Originally Posted by commanderpepper
Time to stream some fighting games!
This is exactly what LoL streams need.
I have no idea the exact specifics but I'm imagining in Korea when StarCraft was really huge the enormous companies that sponsored the teams (SK Telecom, CJ, LG, Samsung, KT, etc) probably had similar restrictions in terms of publicly mentioning competing companies.Originally Posted by balladofwindfishes
But they're really not. Starcraft was huge as one of the first major eSports and it never had stuff like this.
It's kind of sad people feel this sort of stuff is required to be a serious thing. It's not at all.
These particular restrictions are not necessary, I agree, but having a company like Riot sponsor a bunch of teams has, in my opinion, been really healthy for the scene overall. At least in NA, teams that wouldn't have been able to get to very many LANs beforehand ended up at worlds thanks to the LCS structure.
The original article was updated.
So you can't even change your stream to a stream for another game period. You're totally barred from streaming those games.Update: onGamers has confirmed with the team representatives that LCS players are disallowed from streaming the games listed below outright, not just when adjacent to a League of Legends stream. Under Section 3 Rule 4 of the new contract handling 'Non-League Events and Streaming', it states that "... the [LCS] Team shall ensure that, during the Term of this Agreement, its Team Members do not publicly stream gameplay of the titles set forth on Exhibit B". Exhibit B states "the specific restrictions on streaming are set forth in the Sponsorship and Streaming Restricted List, as updated by the League from time to time", which is the document listed below.
They are also not allowed to attend events not officially sanctioned by riot, so they have very little in potential winnings available if they aren't among the best few teams in the world.
Streaming didn't exist when Starcraft was popular. If it did, and competitors existed, the same thing would be happening.Originally Posted by balladofwindfishes
But they're really not. Starcraft was huge as one of the first major eSports and it never had stuff like this.
It's kind of sad people feel this sort of stuff is required to be a serious thing. It's not at all.
Just to clarify these titles cannot be streamed at all, doesn't matter if it's in between a queue or on a weekend when they are not playing League.
This is a flat out ban on these 27 titles.
This is a flat out ban on these 27 titles.
That's just it - their strategy has actually brought a game to penetrate the non-gamer market, and for that, I give them lenience. Never before have my family/relatives brought up a game before...Originally Posted by PsychoSoldier
These particular restrictions are not necessary, I agree, but having a company like Riot sponsor a bunch of teams has, in my opinion, been really healthy for the scene overall. At least in NA, teams that wouldn't have been able to get to very many LANs beforehand ended up at worlds thanks to the LCS structure.
Which would be the case no matter what?They are also not allowed to attend events not officially sanctioned by riot, so they have very little in potential winnings available if they aren't among the best few teams in the world.
Are there a ton of potential tournaments that would be worth the resources to send players to that wouldn't be attended by the best teams in the world that would take all the prize money anyway?
I really miss The GD Show about now.
If you feel so strongly about it, stop taking their money...
yea right
yea right
MLG? even in starcraft people were saying it wasnt worth the price of the plane ticket.Originally Posted by PsychoSoldier
Which would be the case no matter what?
Are there a ton of potential tournaments that would be worth the resources to send players to that wouldn't be attended by the best teams in the world that would take all the prize money anyway?
I feel like Riot are going to back off on this.
Diamondprox already pretty publicly snubbed his nose at the rule and QTPie has had some pretty strong words about it already.
They're unlikely to be the last ones to do so and I don't think the potential benefit to Riot in banning these games is worth messing with the bigger streamers.
Diamondprox already pretty publicly snubbed his nose at the rule and QTPie has had some pretty strong words about it already.
They're unlikely to be the last ones to do so and I don't think the potential benefit to Riot in banning these games is worth messing with the bigger streamers.
In Dota 2, throughout over 111 different events hosted in 2013 that I counted, over 60 different teams have gotten in the top 2 spots alone.Originally Posted by PsychoSoldier
Which would be the case no matter what?
Are there a ton of potential tournaments that would be worth the resources to send players to that wouldn't be attended by the best teams in the world that would take all the prize money anyway?
I guess the big reason that Dota can support a ton of events is a lot of the smaller ones simply do it online only.
The Riot money is probably a small amount compared to Twitch money that could be lost by the restrictions placed on the stream. That coupled with official tournaments only means that it is probably more lucrative to not be contracted with Riot.Originally Posted by PsychoSoldier
I feel like Riot are going to back off on this.
Diamondprox already pretty publicly snubbed his nose at the rule and QTPie has had some pretty strong words about it already.
They're unlikely to be the last ones to do so and I don't think the potential benefit to Riot in banning these games is worth messing with the bigger streamers.
Twitch is the main driver of views now and people with established channels don't need Riot to promote them.
I can definitely see this. They're trying to make the play now for the big leagues. It will make or break their game this year.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.
That's actually kind of surprising to me as it appears to me as if a fairly small number of teams tend to monopolize the top spots.In Dota 2, throughout over 111 different events hosted in 2013 that I counted, over 60 different teams have gotten in the top 2 spots alone.
