NeoGAF

They actually included (Super) Monday Night Combat. Wow.

Guess that 50~ player population ain't being helped anytime soon,

They're free to not sign the agreement if they don't like the terms.

Originally Posted by Teh Emo Penguin

They actually included (Super) Monday Night Combat. Wow.

Guess that 50~ player population ain't being helped anytime soon,

Only MNC is included, SMNC doesn't seem to be on the list

Originally Posted by Einbroch

I mean, I agree with you that streaming is their free time. But it would be like a Pepsi spokesperson going on NPR and using about half their time on air talking about how much they like Coke. And making that a daily segment.

But I think analogies may be strange to use because this field is so new and unexplored.

Yeah I agree the analogies go strange real quick. I wouldn't call streaming going on npr, but simply sitting around on your porch and people decided to show up and watch you do whatever. If you happen to drink coke while playing checkers with your grandpa and a bunch of people show up to watch I don't think Pepsi has any say there.

What a strange analogy.

Originally Posted by koshunter

Pepsi is a very direct competitor to Coke. At best, you can make the argument that Dota 2 should be on the list of games they can't stream because it competes with Riot.

But Hearthstone? Fat Princess? Those are stretches.

Only reason I can think Hearthstone is because its a blizzard license that 99% of pro players play inbetween queues, its pretty huge in the lol community right now.

Originally Posted by AppleMIX

And that stuff like this is the reason why I jumped ship to Dota 2. No regrets.

More people should. No paying for heroes!

This is pretty crappy of Riot, I understand that they don't want high profile pro gamers that 'represent' their game to show off others but that shouldn't mean these sort of draconian rules, get over it.

Originally Posted by Balphon

They're free to not sign the agreement if they don't like the terms.

Of course they are. That doesn't make it right.

If a contract said someone now owned your first born child, we could laugh at it and call it stupid and demand they change it.

Why exactly are being coming in with "Well it's their right blah blah" nobody is arguing rights. We're discussing the implications of the contract and how it might effect LoL.

Unless you can find a quote of someone saying Riot doesn't have the right to do this.

As much as it makes sense if you think about it, the amount gained by this is unlikely worth the blowback they're going to get for it.

As someone who watches a significant amount of streaming, literally the only game that this could be a problem with is Hearthstone. And I'm not sure that them playing Hearthstone between queue pops is shifting a lot of money over to Blizzard.

If Riot is featuring a stream it means they are choosing players to promote their games. If those streams are running competitor's games it is only logical that these representatives of the community wouldn't receive Riot's backing.

Originally Posted by koshunter

Pepsi is a very direct competitor to Coke. At best, you can make the argument that Dota 2 should be on the list of games they can't stream because it competes with Riot.

But Hearthstone? Fat Princess? Those are stretches.

As I said before, a Pepsi employee (at least a salaried, non-entry level one) cannot drink even Dasani (water) while representing the company. That means in uniform, even if "taking a break" or "off the clock", on a business trip, or what have you.

I'm sure it's like this for other businesses with competition. This outrage seems strange to me.

Originally Posted by mrpeabody

It makes sense but it goes against the grain of Twitch's just-hanging-out culture.

I like how the terms are like DO NOT STREAM HEARTHSTONE DO NOT STREAM DOTA and then at the end (oh yeah no porn or drugs).

Well, the latter 2 are ones that anyone with a brain should know not to do, regardless of a contract.

Originally Posted by koshunter

Pepsi is a very direct competitor to Coke. At best, you can make the argument that Dota 2 should be on the list of games they can't stream because it competes with Riot.

But Hearthstone? Fat Princess? Those are stretches.

I'm pretty sure Hearthstone is more of a problem for Riot. Unlike Dota 2, it can be played while you are queuing in LoL and it's a ridiculous money sink, miles above Dota 2 and maybe even LoL

Originally Posted by Mr Cola

Only reason I can think Hearthstone is because its a blizzard license that 99% of pro players play inbetween queues, its pretty huge in the lol community right now.

