A Long, Long Way to Go
Saturday, July 9, 2011 at 9:02AM Now That the Door Has Been Opened…
I was going to leave this alone, based on the blind emotional response from Twitter over this article: http://tinyurl.com/3mykha8. However, our own Natural 20 opened the door for me not yesterday with a blog post discussing the above Kotaku article and what is a “regular” gamer: http://tinyurl.com/5s2fxzd. The issue of what is a “regular” gamer and gaming going mainstream is one that I have touched on before in various shows. What I want to focus on is one particular comment about why fake sports hasn’t made it on TV:
Every TV show I've seen so far has been way too cheesy and not indicative of what pro gaming is about. Trying to squeeze an event into a 60 minute broadcast doesn't really work for gaming as it doesn't really work for tennis. But the latter is shown everywhere on TV.
Only recently, thanks to MLG, can we see what gaming events should look like: Great shoutcasting, well presented, and without the need to cheese it up for regular people to understand.
What we learn from this is two-fold: First, Dave Treacy doesn’t know anything about television production, marketing, ratings, or gathering and holding an audience. Second, if this sentiment is indicative of that of pro-gaming in general, then pro gaming as gone as far as it ever will.
As ever, the “what” of these situations isn’t nearly as interesting as the “why”, but before I do that, let’s toss some numbers around to give a sense of scale to the issue at hand. Over 18 million American and Canadian fans watched the deciding Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals in 2011, according to Puck the Media (http://tinyurl.com/4xj5hs8), and over 15 million Americans watched Game 6 of the NBA finals between Miami and Dallas. For some more perspective, the 2008 World Series of Poker final table garnered 1.9 million viewers on cable network ESPN. The WSOP viewership is the intriguing statistic, because it is professional gaming. So, the notion that professional gaming can’t make it due to cheesy TV is utter nonsense. Why can’t professional video gaming be the same as the WSOP? Well, I’ll tell you.
There are no compelling stories in professional video gaming:
We need only go back to the final table at the 2003 WSOP to find the story and the TV coverage that induced the Poker explosion worldwide. WSOP Main Event internet qualifier Chris Moneymaker makes the final table, and holds the chip lead for much of the final table, though long time poker pro Sam Farha takes the chip lead mid-way through the final table. At the finish, Moneymaker makes an incredible bluff to cut the legs out of Farha’s chip stack before finishing him on the next hand. David had slain Goliath on ESPN to win the biggest poker tournament ever at the time.
I watched this when it aired on ESPN. To be fair, I was already casually interested in poker to begin with, but the legitimate drama of the event, and the story of a relative nobody in the poker world going head-to-head with, and getting the best of, a well-known, high-stakes, professional poker player made me want to play poker. The next month, I found a class at Colorado Free University on playing poker, signed up for the class, bought books, and setup a bankroll to play poker semi-regularly.
That, my friends, is the very definition of compelling television. Now, to be fair, I don’t watch much professional video gaming at all, or watch that much casting of Starcraft 2, etc. What I have watched doesn’t make me want to play the games that are played, as there are no stories associated with 2 random, anonymous people playing games, and the action on the screen isn’t compelling enough to sell me on the games in spite of their shortcomings. If compelling stories are there, then the broadcasters associated with gaming have been negligent in their responsibility to find those stories to attract viewers to make pro gaming bigger.
The participants aren’t marketable or telegenic:
Take a look at the picture to the right. Who do you market that package to, and how do you market that package to the audience at large? You can’t. Period. End. Sure, you can market that package to other gamers, especially the ones who know who’s in the picture. But isn’t that the point? Perception in the marketing world is reality, and this guy looks like a punk who is just as likely to steal your stereo as he is to be one of the best gamers in the world.
Now, let’s look at Shaun White. Just do a Google search and look at the pictures. Show me one picture where Shaun White looks anything like the picture at right. You can’t. Why? Well, clearly someone in Shaun White’s camp gives a damn about marketing Shaun White; further, that same someone probably understands that making the X-games more marketable overall means more money, exposure, and fame for everyone, so it is good business sense to make sure that the poster boy for the summer and winter X-games is marketable.
For more evidence, do a Google search on Daniel Negranu. For those that don’t know, Daniel is a professional poker player, and has had much face time on the WSOP, World Poker Tour, and High Stakes Poker telecasts. Look at those photos and show me where he looks anywhere near as bad as the picture at right. Again, you can’t.
What I will say is, at the very least, it seems Dave Treacy has a signature look. It’s a look that can’t sell anything, but the look in the Alienware interview is the same as on his team-dignitas profile page. That’s something, but at the end of the day, professional video gaming won’t grow beyond the niche without someone to take the reins as poster boy/girl to be put on peripheral ads in trade mags and on TV.
