So are they banned from playing all games on stream or just some games? Because to me it looks like they still have lots of options to use to fill the gap between queues?
Just not direct competitors to Riot.
I feel like "direct competitors" may be a little broad. "Direct competitors, anything by blizzard, and other games that show up on twitch" seems more accurate, along with the general "we don't want anybody to know our players are over 18" moral bans (I dunno if any LCS players smoke, but not smoking on stream for a lot of hours would actually be a pretty big deal).
Both the smoking and firearms things are ridiculous. I can get porn, because there are actual legal restrictions on presenting that to minors, but firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed American right, and prohibiting stuff related to them is ridiculous. Doubly so in a game in which you shoot people to death all the time. Since the evidence shows violence in video games doesn't matter, that doesn't matter in and of itself, but banning someone from cleaning a target pistol used only to perforate paper in-between rounds of a violent video game is hypocritical as fuck.
Eh, speaking as someone who comes from a more strict country regarding guns I can absolutely see why that's in place. Because guns scare the crap out of me and the whole notion of having a gun collection that isn't just some shitty air rifle you use to keep rabbits under control is a scary notion.
Real guns are scary things that are entirely different to fake guns regardless of context and I can totally understand Riot not wanting to show guns as associated to League in any close manner.
I can see them restricting them from a real life tournament in an area where otherwise their carry would be allowed, but if seeing a gun on a screen is an issue, well, seek psychological counseling.
And FWIW, we need to keep these under control:
It just adds to the ridiculousness of it. Feel free to substitute the bullshit tobacco ban if you like. I don't use it personally, but I know plenty of people who, say, dip while playing video games.
You're missing the point. If a streamer is doing something on stream, they are effectively endorsing it. Guns are a very controversial thing with a very, very negative image so why even open yourself up to the controversy by having it on stream? It's completely unnecessary.
So are they banned from playing all games on stream or just some games? Because to me it looks like they still have lots of options to use to fill the gap between queues?
Just not direct competitors to Riot.
I feel like "direct competitors" may be a little broad. "Direct competitors, anything by blizzard, and other games that show up on twitch" seems more accurate, along with the general "we don't want anybody to know our players are over 18" moral bans (I dunno if any LCS players smoke, but not smoking on stream for a lot of hours would actually be a pretty big deal).
Both the smoking and firearms things are ridiculous. I can get porn, because there are actual legal restrictions on presenting that to minors, but firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed American right, and prohibiting stuff related to them is ridiculous. Doubly so in a game in which you shoot people to death all the time. Since the evidence shows violence in video games doesn't matter, that doesn't matter in and of itself, but banning someone from cleaning a target pistol used only to perforate paper in-between rounds of a violent video game is hypocritical as fuck.
Eh, speaking as someone who comes from a more strict country regarding guns I can absolutely see why that's in place. Because guns scare the crap out of me and the whole notion of having a gun collection that isn't just some shitty air rifle you use to keep rabbits under control is a scary notion.
Real guns are scary things that are entirely different to fake guns regardless of context and I can totally understand Riot not wanting to show guns as associated to League in any close manner.
I can see them restricting them from a real life tournament in an area where otherwise their carry would be allowed, but if seeing a gun on a screen is an issue, well, seek psychological counseling.
And FWIW, we need to keep these under control:
It just adds to the ridiculousness of it. Feel free to substitute the bullshit tobacco ban if you like. I don't use it personally, but I know plenty of people who, say, dip while playing video games.
When you are effectively a payed representative of League of Legends and Riot Games, I think there's nothing wrong with Riot saying:
"Hey, we're trying to cultivate an image and culture and we don't want it poisoned with things people often negatively associate with video games, like guns, alcohol, and tobacco. P.S. please don't advertise shit that undercuts our business as we pay you to live your dream."
TSM seems to be the anomaly there. They all stream for as long as they are awake, and never seem to scrim. QT might play 3-4 games before he goes scrim, and Scarra doesn't stream until afterwards. I think Dignitas might scrim for 8 hours a day, every day.