I'm pretty sure (with my limited knowledge in this area) that the type of conduct employers can regulate the employees can do in their off time is limited to things that directly compete with whatever it is the employer is doing.

Of course, esports is a fairly new scene, but looking at it, Dota 2 on the list seems fine. Direct competitor and what not. But Hearthstone isn't exactly a competitor. Yes, its popular but that shouldn't automatically put it on the list.

All that would do is allow Riot to put any popular game on the list, if enough pros flocked to it. Doesn't exactly seem like something that would be legal (given that streaming is on their free time and not on company time).

Originally Posted by dimb

If Riot is featuring a stream it means they are choosing players to promote their games. If those streams are running competitor's games it is only logical that these representatives of the community wouldn't receive Riot's backing.

Indeed. Nothing strange or scummy about that.

Fat...Princess is not allowed to be streamed? Ha ha ha

I already play hearthstone instead of lol. Too late Riot. :D

Originally Posted by SteveWinwood

Yeah I agree the analogies go strange real quick. I wouldn't call streaming going on npr, but simply sitting around on your porch and people decided to show up and watch you do whatever. If you happen to drink coke while playing checkers with your grandpa and a bunch of people show up to watch I don't think Pepsi has any say there.

What a strange analogy.

Sort of, but your situation would also need to have a Ham radio hooked up and broadcasting while grandma is busy making flapjacks for your grandpa because his blood sugar is low.

Originally Posted by Mauricio_Magus

Also "professional streamers", hahaha.

Why is this funny? It's what Kevin "Purge" Godec, the people from Beyond The Summit, Tobi "Tobiwan" Dawson and many, many others do for Dota 2.

Originally Posted by Leezard

Indeed. Nothing strange or scummy about that.

Actually it's both. Strange in that the money "saved" by doing this is probably greatly dwarfed by money and mindshare lost by doing this, and it's scummy because Riot has always been rumored to do stuff like this, but always came back with "No, we don't do that, don't be ridiculous, we love all eSports and all video games!"

Originally Posted by Einbroch

As I said before, a Pepsi employee (at least a salaried, non-entry level one) cannot drink even Dasani (water) while representing the company. That means in uniform, even if "taking a break" or "off the clock", on a business trip, or what have you.

I'm sure it's like this for other businesses with competition. This outrage seems strange to me.

The outrage is mostly because Riot is the only company in the e-sport business to go agressively against everything not part of their game, not just on streams but in real life tournaments too. These "strong arm" tactics don't sit well with a lot of people.

My first reaction was "This is bullshit", but considering that these people are on Riot's payroll it's not that odd. Bad PR though.

Originally Posted by Mr Cola

I have tried multiple times to get into DOTA but after 2 years of LOL I just cant, the gameplay, while similar in type, is too different to enjoy. That and the lack of a ranked mode is a real killer, i like progress and moving up. At this point I am mechanically as good as im going to get at LOL so the fun is finding where my skill limit is. I cant do that in DOTA.

Dotabuff is how you see your progression instead of being given some rank like Silver that does not show how skillful you are at the game. Having those rankings cause a shallow community that cares too much about what tier you are currently put in. I have played enough League of Legends to see that just because someone is bronze they are looked down upon. Even when they are doing better in normals than the Gold player they still get blamed because of their tier.

Originally Posted by Einbroch

As I said before, a Pepsi employee (at least a salaried, non-entry level one) cannot drink even Dasani (water) while representing the company. That means in uniform, even if "taking a break" or "off the clock", on a business trip, or what have you.

I'm sure it's like this for other businesses with competition. This outrage seems strange to me.

Just because those companies are doing this does not mean it is "ok" in a sense to do this for video games. I understand when you are in a meeting or being interviewed and you are playing, eating, or even drinking the competition, but in your free time you should be able to do what you want. Though if you agree to this then I guess you do not mind, but I sure would not sign something that tells me what I can stream on my off work time.

Can a Pepsi employee not drink Dasani water at home, on their free time?

One thing that I read that makes sense is that it may be partially due to bigger sponsors (like Coke Zero) coming aboard.

