On October 20 2012 09:42 Sor wrote:Lately there has been an explosion of posts by concerned StarCraft fans, and for good reason. The prize pools are stagnating, balance issues continue to go unaddressed, the HotS beta seems to be going nowhere fast. You can practically feel the sentiment coming out of your monitor when you log on to TL; our beloved game used to be the shining beacon of eSports, but no more. The question is why. I believe the only way to answer that question is too consider the issues from an economists prospective.
How are they stagnating? I understand that they aren't growing, but at the same time there are a lot more of them. GSL has awarded $50k to the winner since GSL 2011. As far as I am aware, dreamhack has similar prize pools to where they have been, MLG has been growing although not recently, and new tournaments, such as Iron Squid, have respectable prize pools. Yes, time value of money and all that, but exchange rates haven't exactly been stable since then, and it all depends on the spending power of the cash in their country. I can't quote you the US interest and inflation rates, but traditionally 1st world countries rates tend to be low.
I agree on balance issues, and HoTS beta.
Also, the only way to answer questions is from an economists perspective
A disclaimer: I do NOT have a degree in Economics; I am currently studying music as a major, economics as a minor at university. I come from a family of Economics professors. You can‘t walk through the house without tripping over Economics texts and journals. I’m an econ junkie at heart, and while I don’t have the piece of paper to prove it (yet), I have a solid enough understanding of the principles to address the problems that are restricting StarCraft 2 from growing. Economics is full of empirical questions, as such I encourage you to fact check my work and challenge my conclusions.
The end of growth as we know it As far as growing StarCraft 2 eSports is concerned, there are three questions that need answering.
1) Why are the prize pools stagnating?
Evidence of this?2) Why did we see growth plateau in 2012?
3) Why has LoL seen explosive growth, and how do we stay competitive?
I put it to you that all of these problems stem from the same basic narrative. Before I explain, I am going to put forth a prediction. League Of legends is going to go through the EXACT SAME TRENDS as StarCraft 2: a period of explosive growth, followed by stagnation. It will happen in the same timeframe that it did for Sc2, and for the same reasons. Trust me, I’m an economist.
You mention these as problems, but never really address them. Nor do you say where you found them. If anything, LoL has seen explosive growth from certain viewership counts, however, Dota2 has probably seen the most explosive of everything to date, with The International and The international 2. Also, while LoL has high counts, Starcraft 2 hasnt exactly been losing out either. I am fairly confident that there are more viewers on DreamHack now then there were last year. My friends who are entirely into Dota2 at this stage still switch on SC2 streams for the big names even (not being used as empirical, but just an example of consumer behaviour)Everything you forgot after college, and then some Here we go, the real nitty gritty of economic principles. Lets start from the very beginning.
What is the value of a given product? If I have a candy bar, and you want it, how much are you willing to pay. What are YOU willing to give up for my candy bar? That is the very essence of value. My candy bar is worthless unless you want it, and its value is what you are willing to pay for it. Nothing has any inherent value, so sayth the economics textbook. Another way to think about this is, a given product is worth what most people are willing and able to pay for it. Here we have the first (and arguably most important) principle of economics: people face tradeoffs. Everything has an opportunity cost, if you choose to consume something, you must give up all of the equally valuable alternatives to get it.
You try to be too smart here. You appeal to peoples general knowledge, try to show off and then contradict yourself. You and I both know that if the candy bar had no value, it wouldnt have been produced due to the costs of producing something with no value.... Something to make nothing isn't smart, as you conclude, but you still tripped yourself up with this paragraph. Fast forward several chapters, and we land on supply and demand. Demand is simply how much of a good people are willing and able to consume. Supply, as you might have guessed, is the amount of a good that is available on the market for purchase and consumption. There is a third factor in all of this: price.