QT streams a lot more than 3-4 games at a time!
0
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
TSM seems to be the anomaly there. They all stream for as long as they are awake, and never seem to scrim. QT might play 3-4 games before he goes scrim, and Scarra doesn't stream until afterwards. I think Dignitas might scrim for 8 hours a day, every day.
So are they banned from playing all games on stream or just some games? Because to me it looks like they still have lots of options to use to fill the gap between queues?
Just not direct competitors to Riot.
I feel like "direct competitors" may be a little broad. "Direct competitors, anything by blizzard, and other games that show up on twitch" seems more accurate, along with the general "we don't want anybody to know our players are over 18" moral bans (I dunno if any LCS players smoke, but not smoking on stream for a lot of hours would actually be a pretty big deal).
Both the smoking and firearms things are ridiculous. I can get porn, because there are actual legal restrictions on presenting that to minors, but firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed American right, and prohibiting stuff related to them is ridiculous. Doubly so in a game in which you shoot people to death all the time. Since the evidence shows violence in video games doesn't matter, that doesn't matter in and of itself, but banning someone from cleaning a target pistol used only to perforate paper in-between rounds of a violent video game is hypocritical as fuck.
Eh, speaking as someone who comes from a more strict country regarding guns I can absolutely see why that's in place. Because guns scare the crap out of me and the whole notion of having a gun collection that isn't just some shitty air rifle you use to keep rabbits under control is a scary notion.
Real guns are scary things that are entirely different to fake guns regardless of context and I can totally understand Riot not wanting to show guns as associated to League in any close manner.
I can see them restricting them from a real life tournament in an area where otherwise their carry would be allowed, but if seeing a gun on a screen is an issue, well, seek psychological counseling.
And FWIW, we need to keep these under control:
It just adds to the ridiculousness of it. Feel free to substitute the bullshit tobacco ban if you like. I don't use it personally, but I know plenty of people who, say, dip while playing video games.
When you are effectively a payed representative of League of Legends and Riot Games, I think there's nothing wrong with Riot saying:
"Hey, we're trying to cultivate an image and culture and we don't want it poisoned with things people often negatively associate with video games, like guns, alcohol, and tobacco. P.S. please don't advertise shit that undercuts our business as we pay you to live your dream."
How much are Riot actually paying? If they are paying for an entire occupation's worth of wages and benefits, I mind substantially less than any other scenario.
Also, the idea that guns, alcohol, and tobacco limit business potential, well, [citation needed]. Particularly among young males, who are the main demographic.
TSM seems to be the anomaly there. They all stream for as long as they are awake, and never seem to scrim. QT might play 3-4 games before he goes scrim, and Scarra doesn't stream until afterwards. I think Dignitas might scrim for 8 hours a day, every day.
QT streams a lot more than 3-4 games at a time!
I only ever see him stream a few ranked with a Dominion or two before he calls it a day. I don't watch him every day, but it always seems like he doesn't play all that much.
So are they banned from playing all games on stream or just some games? Because to me it looks like they still have lots of options to use to fill the gap between queues?
Just not direct competitors to Riot.
I feel like "direct competitors" may be a little broad. "Direct competitors, anything by blizzard, and other games that show up on twitch" seems more accurate, along with the general "we don't want anybody to know our players are over 18" moral bans (I dunno if any LCS players smoke, but not smoking on stream for a lot of hours would actually be a pretty big deal).
Both the smoking and firearms things are ridiculous. I can get porn, because there are actual legal restrictions on presenting that to minors, but firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed American right, and prohibiting stuff related to them is ridiculous. Doubly so in a game in which you shoot people to death all the time. Since the evidence shows violence in video games doesn't matter, that doesn't matter in and of itself, but banning someone from cleaning a target pistol used only to perforate paper in-between rounds of a violent video game is hypocritical as fuck.