The casters shoot themselves in the foot when they aren’t casting:
Maybe this is because they feel they have to be “in character” all the time? Here’s what I know: Kevin Harlan doesn’t care about how many twitter followers he has; It doesn’t appear that Hubie Brown has a Youtube channel, so he can’t mouth off about his subscriber numbers; When Colin Cowherd does an interview outside his show, he conducts himself in a professional manner; Mike Sexton and Vince Van Patten have played enough poker to provide informative and entertaining insight into the action on the felt.
If you can find a video gaming caster that isn’t a galactic douche during his/her casts, then you can bet the farm on him/her making an idiot out of themselves in a forum or on social media, and setting back professional video gaming back years. Sell me on putting these people on any major cable network. Even G4, which would be the obvious place for tons of video game casting, has decided syndicating Cops is better for their bottom line than trying to put casters on the air, and spending the money on damage control when the casters inevitably tarnish the image of G4 by thumping their chest about their subscriber numbers or twitter followers.
So, if we really want to move professional video gaming away from the stigma, do the following: find the compelling stories, and cover the hell out of them; find someone marketable enough to put on the ads for peripherals and for your league/tournament; and find casters that care more for their “sport” then they do for themselves. Oh, and while we’re at it, can we find someone with the courage to tell aspiring professional video gamers the same thing my Freshman Football coach told me, “Son, there’s a 99% chance you’re not going pro.”?
VTWProductions
The sniveling of “ignorance” has already started, so, I went to MLG TV, called up an SC2 replay, and I’m going to be posting a running log of this replay. As my stomach allows, I’ll do more of these. I apologize in advance when I hurt your feelings.
White-Ra vs. LiquidRet (Part 1) - MLG Live Replay
Pre-show sponsor message: Bic Razor
00:00 – “Without further ado” is the most boring lead in to anything in the history of ever.
01:17 – Nice insight about the map, “you can’t really push around the outside of the map without exposing your entire army”.
02:50 – It’s harassment; oh, no it isn’t. Conjecturing what is happening and having to stop and start again with what really happened breaks the flow of the play-by-play. Stop doing it. The role of the play-by-play guy is to inform the viewer what has happened on the “field”. The color commentator gets to speculate on why something is happening, and gets to go back to correct himself. The only exception to this is when the caster is solo. In that case, fine, conjecture if necessary.
05:17 – Still way, way too much strategy conjecture from the play-by-play guy. What is this, amateur hour?
7:10 – GG Game 1. The color guy in the video said something about liking White-Ra’s positioning about something, but I don’t think we ever saw it.
General Impressions of Game 1 – The play-by-play guy is totally monotone. There’s a lot of insight coming from the color guy, which is his role. It’s nowhere near where it needs to be to grab any sort of audience, sadly.
9:45 – Nice to get some insight into the map for Game 2. I don’t necessarily understand the ramifications of Protos not getting a third base, and Zerg getting a third base, but it is a good bit of information nonetheless.
10:27 – Finally Game 2 starts. For 3 minutes, we’ve stared at random dude in a headset staring at a camera, typing, and nodding. This is totally Bush league stuff. Where are the highlights from Game 1? Where’s the commentary on what has to happen in Game 2? Where’s the interview with the winner and loser of Game 1? This is a replay, so all of these things ought to be there. It is just shamefully unprofessional for a professional gaming league.
10:38 – Positions for Game 2 described. More conjecture of strategy. It’s confusing.
12:36 – A pseudo-debate about cannon rushing mercifully ends. If it isn’t germane to the game at hand do not say it.
13:44 – We’ve watched Zerglings run across the map for 15 seconds now. Why? For a replay, this should all be edited out. More amateurish production quality from a pro league.
13:49 – The options screen appears to increase the volume. Whoever did that should be fired.
13:55 – Self-deprecation from the play-by-play guy about his assumptions. Here’s a thought: don’t assume! Inform us what is happening; that’s your job. Seriously, watch some real sports and take notes how the real pros do it.
15:40 – We’ve just heard the most professional bit of discourse from the casters thus far about at what level to stop building Drones. The color guy’s expertise really shines through at this bit.
20:10 – Huge missed opportunity here. For 2 minutes, we’ve watched 2 amassing armies, with no description of what is there, what they are strong/weak against for the opposing faction, etc. For 2 minutes at this point, there’s been discussions about strategy when no strategy is happening. Inform us what is on the field, how they will fare against each other in armed conflict.
21:11 – The first major engagement of Game 2 just happened, but you wouldn’t know it, as the play-by-play team’s pulse didn’t raise above comatose.
