) and I have had our run-ins before, remotely. Back a few months when EGLN was becoming EGLN out of BFRadio, we were having our 'launch party' and were trying to get listeners and idlers on our stream and on our IRC channel. #bf2 on Gamesurge is a fairly popular channel comprised of BF2 players, so it seemed a good choice to advertise our launch and prize giveaways based on idlers. I was promptly banned by Stealth for the advert and he set the Gamesurge cops on us for advertising some idling contest. While we were out of bounds (as we found out after the fact, reading the TOS carefully FTW), the reaction was kinda harsh...
As I see it, the recent riot over at WT and the subsequent response is just another manifestation of the same hardheaded character I saw out of Stealth just a few months back. What doesn't make any sense to me is how someone who has enough business sense to bring in sponsors to furnish prizes to a combined tune of 20 grand would make such a baffling decision to continue to ride the sinking ship that is (and has been) BF2 coverage at TsN. Harry is a good guy and an equally good caster, however it's clear that BF2 has not been a priority for TsN for months now, and while TsN outshines any other organization in existance currently in many other areas, BF2 coverage is not one of them; manifested most clearly in the dismal state of the stream being served up for the coverage of the recent c7 vs HOT match.
From what I read, TGBF (or BFGeeks, or BFTV, whatever you want to call them) didn't go about it the right way themselves. Instead of keeping their protests to themselves, their own website, or their comms and close contacts; instead we saw a machismo, biker-dude style move to hop in the server and just start casting. Clearly they had some cooperation from the teams, and I'm not going to speculate on how much the teams encouraged it, but it was a move made in poor taste nontheless, and TGBF made it. I'm all for competition in the shoutcasting industry and their look at the medium is entertaining and somewhat refreshing, but you can't expect to get very far if you blatantly burn bridges like that.
Similar could be said for the World Tournament. Granted, shoutcasting is a non-essential element of online sporting events; matches and tournaments have been and will continue to be played without the presense of a media organization following every match. However, you can't argue the benefits of media coverage of your event, it increases exposure within the community and also provides any sponsors an opportunity for increased exposure as well. But these benefits only come through quality media coverage, and it's painfully clear, taking into consideration the entire situation, that WT will not be recieving the quality coverage that a tournament of that calibur deserves unless something moves; that something being a rethinking by Stealth, an adjustment by TsN, or the trifecta of TGBF eating crow, Stealth accepting an apology, and Stealth letting TGBF in.
As it has always seemed to be within BF2, sadly, what's best for the community here is the most remote possibility.
Until next time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)