Eh, speaking as someone who comes from a more strict country regarding guns I can absolutely see why that's in place. Because guns scare the crap out of me and the whole notion of having a gun collection that isn't just some shitty air rifle you use to keep rabbits under control is a scary notion.
Real guns are scary things that are entirely different to fake guns regardless of context and I can totally understand Riot not wanting to show guns as associated to League in any close manner.
I can see them restricting them from a real life tournament in an area where otherwise their carry would be allowed, but if seeing a gun on a screen is an issue, well, seek psychological counseling.
And FWIW, we need to keep these under control:
It just adds to the ridiculousness of it. Feel free to substitute the bullshit tobacco ban if you like. I don't use it personally, but I know plenty of people who, say, dip while playing video games.
When you are effectively a payed representative of League of Legends and Riot Games, I think there's nothing wrong with Riot saying:
"Hey, we're trying to cultivate an image and culture and we don't want it poisoned with things people often negatively associate with video games, like guns, alcohol, and tobacco. P.S. please don't advertise shit that undercuts our business as we pay you to live your dream."
How much are Riot actually paying? If they are paying for an entire occupation's worth of wages and benefits, I mind substantially less than any other scenario.
Also, the idea that guns, alcohol, and tobacco limit business potential, well, [citation needed]. Particularly among young males, who are the main demographic.
Last year Riot announced a $100k salary for players.
as for drugs, guns and alcohol, you really don't understand why a company that is trying to appeal to a broad base would steer away from these things? really?
Last year Riot announced a $100k salary for players.
as for drugs, guns and alcohol, you really don't understand why a company that is trying to appeal to a broad base would steer away from these things? really?
Alcohol isn't on the list. And FWIW, if a player has a doctor diagnosed disability and takes a prescribed medicine within proper parameters, that violates the contract, which may make it illegal under the ADA. The guns thing is vaguely politicalish among silly geese, but I'm convinced said geese make up <1% of Riot's revenue. And again, my main criticism is from a labor rights perspective, but it's just a tape worm cherry on a shit sandwich.
So are they banned from playing all games on stream or just some games? Because to me it looks like they still have lots of options to use to fill the gap between queues?
Just not direct competitors to Riot.
I feel like "direct competitors" may be a little broad. "Direct competitors, anything by blizzard, and other games that show up on twitch" seems more accurate, along with the general "we don't want anybody to know our players are over 18" moral bans (I dunno if any LCS players smoke, but not smoking on stream for a lot of hours would actually be a pretty big deal).
Both the smoking and firearms things are ridiculous. I can get porn, because there are actual legal restrictions on presenting that to minors, but firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed American right, and prohibiting stuff related to them is ridiculous. Doubly so in a game in which you shoot people to death all the time. Since the evidence shows violence in video games doesn't matter, that doesn't matter in and of itself, but banning someone from cleaning a target pistol used only to perforate paper in-between rounds of a violent video game is hypocritical as fuck.
Eh, speaking as someone who comes from a more strict country regarding guns I can absolutely see why that's in place. Because guns scare the crap out of me and the whole notion of having a gun collection that isn't just some shitty air rifle you use to keep rabbits under control is a scary notion.
Real guns are scary things that are entirely different to fake guns regardless of context and I can totally understand Riot not wanting to show guns as associated to League in any close manner.
I can see them restricting them from a real life tournament in an area where otherwise their carry would be allowed, but if seeing a gun on a screen is an issue, well, seek psychological counseling.
And FWIW, we need to keep these under control:
It just adds to the ridiculousness of it. Feel free to substitute the bullshit tobacco ban if you like. I don't use it personally, but I know plenty of people who, say, dip while playing video games.
When you are effectively a payed representative of League of Legends and Riot Games, I think there's nothing wrong with Riot saying:
"Hey, we're trying to cultivate an image and culture and we don't want it poisoned with things people often negatively associate with video games, like guns, alcohol, and tobacco. P.S. please don't advertise shit that undercuts our business as we pay you to live your dream."
How much are Riot actually paying? If they are paying for an entire occupation's worth of wages and benefits, I mind substantially less than any other scenario.
