Time: 22:21:17 CET 13:21:17 PST 16:21:17 EST 06:21:17 Seoul 05:21:17 Beijing
NEWS
In the memory of your esports heroes
Esports is a phenomenon so young that few have been worried about its heritage. So far, when one of the main esports titles was dropped by one tournament organiser, another took over and carried the torch. But a day will come when it ends. What then?
By Michal 'Carmac' Blicharz
Dec 15, 2008 23:21
Esports is a phenomenon so young that few have been worried about its heritage. So far, when one of the main esports titles was dropped by one tournament organiser, another took over and carried the torch. But a day will come when it ends. What then?When the CPL let go of Quake, ESWC helped keep it alive. When the CPL and the World Series of Video Games died, ESL took over Counter-Strike internationally. But what if the ESWC drops Quake or (please no!) dies? What if ESL forgets CS? By the look of things right now it is quite possible that one day the lineage is broken and some of the games we treat as esports will be history.
What if on the day that a league needs to change a Counter-Strike or a Warcraft 3 for something else, that game has no worthy successor? There is a real threat that the games played by the most talented gamers in the world will be buried along with their histories. The names of the players forgotten along with all their records, championships, trophies, with their skill and knowledge. Almost as if none of their matches ever happened.
Wouldn't you like two decades to pass and see a young Korean player being compared to June 'Lyn' Park the same way Lionel Messi is compared to Diego Maradona? The achievements of SK Gaming's Counter-Strike team of 2003 to the records of SK Gaming in 2025? Not in our world.
Like it or not, that day when our legends become buried and forgotten may come. As a game gets older its community shrinks. Sponsors and publishers pay money for newer games to be used. A new game is needed and if the sequel to your game of choice does not come out in time, does not meet expectations or the publisher does not want the ESLs of this world to use it, the heritage that thousands of players, team managers, journalists and referees worked for is lost.
That certainly is not progress. It is a standstill at best, one where it is hard to find someone that benefits. Even sponsored teams that can quickly pick up players of any game will not be too shaken up, but they also need to put a lot of time and work into promoting their champions to become recognisable brands.
Game fluctuation cannot go on forever. Not if we want esports to move forward. We need to start building on the past instead of erasing it.
Ultimately, we need a game to come that would be bigger than the needs of the companies that pay for tournaments to happen. A game like chess that would be so good that there would be no necessity to change it. Or StarCraft for Koreans. A game so popular that the tournament organisers could rely on sponsors who do not care if the game is one year or twelve years old.
We could go with a game franchise which would be re-released like FIFA - newer and shinier each year or two, but not a mockery of its predecessor when it comes to gameplay. It would introduce new players into the community and it would keep the lineage.
Until such a game comes we need to be ready to give our esports heroes a funeral some day.
What if on the day that a league needs to change a Counter-Strike or a Warcraft 3 for something else, that game has no worthy successor? There is a real threat that the games played by the most talented gamers in the world will be buried along with their histories. The names of the players forgotten along with all their records, championships, trophies, with their skill and knowledge. Almost as if none of their matches ever happened.
"Wouldn't you like two decades to pass and see a young Korean player being compared to June 'Lyn' Park the same way Lionel Messi is compared to Diego Maradona?"
20 years from now if I tell my children that I saw the most amazing Champions League final in history, the one between Liverpool and Milan, they may be interested in the story. If Warcraft 4 never comes to succeed Warcraft 3 and I tell my kids that I know Manuel 'GrubbY' Schenkhuizen they may go: "Who the hell is Grubby?" Would they know what a hero surround is? Would they understand a tower rush and what it takes to defend your base from it?Wouldn't you like two decades to pass and see a young Korean player being compared to June 'Lyn' Park the same way Lionel Messi is compared to Diego Maradona? The achievements of SK Gaming's Counter-Strike team of 2003 to the records of SK Gaming in 2025? Not in our world.
Like it or not, that day when our legends become buried and forgotten may come. As a game gets older its community shrinks. Sponsors and publishers pay money for newer games to be used. A new game is needed and if the sequel to your game of choice does not come out in time, does not meet expectations or the publisher does not want the ESLs of this world to use it, the heritage that thousands of players, team managers, journalists and referees worked for is lost.
"We need to start building on the past instead of erasing it."
Every time such a scenario comes to fruition, esports has to rebuild itself from scratch in a certain area. It has to find a new game and educate a new generation of players on how to behave like professionals, how to practice, prepare for a tournament and what to say in interviews. It has to find new journalists among those players and wait for them to get the quality of their work up to par.That certainly is not progress. It is a standstill at best, one where it is hard to find someone that benefits. Even sponsored teams that can quickly pick up players of any game will not be too shaken up, but they also need to put a lot of time and work into promoting their champions to become recognisable brands.