The price of a product is dictated by supply and demand. Simply put, making stuff costs money. If you want to make more stuff, it is more expensive then if you want to make less stuff. If people are demanding more of your good, you must supply more, and spend more to do so. As demand goes up, so does the price. Likewise, if you supply more then is demanded, you have a surplus of goods. Lowering the price creates an incentive for consumers to purchase your good. Ideally, you want to supply the amount that is demanded. If this is happening, we refer to the price of the good as the equilibrium price.
In summary:
If demand is greater then supply, then the price will rise.
If supply is greater then demand then the price will fall.
If supply is equal to demand, the price will stabilize, and we refer to this price as the equilibrium price.
On a side note, due to tournaments keeping the same prize pools, but there being more tournaments, one could probably argue that supply has increased due to new producer entry, whereas the demand has been met by new consumer entry. In fact, if one argues this, this satisfies your "stagnation" assumption in that there hasnt been stagnation, merely market expansion outside of the estabilished suppliers.
The evidence of this ofc is in the introduction of the MLG arena's, Iron Squid, OSL sc2, etc. Brood war fans could have switched over as well as they become more familiar with the content and as they follow their favourite players from BW (my assumption is that they did), to increase the viewer base,What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
Where am I going with all of this? Lets examine the rise of StarCraft 2 eSports in terms of supply and demand. 2010 and 2011 saw tremendous growth for StarCraft 2. We took over the main stage at MLG, we saw the creation of several leagues, and teams started investing in training houses, as well as up and coming talent. And who paid for all of that, you ask? We did. You, me, everyone. We consumed StarCraft 2, we DEMANDED it, and the market supplied. Remember the third factor in all of this, always remember price. At first the price was our time, all we had to do was tune in. But as we demanded more, the price went up, per the principle of supply and demand.
Not always the case. See what happens when there are simultaneous increases in supply and demand in your texttbook. Its the next chapter AFTER the introductory supply and demand chapter normally. Trust me, I lectured it these last two years Eventually the price level went up such that streaming revenue was not enough to sustain supply, and we saw the implementation of a pay wall. The community was able to consume more StarCraft, but we where not willing. We simply didn’t want to pay for eSports. So what happened? Demand went down, less eSports was supplied, and the price reached equilibrium.
Evidence of less SC2 supplied? Dreamhack, Ironsquid, MLG, Homestory, 2gd invitationals, NASL is still continuing as wellVote with your money At this point, I imagine some of you are thinking to yourselves: Wait! All of this stagnation is OUR FAULT! Well, kind of. The market is going to supply exactly as much eSports as the community is going to consume. Pay walls are inevitable and necessary for the growth of StarCraft 2. Never mind how well Blizzard is balancing the game, never mind the battle.net interface. If you want the game to grow as a sport you MUST pay for it. You can make a difference; all you need to do is shell out a little bit.
You supply no evidence of your reasoning. Pay walls are not inevitable nor necessary for the growth of esports. One could argue that with sufficient sponsors and/or ad revenue and/or commited individuals who do manage studios of their own free will (respect to 2gd), not to forget mentioning committed game developers (Riot and Valve) esports could be provided free to the end consumer. Also, venues at the events are somewhat populated as well.Enter League of Legends I mentioned earlier that I think LoL will experience the same growth trends as StarCraft 2. I hold this view despite the growth LoL is seeing in Korea. Sc2 has benefited from retaining the viewership of people who have since stopped playing the game. I am editorializing here, but I don’t think LoL has the same long-term viewership potential. LoL is constantly seeing new heroes introduced, and the old ones are constantly being patched. If you stop paying attention for a while, you could come back to a completely foreign game. StarCraft is more consistent in this regard. If you stopped watching for awhile the maps will change, the metagame will evolve, the big name players may even change during your hiatus. But a colossus will always be a colossus.
your argument here is ignorant. Just as the units of SC2 don't change, the summoner spells, the items in the shops don't change. The roles of the heroes don't change that often either. If you started wathcing SC2 in 2010, stopped, and resumed now, you would be amazed at how useful the roach and the infestor has become, and how the HT has been nerfed.