Also, the idea that guns, alcohol, and tobacco limit business potential, well, [citation needed]. Particularly among young males, who are the main demographic.
They pay enough for the dudes to do it full time
EDIT: do you not watch any news where random TV commentator talks about how horrible GTA is, and how video games beget violence, and so on and on.
So are they banned from playing all games on stream or just some games? Because to me it looks like they still have lots of options to use to fill the gap between queues?
Just not direct competitors to Riot.
I feel like "direct competitors" may be a little broad. "Direct competitors, anything by blizzard, and other games that show up on twitch" seems more accurate, along with the general "we don't want anybody to know our players are over 18" moral bans (I dunno if any LCS players smoke, but not smoking on stream for a lot of hours would actually be a pretty big deal).
Both the smoking and firearms things are ridiculous. I can get porn, because there are actual legal restrictions on presenting that to minors, but firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed American right, and prohibiting stuff related to them is ridiculous. Doubly so in a game in which you shoot people to death all the time. Since the evidence shows violence in video games doesn't matter, that doesn't matter in and of itself, but banning someone from cleaning a target pistol used only to perforate paper in-between rounds of a violent video game is hypocritical as fuck.
Eh, speaking as someone who comes from a more strict country regarding guns I can absolutely see why that's in place. Because guns scare the crap out of me and the whole notion of having a gun collection that isn't just some shitty air rifle you use to keep rabbits under control is a scary notion.
Real guns are scary things that are entirely different to fake guns regardless of context and I can totally understand Riot not wanting to show guns as associated to League in any close manner.
I can see them restricting them from a real life tournament in an area where otherwise their carry would be allowed, but if seeing a gun on a screen is an issue, well, seek psychological counseling.
And FWIW, we need to keep these under control:
It just adds to the ridiculousness of it. Feel free to substitute the bullshit tobacco ban if you like. I don't use it personally, but I know plenty of people who, say, dip while playing video games.
When you are effectively a payed representative of League of Legends and Riot Games, I think there's nothing wrong with Riot saying:
"Hey, we're trying to cultivate an image and culture and we don't want it poisoned with things people often negatively associate with video games, like guns, alcohol, and tobacco. P.S. please don't advertise shit that undercuts our business as we pay you to live your dream."
How much are Riot actually paying? If they are paying for an entire occupation's worth of wages and benefits, I mind substantially less than any other scenario.
Also, the idea that guns, alcohol, and tobacco limit business potential, well, [citation needed]. Particularly among young males, who are the main demographic.
They pay enough for the dudes to do it full time
They pay less than what most of the prominent streamers make off of streaming.
Personally, I don't even mind the player's side of the equation though, which is what the thread seems to be focusing on. I just find it a little gross when you contrast the extensive amount of time and effort Riot devoted to talking about growing esports during the last season with them actively trying to stifle competing games.
Last year Riot announced a $100k salary for players.
as for drugs, guns and alcohol, you really don't understand why a company that is trying to appeal to a broad base would steer away from these things? really?
Alcohol isn't on the list. And FWIW, if a player has a doctor diagnosed disability and takes a prescribed medicine within proper parameters, that violates the contract, which may make it illegal under the ADA. The guns thing is vaguely politicalish among silly geese, but I'm convinced said geese make up <1% of Riot's revenue. And again, my main criticism is from a labor rights perspective, but it's just a tape worm cherry on a shit sandwich.
I seriously doubt the contract stops them from taking medication on air.
And FWIW, if a player has a doctor diagnosed disability and takes a prescribed medicine within proper parameters, that violates the contract, which may make it illegal under the ADA. The guns thing is vaguely politicalish among silly geese, but I'm convinced said geese make up <1% of Riot's revenue. And again, my main criticism is from a labor rights perspective, but it's just a tape worm cherry on a shit sandwich.
Uh, no. If they do it on stream it does. Who the fuck takes medicine on stream? Why would you ever want to?