22:15 – GG Game 2. More post game analysis, which is great. It needs to be done over the highlights of Game 2, instead of Suited Putz #46 and his headset. I understand the need to have a person to set up games and such, but the production needs to be aware of the game design and account for it, and the production just doesn’t.
24:48 – Game 3 introduced. There’s no mention that the Best of 5 is 1-1, no mention that this is a pivotal Game 3. Maybe that’s totally obvious to everyone, but here’s another missed opportunity. The loser of Game 3 has to win twice to win the Best of 5; Game 3 is also on a map that we’re told favors Protoss. That’s a not insignificant advantage, isn’t it? No mention of the situation relative to the map.
30:22 – Game 3’s all in strategy from Zerg is foiled. Paramedics have arrived to revive the play-by-play team, which is still comatose. I guess I’m not supposed to care about the Pro Circuit events?
31:40 – Well, at least we got an explanation of “that famous game”.
33:00 – It’s time for special tactics? What special tactics? Also, we have 2 Protoss units v. Zerg queens and no indication of who should win that fight, and under what conditions the underdog could upset the favorite. I want to care about these amassing armies; the play-by-play team’s job is to induce me to care. They haven’t yet.
34:32 – They MISSED the counter attack. We’ve been watching drones mine for most of this game, there is a race condition, and the pro gaming league completely missed it!
36:25 – The mop up phase is calling to be edited out. Why it isn’t done on a replay is beyond me.
37:15 – Nice close up of the mothership. It’s the big unit of the game, and it is getting face time. Nice touch.
40:34 – After screwing around for what seemed like an eon or two, GG finally comes. Why did we have to watch the last 5 minutes of this game on a replay? We shouldn’t? You’re right.
Part 2 Sponsor: Sony Erickson
Part 2; 00:00 – Oh, suit boy is MLG Live Host JP McDaniel, and he can participate in the discussion! 41 minutes of gaming, 6 of which I’ve had to stare at this guy, and his nugget of insight is, “Why’d he do that all-in in that last game?”
00:50 – They are rationalizing an all-in in the pivotal game of a Best of 5. Big risk, big reward to win a game to go up 2-1 and take control of the Best of 5. It’s a 10 second conversation that’s labored on into 3 minutes.
02:24 – Game 4 on Terminus. Not one mention of Zerg player being down 2-1 in the Best of 5. Any hope of drama is lost. I don’t care about this match, and that must be by design.
04:51 – This is the best 2 minutes of commentary of the match. It’s a discussion of mutalisks in PvP, and it actually distracted me from how totally boring it is to watch resource gathering. If you can do that every game, you might not need to edit out the first 4 minutes of every game.
06:35 – Our awesome discussion about mutalisks has devolved into sniveling about how awesome banelings are. I want to die, so I don’t have to watch resource gathering and listen to this crap. It’s desperately calling out to be edited. Did I mention I am watching a replay? Did I also mention it is shameful to not edit your replays?
At this point, I had to leave the computer to make breakfast. The first few minutes of Game 4 have been so boring that I am tempted to turn it off; however, in the interest of quelling the sniveling of MLG fanbois, I force myself to continue.
07:50 – We finally get some analysis that matters. Thank Kerrigan!
08:55 – First engagement of Game 4, and I heard a little excitement in the play-by-play guy’s voice. Again, apparently it is by design for me to not care about MLG Pro Circuit matches.
12:55 – Second engagement of Game 4 gets a “Holy Smokes” from an attack gone catastrophically wrong.
14:15 – We cut away from the fight to look at a base…really?
16:10 – GG Game 4. Whitera wins the Best of 5 3-1. Postgame interview commences. Ben (play-by-play guy) has the courage to ask why you’d do something so galactically stupid as to all in in the pivotal game of a Best of 5. That’s something you don’t see in sports ever, and something MLG might be able to work with.
18:05 – Webcam structural failure. Is MLG is so much trouble that they can’t provide functional equipment to their casters? It’s embarrassing.
18:20 – Softball question to the losing player.
19:00 – Winning player added to Skype call.
19:35 – Oh, “special tactics” is an inside joke. Too bad it wasn’t explained so we all could laugh.
20:40 – The interview continues. There’s another 9 minutes on the video, but I need to start show prep.
What's funny to me is that the "revolution" of pro-game is happening, or has happened, and nothing has changed from when MLG was on USA network. It's still boring as sin; I still don't know why I should care about a Best of 5 between 2 random players; 1/2 of the play-by-play team is god awful. I'm going to keep doing this until I bludgeon the point into the heads of the mindless. Apparently, I'm a glutton for punishment.
Reader Comments