If bigger companies are getting involved in sponsoring players they may want to make sure they're not promoting other games for free.

Just smells of something they didn't think through the PR implications of either way.

Originally Posted by Mr Cola

I think this is more akin to the NFL telling a player he is not allowed to play basketball in his spare time.

Maybe that actually happens, but it shouldnt.

The discussion has since moved on from this point, but I'll leave this here just as an FYI:

The reason things like this are stipulated in sports contracts is to protect the employer's (I.E. The teams) investment in the player, not because of any advertising/competing sport thing. The thinking goes that a player's job (and therefore their value to the team) is completely dependent on their ability to play. Therefore, the reason sports teams don't want their players playing for basketball or football or X sport in their free time is quite simple: They don't want their star players injured playing pick up basketball with their friends.

And it's actually happened a couple of times. Some years ago Aroon Boone (I might be misremembering who it was) tore up his knee playing basketball with his kids in the offseason. He was going to miss the entire year of his contract, and normally his team (the Yankees) would have had to pay him in full. Because of this clause, they didn't.

Also, with regards to Golf, no one bans players from playing Gilf because of the extremely low risk if injury. It's also why so many professional athletes end up playing golf, as it's the only sport they can 'legally' do in their free time.

(Jesus I wrote a lot more than I wanted to)

Originally Posted by koshunter

Can a Pepsi employee not drink Dasani water at home, on their free time?

Obviously they can, but this about live streaming things publicly not about what they do in their spare time.

Originally Posted by Mr Cola

I have tried multiple times to get into DOTA but after 2 years of LOL I just cant, the gameplay, while similar in type, is too different to enjoy. That and the lack of a ranked mode is a real killer, i like progress and moving up. At this point I am mechanically as good as im going to get at LOL so the fun is finding where my skill limit is. I cant do that in DOTA.

What is so different about it that it throws you off so?

Originally Posted by PsychoSoldier

Obviously they can, but this about live streaming things publicly not about what they do in their spare time.

Many would say that publicly streaming is what they choose to do in their spare time.

Originally Posted by patapuf

The outrage is mostly because Riot is the only company in the e-sport business to go agressively against everything not part of their game, not just on streams but in real life tournaments too. These "strong arm" tactics don't sit well with a lot of people.

The bigger the giant...

I could see this year being a sharp turn in lol's popularity. The new season changes didn't make the game more fun or interesting. Hearthstone is the new king of F2P (in the hearts of gamerz).

Originally Posted by koshunter

Can a Pepsi employee not drink Dasani water at home, on their free time?

Sure they can.

If there were a soda podcast out there, though, they couldn't go on it and talk about how much they like Dasani for 50% of their time on the air, which is how long some of these queues can get.

These LCS players are representing the company when they stream, as everyone knows who they are and who they work for. Free time, in the privacy of your home with friends/family/neighbors/whatever, is completely different than streaming to 20k+ people simultaneously. You're voluntarily putting yourself out there.

I'd like to point out Valve sells branded items on their store for teams and players (and a couple streamers) which basically pays them directly, and has no such clause.

It's not because Valve hates money. It's because it's just common sense and good PR, which are more profitable in the long term than a strong arm grid lock on contracts.

Originally Posted by Einbroch

Sure they can.

If there were a soda podcast out there, though, they couldn't go on it and talk about how much they like Dasani for 50% of their time on the air, which is how long some of these queues can get.

These LCS players are representing the company when they stream, as everyone knows who they are and who they work for. Free time, in the privacy of your home with friends/family/neighbors/whatever, is completely different than streaming to 20k+ people simultaneously. You're voluntarily putting yourself out there.

I understand that. However, again, that only really applies to something like Dota 2 or Heroes of the Storm because those are similar direct competitors.

Why are games like Fat Princess and Hearthstone banned? The latter because its popular on LoL streamers. Why not do a blanket ban on all games then? After all, there is no relation between Hearthstone and League.