I guess the big reason that Dota can support a ton of events is a lot of the smaller ones simply do it online only.
Are these other teams just winning really small online tourneys with tiny payouts or something?
That's per split. They make double that in a year. They also have alternate income venues, free promotion and technically don't have to work for about half the year on top of all of that. Also, the manager pays for living expenses I'm pretty sure.Originally Posted by dave is ok
$100k a year
divided by 5 players and a manager = $16.6k a year
That is minimum wage.
fat princess
"Riot should pay their employees so they can give publicity to their competitors."
Doesn't make any sense.
Doesn't make any sense.
(Yesterday, 09:09 PM)
back in da day there were streaming quotas for certain teamz, I dunno if that's in place right now.Originally Posted by SteveWinwood
Streaming publicly is what some of them choose to do in their free time.
but i mean of course there is a discussion to be had about how free time exists
when you are ostensibly the face of company
It sounds like a bad thing, on first read, but I don't think Riot is in the wrong. If these guys are getting paid by Riot, Riot can control it however they deem necessary.
I like their active approach to protecting their game. Blizzard was so hands off with e-sports for so long, that now they are far behind the curve.
I like their active approach to protecting their game. Blizzard was so hands off with e-sports for so long, that now they are far behind the curve.
Look at it this way. Twitch.tv is the medium through which most people watch the tournaments these guys play in.Originally Posted by SteveWinwood
Streaming publicly is what some of them choose to do in their free time.
Considering them streaming, free time or not, is just on another channel on twitch, it's basically the equivalent of an athlete sponsored by one apparel company wearing a different brand of apparel just on a different station on tv.
It may be technically their free time, but any employee in a public setting is going to need to be aware of how their actions are perceived by their employer. I don't think any company is going to be okay with one of their employees explicitly or implicitly advertising another product while 20k people are watching, whether it is on their own time or not.
im interested in how riot will address the outcry
itd probably be in line with roits listen to public image if they redacted this
even though there is probably a shitload of crazy shit in these contracts
itd probably be in line with roits listen to public image if they redacted this
even though there is probably a shitload of crazy shit in these contracts
Last edited by brian!; Yesterday at 09:30 PM.
You realize this is bullshit right? Unless Riot is paying them extra for their free time they should be able to stream whatever they want.Originally Posted by BurnOutBrighter
If you are a representative of a company, anything you do in public is not your free time if it is likely to contradict your employer.
Removing a player from a list of featured streamers sounds like fair play, if I was Riot I wouldn't want Dota2 streamed/stream linked on my website.
As far as the ban for the league players goes, IMHO it depends on how much they're paid.
As far as the ban for the league players goes, IMHO it depends on how much they're paid.
Backpedal.im interested in how riot will address the outcry
Then they'll do something sleazy again in 6-12 months.
Then we do this all over again.
Overall, I feel like this is much, much less scummy than what they've tried to do with not allowing organisations that take part in LCS to field teams in other games, with different players and all that.
This is just a simple contract, 'Want our $100k? Don't stream other games.'. If Riot wasn't using them to promote LoL as far as they can, why would they even bother paying them money?
This is just a simple contract, 'Want our $100k? Don't stream other games.'. If Riot wasn't using them to promote LoL as far as they can, why would they even bother paying them money?
They are paying them to promote League of Legends. Being featured on a homepage as a League of Legends streamer and then clicking in to see someone playing Hearthstone is pretty contradictory.Originally Posted by Interfectum
You realize this is bullshit right? Unless Riot is paying them extra for their free time they should be able to stream whatever they want.
And I'd go as far to say that Hearthstone is only as popular as it is because of LoL streamers.
The reason they can make lots of money from streaming and sponsorship is because they are/were in professional leagues in the first place. If LCS players think they can make a better living by just streaming, they are free to leave the LCS. Though I doubt they'd attract sponsors.Originally Posted by dave is ok
They probably make more money per year streaming in their "free time" than they do being employed by Riot as an LCS team
They don't want Dyrus missing any more champion selects while being too busy playing Hearthstone.
This does happen all the time in football.nike gets a basketball player to do a series of commercials.
that player shows up to his next game in his addidas.
nike cancels the contract.
fuck nike, right?
Example: Bayern Munich is sponsored by Adidas, but Götze by Nike.
He is always caught wearing Nike gear at official Bayern events. He gets a fine (probably paid by Nike) and does it again a week later. :lol
He can wear Nike in his free time all he wants. He only needs to wear Adidas when he represents Bayern.
Last edited by la_briola; Yesterday at 09:50 PM.
wow, no hearthstone?
Ehhh no.Originally Posted by BurnOutBrighter
The reason they can make lots of money from streaming and sponsorship is because they are/were in professional leagues in the first place. If LCS players think they can make a better living by just streaming, they are free to leave the LCS. Though I doubt they'd attract sponsors.
The product isn't the game, the product is the streamers personality. They personality that persists no matter what game he/she is playing.
Valve understands this. Riot doesn't.
i dunno what valve has to do with it, ive never seen a dota stream
| Thread Tools | |