Even if you can't recognize the hero in the mid lane, you can realize that its a AP or AD hero by its items and the commentators, and not be too confused. Just like how a collosus is always a collosus, but the range, damage and movement speed could be pathced The next step Suppose all of our current viewers buy passes for their favorite leagues. Prize pools will increase in size, leagues will be able to experiment with new content, and maybe we land a big name sponsor.
LG is sponsoring IM, Monster is sponsoring EG, Steelseries is spoonsoring lots of teams throughout e-sports. Who exactly do you want as "Big Name Sponsors" ? Can we really consider that growth by any reasonable standard? Yes, in the sense that the industry will be producing more, but to really take the next big step we need to reach new customers.
See my statements above StarCraft and LoL are what we call substitutes. That is, they provide the same basic service, and are interchangeable to a degree.
In a sense that Rugby and football are substitutes. Both are sports, but they both don't excite the same people. In fact one could almost argue that its closer to Cricket and Football, or even Boxing and Football. Maybe even Chess and Football. I'll give you a hint, LoL isn't Chess in that example. You touch upon that below, but don't develop the idea fully If StarCraft isn’t providing what you want from an eSport, you can consume (vote for) something else. Or you can do both, and a lot of people do. Typically people will opt for the cheaper of two substitutes. If apples are too expensive, then you can always eat pears.
This is very wrong. You imply heavily that by the fact tthat they are substitutes that they are consumed with equal value by each consumer. Football and Rugby are both sports. They are not enjoyed to the same extent by an individual. I think assuming this reduces your argument to too basic level. But Sc2 and LoL aren’t true substitutes in everyway. They are fundamentally different in many significant areas. I sincerely believe that StarCraft is the better of the two. I’m not saying that because I prefer StarCraft. StarCraft has much greater potential to reach customers that are completely ignorant of eSports.
Evidence of this? But regardless, this last section contradicts what you've just said immediately above itThe snowstorm in the room Blizzard. As much as I hate to say it, Blizzard has all the power here. Think about how people get into eSports in the first place. For the most part, eSports is discovered as a result of buying and playing a game that is played professionally. There is no way around it. Hook more players, get more eSports customers.
Blizzard is a superpower in the video game industry. Everyone knows it. They have the money, the resources, and the brand recognition to make StarCraft 2 the shining standard for eSports. At this juncture, they have an opportunity to put Sc2 back on top, by way of Heart of the Swarm. Two things need to happen to draw in and retain new viewership. (1) HoTs need to bring new players to StarCraft, and (2) it needs to keep them interested. The first piece is easy, if Blizzard does that marketing voodoo they do so well, and make effective use of price discrimination (buying WoL and HotS as a combo pack should be cheaper then buying them separately) then it will sell. But the game needs to be really damn good. The 1v1 aspect needs to be balanced at the highest levels with dynamic strategic options, and casuals need a social centric way to enjoy the game.
Not going to touch this part. This is clearly your own opinion and you are welcome to it Reality check If everyone is willing to spend some money on eSports viewership AND HotS is everything it needs to be, StarCraft 2 will be the greatest eSport to date.
-_- Not one or the other; both, and it needs to start soon. If you love this game, and this community then you need to be active. Save that $20 you would spend at a bar or restaurant and spend it on eSports. Put CONTSRUCTIVE pressure on Blizzard to get their act together with Heart Of The Swarm.
Folks, we are going to get the eSport we deserve. StarCraft players are renowned for being manner, intelligent, devoted and passionate. If we can live up to those standards, then we deserve a damn good eSport.
MLG is reputed to be losing money behind the paywall, whereas Riot seems to be flourishing without one. GSL seems to be doing alright compromising a paywall with free access for live viewers who can settle for lower quality. If anything the best option is probably the GSL one, which MLG emulates for their major tournaments. Paying a small premium to avoid adverts is also a good business model, as those who don't want to pay are exposed to adverts, which in turn generate revenue. It would be interesting to see those numbers in fact, to see iif paying to avoid adverts is more or less desirable for the tournament organizer than vice versa.