Originally Posted by balladofwindfishes

I'd like to point out Valve sells branded items on their store for teams and players (and a couple streamers) which basically pays them directly, and has no such clause.

It's not because Valve hates money. It's because it's just common sense and good PR, which are more profitable in the long term than a strong arm grid lock on contracts.

Yeah but what Dota pro is going to casually stream LoL and "convert" others. It's a joke.

Make a quality product and people will want to play it and watch it, and you'll have no need to enforce it through contracts.

Originally Posted by VanquishUK

It says "during or adjacent to League of Legends content". It means that they aren't allowed to play the listed games while queuing etc. Not a big deal.

Why shouldn't they be able to do it whenver and however they please? If they can play LoL and Dawngate at the same time more power to them I guess.

It says "during or adjacent to League of Legends content". It means that they aren't allowed to play the listed games while queuing etc. If they change the game they're listed as playing on Twitch, they can play whatever they want. Not a big deal.

Originally Posted by balladofwindfishes

Of course they are. That doesn't make it right.

If a contract said someone now owned your first born child, we could laugh at it and call it stupid and demand they change it.

Why exactly are being coming in with "Well it's their right blah blah" nobody is arguing rights. We're discussing the implications of the contract and how it might effect LoL.

Unless you can find a quote of someone saying Riot doesn't have the right to do this.

Comparing this to a contract with blatantly unconscionable and illegal terms is disingenuous. Contract terms like these are common among professional athletes, among others. They are not onerous, nor are they unfair. Moreover, the most basic efforts at brand protection are unlikely to harm LOL more than they help it.

Originally Posted by koshunter

I understand that. However, again, that only really applies to something like Dota 2 or Heroes of the Storm because those are similar direct competitors.

Why are games like Fat Princess and Hearthstone banned? The latter because its popular on LoL streamers. Why not do a blanket ban on all games then? After all, there is no relation between Hearthstone and League.

They're games. Just like water and soda are drinks.

But as stated, analogies are weird. Just a difference in opinion.

Originally Posted by Mauricio_Magus

Fuck Riot Games.

Also "professional streamers", hahaha.

I see someone is still in 2008.

"The following companies and/or products are not to be advertised during or adjacent to League of Legends content during the Term."

With the wording here, it sounds like they mean they only disallow streamers from playing these other games immediately before/after playing League of Legends. Is that the correct interpretation?

Originally Posted by balladofwindfishes

I'd like to point out Valve sells branded items on their store for teams and players (and a couple streamers) which basically pays them directly, and has no such clause.

It's not because Valve hates money. It's because it's just common sense and good PR, which are more profitable in the long term than a strong arm grid lock on contracts.

This is a totally different situation though. The teams/players are treated like every other person who puts content on the marketplace so no reason to have such a clause.

There are no DoTA2 teams that are directly paid by Valve in the same Riot directly pays these teams.

It doesn't make this clause smart or good, but it's a very different thing.

You know, if that's what they want to do with their company, that's fine.

Meanwhile, I think I'll start promoting DotA to my family. I've been meaning to try it for a while and I have some impressionable younger minds on-hand who are just itching to play a good hard computer game.

Originally Posted by Mr Cola

High ELO queue times are absurd, lol streamers in the top 50 can spend upwards of 30 minutes waiting for a compatible game. During this wait many stream hearthstone, SC2 and similar games in the interim, its something for the fans to watch while we wait.

Playing a game while you wait to play a game is rather unique.

It's not all other games; it's just games in direct competition with LoL. Of course the company doesn't want its streamers promoting its competitors.

Non-story.

Originally Posted by balladofwindfishes

I'd like to point out Valve sells branded items on their store for teams and players (and a couple streamers) which basically pays them directly, and has no such clause.

It's not because Valve hates money. It's because it's just common sense and good PR, which are more profitable in the long term than a strong arm grid lock on contracts.

Valve doesn't give anyone a salary so they couldn't have such a clause even if they wanted. The problem is that Riot has an irongrip on their esports community and that will probably be their downfall. Other communitys like sc2, dota2 etc are grassroots driven and promotes new talent and tournaments and seems to be much healthier because of that.