And FWIW, if a player has a doctor diagnosed disability and takes a prescribed medicine within proper parameters, that violates the contract, which may make it illegal under the ADA. The guns thing is vaguely politicalish among silly geese, but I'm convinced said geese make up <1% of Riot's revenue. And again, my main criticism is from a labor rights perspective, but it's just a tape worm cherry on a shit sandwich.
Uh, no. If they do it on stream it does. Who the fuck takes medicine on stream? Why would you ever want to?
Aw yeah son, going to be tripping on that 6-mercaptopurizzle on stream. Seriously thougn, I don't think that Riot would even care if a player happened to take some prescribed medicine on their stream, unless it was like medicinal pot or something.
So are they banned from playing all games on stream or just some games? Because to me it looks like they still have lots of options to use to fill the gap between queues?
Just not direct competitors to Riot.
I feel like "direct competitors" may be a little broad. "Direct competitors, anything by blizzard, and other games that show up on twitch" seems more accurate, along with the general "we don't want anybody to know our players are over 18" moral bans (I dunno if any LCS players smoke, but not smoking on stream for a lot of hours would actually be a pretty big deal).
Both the smoking and firearms things are ridiculous. I can get porn, because there are actual legal restrictions on presenting that to minors, but firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed American right, and prohibiting stuff related to them is ridiculous. Doubly so in a game in which you shoot people to death all the time. Since the evidence shows violence in video games doesn't matter, that doesn't matter in and of itself, but banning someone from cleaning a target pistol used only to perforate paper in-between rounds of a violent video game is hypocritical as fuck.
Eh, speaking as someone who comes from a more strict country regarding guns I can absolutely see why that's in place. Because guns scare the crap out of me and the whole notion of having a gun collection that isn't just some shitty air rifle you use to keep rabbits under control is a scary notion.
Real guns are scary things that are entirely different to fake guns regardless of context and I can totally understand Riot not wanting to show guns as associated to League in any close manner.
I can see them restricting them from a real life tournament in an area where otherwise their carry would be allowed, but if seeing a gun on a screen is an issue, well, seek psychological counseling.
And FWIW, we need to keep these under control:
It just adds to the ridiculousness of it. Feel free to substitute the bullshit tobacco ban if you like. I don't use it personally, but I know plenty of people who, say, dip while playing video games.
When you are effectively a payed representative of League of Legends and Riot Games, I think there's nothing wrong with Riot saying:
"Hey, we're trying to cultivate an image and culture and we don't want it poisoned with things people often negatively associate with video games, like guns, alcohol, and tobacco. P.S. please don't advertise shit that undercuts our business as we pay you to live your dream."
How much are Riot actually paying? If they are paying for an entire occupation's worth of wages and benefits, I mind substantially less than any other scenario.
Also, the idea that guns, alcohol, and tobacco limit business potential, well, [citation needed]. Particularly among young males, who are the main demographic.
They pay enough for the dudes to do it full time
They pay less than what most of the prominent streamers make off of streaming.
Personally, I don't even mind the player's side of the equation though, which is what the thread seems to be focusing on. I just find it a little gross when you contrast the extensive amount of time and effort Riot devoted to talking about growing esports during the last season with them actively trying to stifle competing games.
They are doing a fairly good job of stifling league as well to be fair.
Them not letting anyone else create a proper league is keeping the scene way smaller than it could be.
Personally, I don't even mind the player's side of the equation though, which is what the thread seems to be focusing on. I just find it a little gross when you contrast the extensive amount of time and effort Riot devoted to talking about growing esports during the last season with them actively trying to stifle competing games.
? When Riot says growing esports, they mean growing their esport. Same shit with Blizzard and Kespa. Blizzard doesn't want SC2 to be a popular esport out of the goodness of their heart, that's why they fucked with SC2 hard enough (always online for your pleasure!) to screw over Kespa and take complete control of the esport aspect of it. Does League getting big help legitimize other competitive games? Yes. But that's a side effect. Riot's not some kind of evil hive mind that wants to destroy all competition, this is about salaried contractors working for them not advertising competing products to the public. When [sports player] who works for [sports team] that has a promotional deal with Coke goes to sit on the bench during a game you think he's going to put on a Pepsi hat? You think he's going to have a Pepsi hat on during interviews? During any public, recorded appearance? Of course not.