Game fluctuation cannot go on forever. Not if we want esports to move forward. We need to start building on the past instead of erasing it.
"Ultimately, we need a game to come that would be bigger than the needs of the companies that pay for tournaments to happen."
We need the games to stop changing and their stories to go on for years, for decades. It is in the hands of the tournament organisers to choose their games wisely, for the long haul. Not for a season but for eight seasons. We need the ESL, WCG and ESWC to work with game developers who know of esports and are willing to help, and to convince others and educate them.Ultimately, we need a game to come that would be bigger than the needs of the companies that pay for tournaments to happen. A game like chess that would be so good that there would be no necessity to change it. Or StarCraft for Koreans. A game so popular that the tournament organisers could rely on sponsors who do not care if the game is one year or twelve years old.
We could go with a game franchise which would be re-released like FIFA - newer and shinier each year or two, but not a mockery of its predecessor when it comes to gameplay. It would introduce new players into the community and it would keep the lineage.
Until such a game comes we need to be ready to give our esports heroes a funeral some day.
RELATED NEWS
132 comments
Loading comments...
season 2: http://www.esl-world.net/masters/archive_overview_season2/
season 1: http://www.esl-world.net/masters/archive_overview_season1/
mari men1kmati juadah cs bersama.... =D
First of all, there is almost no way you could get any developer to support this idea. Even less a publisher.
A development studio always wants to do the next thing. They always see forward to what's cool and fun and unique. Both gameplay and technology wise, like graphics and so on.
Publishers, on the other hand, is always after the next money maker. The game that will generate the most money for them. It's the publishers that decides for the developers what they can and cannot do, because it is the publishers that pays for the development.
Developers is constantly strangled by publishers during the initial state of a project, a developer needs to present an idea for a game for a publisher and make them think that their game is the next huge money maker. There is also the kind where a developer is owned by a publisher, and the publisher just "feeds" the developer the next project. Like with some of Electronic Art's studios. More often than not, a movie licensed game or alike. This is more rare though.
There are developers that can do what ever they like, but they are extreeeeemely few. A couple of them are Blizzard Entertainment, Valve and ID Software. What ever these studios want to do, the publishers will say "alright, we trust you guys since you've only made awesome games on your own so far". I don't think either of those studios will be interested in an idea like Carmac presented in his article, since everyone of them is (as I previously mentioned) always thirsty for the next step.
But at the same time, all 3 of the developers I mentioned keeps making game that is perfect for e-sports. So it shouldn't be impossible for them to do new stuff at the same time as dedicating a smaller team to "upgrade" this hypothetical "ultimate game of e-sport".
The bigger problem lies within the money. How will they make money? A new version of FIFA sells millions of copies, but to who? Not e-sporters, surely not. The buyers are obviously football interested people, and they probably doesn't play that many other games except for the sporty ones.
So, take Stacraft 2 for example. If Blizzard were to dedicate a smaller team to upgrade the games graphics and so on to extend the length of SC2's life time in e-sports, who would buy it after the 4th upgrade? It's the same game, same content, same gameplay, same single-player campaign, etc etc. When Starcraft 2 is released it will sell A LOT of copies, a fucken lot. But not even half of them are e-sporters. And probably not even 40% of the buyers are interested in the multiplayer part. And the ones that constantly wants new and refreshing games to play aren't the e-sporters. Heck, e-sporters still play counter-strike and starcraft 1, and those aren't close to new.
The ones that wants the new stuff are the ones buying new games all the time, the ones that play mainly singleplayer, the more casual players. The players that wants to be entertained in new ways. These people won't even buy a second edition of Starcraft 2, unless it offers them something new and refreshing and unique. An upgrade of graphics aren't enough. And to release a full expansion every now and then, with campaigns and maps etc would cost very much money and would requre a VERY dedicated team to keep up with developing for the same game over and over again, especially to remake that Zerg-model again for the 4th time.
This is also the problem for the publishers that publish games for all the other developers out there, they won't see any huge money making in a project like this. Publishers don't know games, and they rarely play games themselves. Ergo, they wouldn't know a thing about e-sports. So why would they see money in this? If one would explain the concept, they would probably say something like what I wrote earlier. That very few people want to buy the same game again, and again, and again. And when it comes to the e-sport part of the game, it isn't the publisher or the developer that gains any money. It's the advertisement. The publisher and the developer only gain money on sales, so that's what the publisher will focus on.