You know whats unfortunate? I feel really, really sorry for all the professional LoL players who also rely on streaming for their livelihood.

Originally Posted by balladofwindfishes

Of course they are. That doesn't make it right.

If a contract said someone now owned your first born child, we could laugh at it and call it stupid and demand they change it.

But the Federal Government does make contracts like this for service members, employees of 3 letter agencies, and federal agents. Once you sign a federal contract, your life is the government's to own until your contract is up. Everything about your life is theirs. This includes how your family acts and what your family can and cannot do.

Yet everyone WILLINGLY signs these contracts do so despite knowing all this. Sure some realize it's not for them and try everything to bail out but their lives are going to be shit regardless.

Originally Posted by smr00

Since when is World of Warcraft a competing product? or Hearthstone? They aren't MOBA games.

I can understand not wanting them to stream DOTA or other MOBAs but WOW? Hearth? Diablo? Fucking absurd.

since heroes of the storm put warcraft, starcraft and diablo characters in a moba.

Originally Posted by SteveWinwood

What is so different about it that it throws you off so?


Many would say that publicly streaming is what they choose to do in their spare time.

Principally how I move my map, the recall system and lack of runes and masteries. Rune and masteries are a large part of league of legends, you cannot go into a game without either and expect not to get stomped, they also offer differing play styles with the same champion. Recalling represents something which can be amended in dota with scrolls, but having done it a certain way for 2 years it feels unnatural to relearn a new system, the same with map scrolling, I use the middle mouse button to scroll in LOL and in DOTA its inverted for some reason. I searched how to fix this (This was a few months ago) I couldnt find an answer.

As far as general play goes League Champions abide by certain rules which dont seem to be apparent in DOTA, not that this makes DOTA worse, just different. DOTA contains abilities that, if they were in league, would make me shake my head. There is a 3 second immobilisation in League called Dread which fears a target, it is so long in the scope of the game that if a primary target gets feared they are dead, it forces said target to rush certain items to counteract it or take a summoner spell just for it. DOTA has aoe team stuns for longer than this. While this can be balanced in DOTA because the gameplay is different, to me its too different. If 2 years ago someone had introduced me to DOTA i would be playing that now instead of league, I dont buy any of this "Dota is hardcore lol is for nubs" attitude some people have, its a stupid argument that completely ignores player interaction, a game of league can be just as hard as a game of Dota because you are playing against an opponent who has many ways to approach the situation. Once you mechanically understand a game and the champions complexity revolves around approaching situations rather than the mechanical intensity it takes to pull off said moves.

The last nail in the coffin for DOTA is ranking, which is very important to me. A poster above said I could check my elo on a site and then proceeded to tell me LOL's elo system sucks. While I wont say I prefer the the league system to the old elo system I do enjoy A system. And while I dont condone bronze being belittled by gold members I can say that as someone who has 5 accounts, 3 in gold and 2 elsewhere I know what it takes to be gold and im proud of having achieved it. I have played this game for 2 years and there is a different between the leagues, and progression DOES mean something.

Originally Posted by MOPP 4

But the Federal Government does make contracts like this for service members, employees of 3 letter agencies, and federal agents. Once you sign a federal contract, your life is the government's to own until your contract is up. Everything about your life is theirs. This includes how your family acts and what your family can and cannot do.

Yet everyone WILLINGLY signs these contracts do so despite knowing all this. Sure some realize it's not for them and try everything to bail out but their lives are going to be shit regardless.

Bringing a military contract into this discussion is really weird. Most of those stipulations in the contract are done for national security purposes... it's quite a different sort of contract than trying to stop people from killing time with a digital card game.

Originally Posted by trw

Other communitys like sc2, dota2 etc are grassroots driven and promotes new talent and tournaments and seems to be much healthier because of that.

Blizzard's implementation of the WCS system this year really hurt that part of the community for SC2. Thankfully they're improving the system for 2014. I agree that a less restricted system is better for the health of a competitive game.