And FWIW, if a player has a doctor diagnosed disability and takes a prescribed medicine within proper parameters, that violates the contract, which may make it illegal under the ADA. The guns thing is vaguely politicalish among silly geese, but I'm convinced said geese make up <1% of Riot's revenue. And again, my main criticism is from a labor rights perspective, but it's just a tape worm cherry on a shit sandwich.
Uh, no. If they do it on stream it does. Who the fuck takes medicine on stream? Why would you ever want to?
If I had to take medicine before dinner every day and did the constant stream w/ webcam thing, you'd bet I'd taken medicine on stream not as any protest against The Man, but purely because it would be in my computer desk drawer, like the prescription medicine I have (which is like 800 mg Ibuprofen. SRS BSNS) is right as I type!!!!
So are they banned from playing all games on stream or just some games? Because to me it looks like they still have lots of options to use to fill the gap between queues?
Just not direct competitors to Riot.
I feel like "direct competitors" may be a little broad. "Direct competitors, anything by blizzard, and other games that show up on twitch" seems more accurate, along with the general "we don't want anybody to know our players are over 18" moral bans (I dunno if any LCS players smoke, but not smoking on stream for a lot of hours would actually be a pretty big deal).
Both the smoking and firearms things are ridiculous. I can get porn, because there are actual legal restrictions on presenting that to minors, but firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed American right, and prohibiting stuff related to them is ridiculous. Doubly so in a game in which you shoot people to death all the time. Since the evidence shows violence in video games doesn't matter, that doesn't matter in and of itself, but banning someone from cleaning a target pistol used only to perforate paper in-between rounds of a violent video game is hypocritical as fuck.
Eh, speaking as someone who comes from a more strict country regarding guns I can absolutely see why that's in place. Because guns scare the crap out of me and the whole notion of having a gun collection that isn't just some shitty air rifle you use to keep rabbits under control is a scary notion.
Real guns are scary things that are entirely different to fake guns regardless of context and I can totally understand Riot not wanting to show guns as associated to League in any close manner.
I can see them restricting them from a real life tournament in an area where otherwise their carry would be allowed, but if seeing a gun on a screen is an issue, well, seek psychological counseling.
And FWIW, we need to keep these under control:
It just adds to the ridiculousness of it. Feel free to substitute the bullshit tobacco ban if you like. I don't use it personally, but I know plenty of people who, say, dip while playing video games.
When you are effectively a payed representative of League of Legends and Riot Games, I think there's nothing wrong with Riot saying:
"Hey, we're trying to cultivate an image and culture and we don't want it poisoned with things people often negatively associate with video games, like guns, alcohol, and tobacco. P.S. please don't advertise shit that undercuts our business as we pay you to live your dream."
How much are Riot actually paying? If they are paying for an entire occupation's worth of wages and benefits, I mind substantially less than any other scenario.
Also, the idea that guns, alcohol, and tobacco limit business potential, well, [citation needed]. Particularly among young males, who are the main demographic.
They pay enough for the dudes to do it full time
EDIT: do you not watch any news where random TV commentator talks about how horrible GTA is, and how video games beget violence, and so on and on.
People largely stopped taking that seriously when Jack Thompson went out of style. Besides, Riot should take a proactive position much like Newegg does with patent trolls. If it's not a matter of being in the red vs. in the black, supporting your own industry by fighting against the barbarous enemy forces is a morally commendable act, and likely fairly profitable due to your customer base (video game players) caring a lot about it, whereas people who think violent video games are bad are as worthless as militant vegans to a steakhouse.
If the 25K figure is accurate, that's not enough to do it full time. That's a supplement at best, and while supplementing income is nice and all, it doesn't entitle you to dictate unrelated economic actions.
they're doing a good... job... of... stifling... league.
dude.