If Carmac's idea were to work, one would have to come up with some kind of partnership between developers, publishers, leagues and the companies that would want to advertise. The problem here is that a publisher will still mainly focus on the sales, and once that is over they will look forward to the next game that will give them more money based on the sales. So there is very little room for e-sports as it renders much less money than the sales of a new hit game.
Still, would be cool if it would be done in some way. I like the idea and with the right game it could work. But, I'm a developer myself and I know I wouldn't want to work on the same game forever =).
Yes, this could potentially work for a game as well but it would still need another game to build on that could create a community base large enough to begin with.
And yeah I agree with you about the possibilities of advertising, but that would mean a huge commitment for the publisher since advertising isn't their main focus to begin with. And they would probably still think that it's more safe to release another new game that sells even more, and THEN try to build a community around it and all that. And then the same thing with another game, because sales brings more money.
The problem with the developer remains as well. Your average development studio doesn't want to work on the same game forever, partly becuase it's boring and partly because of money.
Yes studios like Blizzard continues to support their titles (e.g new heroes for Wc3, patching, etc) but that doesn't make them more money. It's just keeping the game alive so that the Blizzard name is related to great support and a good game. This makes people want to buy their other/coming titles. But it isn't Blizzard that makes money on the advertising in the long run.
I believe this works for Call of Duty as well. Two studios get jobs for CoD X and CoD X+1 simply because the franchise is so popular. Put some effort into making those games good for multiplayer and their esports communities will increase with each new release (and the game will sooner or later be on TV and get air time).
If the actual gameplay where more in focus (like with Gears of War), they would still want to ensure larger amount of sales through adding new features and ideas, which would render it a new game and thus a new e-sport, which is what we wanted to avoid right?
The Call of Duty games are popular but they are still mainly single-player based games, and it's the new campaigns that render good sales since that more or less the only "new" thing about it. The core gameplay is the same, but the content and the campaigns are new and offers the players something new. If the only thing were newer graphics it wouldn't sell as good at all, and it would be really difficult to promote it as well since it doesn't offer anything that's really new.
Adding new features, game styles, options and other content to a game like UT hurts no one. People could still play DM and TDM. The achievements of new champions would be comparable to the achievements of the old ones. All it would take is one person with an idea about how deathmatch actually works that could fix the game without spoiling it for the masses (which is not that hard).
I am not asking for new games to be re-sold in a brighter package. As far as I know, SC2 will be released as three separate campaigns + the same multiplayer component with each. I personally love this idea simply because it will introduce three waves of fresh blood into the community, not one.
Yes, I also think that if you have a base large enough to build on then you can add smaller tweaks to keep it fresh, but it's still difficult for a (current day) publisher or a game developer to see any profit in this since the game won't be sold that much.
I'm also a fan of the Sc2 Triliogy idea. It's a smart thing to releaseone part of the game earlier, so that they can take their time with the rest. Valve did this as well with the HL2 episodes, but these two studios are probably the only ones that could pull it off because of their relation to publishers since the development takes several years between each game/episode.
I agree though that this is a great thing for the community itself. As you said, it will make people pick up the game once more.
But I can't help to wonder if people will do that when it comes to the multiplayer? Will they become so into SC2 as they were when the first part came out that they will once again follow the scene and play alot of multiplayer, or will they just satisfy their SC2-mind with the campaign and then move on?
Anywho, great article none the less Carmac. Keep up the good work!
If not... the esports will never develope.
I don't think a game so much played and so populair will be dropped or there has to be a good reason!
e-Sports forever and further!
he was the best football player...
and btw carmac just use that like an example...
And there is already a replacement coming for Quake which is QuakeLive. And besides that, if anyone ever played Quake 4, the ending never really ends, and you'd have to be stupid to think there wouldn't be a Quake 5 with such an ending.
CS already has CS:S, but when CS:S dies out, we'll probably see something new, like the concept of CPL's Severity, or maybe even CS 2.0
So the point is, something new will always replace the old. Only thing professional gamers just have to keep in mind is this: "You play games for *money*". So if your game is replaced, you are certainly intended to move as well.
On that "future game" point. I agree that there should be one uniting game (rts and fps) . but the updating would be a problem, only people willing to realy do the updating would be the gamers who usually lack the skill, funding or time to do it. If there was a funding for the skilled modders,coders etc. then we might have a "esport game studio inc." that could rise and defeat the lack of updates and the need for a new game every goddamn year.
I remember de_bahrin v2 was a very tactical map. I wonder why doesn't it fit to the players :\
Fisker face!
As for me i will always remember then