The game is insanely popular despite their strategies, not because of it.
They have restricted it a tiny amount of teams, with terrible commentators and horrible analysts. Overall, good production values, but not really getting anything done with them. They prevent other organisations from making events with the game, to make sure it is all concentrated to the LCS. If they just let other people sponsor and make events they could probably have twice as many teams competetively active at least, probably more looking at the dota 2 scene, which supports more than that with less money flowing around.
they're doing a good... job... of... stifling... league.
dude.
The game is insanely popular despite their strategies, not because of it.
They have restricted it a tiny amount of teams, with terrible commentators and horrible analysts. Overall, good production values, but not really getting anything done with them. They prevent other organisations from making events with the game, to make sure it is all concentrated to the LCS. If they just let other people sponsor and make events they could probably have twice as many teams competetively active at least, probably more looking at the dota 2 scene, which supports more than that with less money flowing around.
And FWIW, if a player has a doctor diagnosed disability and takes a prescribed medicine within proper parameters, that violates the contract, which may make it illegal under the ADA. The guns thing is vaguely politicalish among silly geese, but I'm convinced said geese make up <1% of Riot's revenue. And again, my main criticism is from a labor rights perspective, but it's just a tape worm cherry on a shit sandwich.
Uh, no. If they do it on stream it does. Who the fuck takes medicine on stream? Why would you ever want to?
If I had to take medicine before dinner every day and did the constant stream w/ webcam thing, you'd bet I'd taken medicine on stream not as any protest against The Man, but purely because it would be in my computer desk drawer, like the prescription medicine I have (which is like 800 mg Ibuprofen. SRS BSNS) is right as I type!!!!
Why wouldn't you take the medication before starting the steam?
So are they banned from playing all games on stream or just some games? Because to me it looks like they still have lots of options to use to fill the gap between queues?
Just not direct competitors to Riot.
I feel like "direct competitors" may be a little broad. "Direct competitors, anything by blizzard, and other games that show up on twitch" seems more accurate, along with the general "we don't want anybody to know our players are over 18" moral bans (I dunno if any LCS players smoke, but not smoking on stream for a lot of hours would actually be a pretty big deal).
Both the smoking and firearms things are ridiculous. I can get porn, because there are actual legal restrictions on presenting that to minors, but firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed American right, and prohibiting stuff related to them is ridiculous. Doubly so in a game in which you shoot people to death all the time. Since the evidence shows violence in video games doesn't matter, that doesn't matter in and of itself, but banning someone from cleaning a target pistol used only to perforate paper in-between rounds of a violent video game is hypocritical as fuck.
Eh, speaking as someone who comes from a more strict country regarding guns I can absolutely see why that's in place. Because guns scare the crap out of me and the whole notion of having a gun collection that isn't just some shitty air rifle you use to keep rabbits under control is a scary notion.
Real guns are scary things that are entirely different to fake guns regardless of context and I can totally understand Riot not wanting to show guns as associated to League in any close manner.
I can see them restricting them from a real life tournament in an area where otherwise their carry would be allowed, but if seeing a gun on a screen is an issue, well, seek psychological counseling.
And FWIW, we need to keep these under control:
It just adds to the ridiculousness of it. Feel free to substitute the bullshit tobacco ban if you like. I don't use it personally, but I know plenty of people who, say, dip while playing video games.
When you are effectively a payed representative of League of Legends and Riot Games, I think there's nothing wrong with Riot saying:
"Hey, we're trying to cultivate an image and culture and we don't want it poisoned with things people often negatively associate with video games, like guns, alcohol, and tobacco. P.S. please don't advertise shit that undercuts our business as we pay you to live your dream."
How much are Riot actually paying? If they are paying for an entire occupation's worth of wages and benefits, I mind substantially less than any other scenario.
Also, the idea that guns, alcohol, and tobacco limit business potential, well, [citation needed]. Particularly among young males, who are the main demographic.
They pay enough for the dudes to do it full time
They pay less than what most of the prominent streamers make off of streaming.
Personally, I don't even mind the player's side of the equation though, which is what the thread seems to be focusing on. I just find it a little gross when you contrast the extensive amount of time and effort Riot devoted to talking about growing esports during the last season with them actively trying to stifle competing games.
They are doing a fairly good job of stifling league as well to be fair.
Them not letting anyone else create a proper league is keeping the scene way smaller than it could be.
This is true of all major competitive sports leagues. If you look at the Season 3 world championships, there are some incredibly one sided matches. There simply isn't a deep enough talent pool to insure top level play if they expand the league. Would people watch lower quality players? Possibly. But quality control isn't just about locking out competitors, it's about trying to make sure your product is good in the long run and that your fans don't get sick of your game from watching crappy matches.
Sceptre: Penny Arcade, where you get starcraft AND marriage advice.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
they're doing a good... job... of... stifling... league.
dude.
The game is insanely popular despite their strategies, not because of it.
They have restricted it a tiny amount of teams, with terrible commentators and horrible analysts. Overall, good production values, but not really getting anything done with them. They prevent other organisations from making events with the game, to make sure it is all concentrated to the LCS. If they just let other people sponsor and make events they could probably have twice as many teams competetively active at least, probably more looking at the dota 2 scene, which supports more than that with less money flowing around.
I am sorry, just no. You can't say something like that at all. I cant even begin to imagine why you would think that riots strategy is harmful. I doubt just by happen chance the game survive and goes from 2 million unique viewers for worlds to 8 million in a year. That is crazy talk. Riot does what they believe is best for the game. do I like the idea of limitign streamers to what they can do on stream. Hell NO. Its a dick move and I can't defend it.
HOWEVER the idea that dispite riots efforts to 'stifle the game, aside from, jungle changes, vision changes, map changes, visual updates, new and interesting champions. That is really just the player base making the game popular. That is crazy talk.
Looking at it again, with the way non-"over the counter" drugs is written I'm assuming it means shit like pot. Not prescription stuff.
Honestly, I don't think any of us know enough about contract law to know if this is enforceable or not. I would love to see a player's union, as I do think the current talent pool has something special to offer an audience. Beyond that though, it's all speculation on our part.
Sceptre: Penny Arcade, where you get starcraft AND marriage advice.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
I wonder if it'd be possible for them to do smurf streams as a compromise. Like, their main stream page that Riot might link to is just for League, and then they could have a alternate account/feed for when they're playing anything else.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
I think I'm missing something in this conversation.
What's the specific issue with Riot saying to people that it's employing "Hey, while you're doing the thing that we're paying you to do, don't do stuff that will make us look bad, and don't give our competition advertising?"
I think I'm missing something in this conversation.
What's the specific issue with Riot saying to people that it's employing "Hey, while you're doing the thing that we're paying you to do, don't do stuff that will make us look bad, and don't give our competition advertising?"
The question is whether or not the action of streaming takes place as 1) a representative of Riot or 2) a representative/endorser of the other product. See my post on the previous page. If they wanted to play Street Fighter at an arcade and someone took video of them, that's fine. If they want to broadcast themselves playing Street Fighter and get paid for it, is that significantly different? I think so, but that's the question at hand.
Edit: Quite honestly, we have a lot of problems with the way labor and labor contracts work in this country. The screwy contracts that entertainers sign is just icing on the cake.
Dropping Loads on
Sceptre: Penny Arcade, where you get starcraft AND marriage advice.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
There's nothing screwy about this. If you work for company X you shouldn't be making money off of company Y's product in front of thousands of people.
That point of view represents the company's interests above that of the individual, which hasn't really been that great for society for the last 30 years. It's a labor vs. capital issue, and better reserved for D&D than the LoL forum. I brought it up to indicate that there ISN'T anything weird about this specific employment contract, but there IS something weird about the way we think about employment contracts in modern life.
Sceptre: Penny Arcade, where you get starcraft AND marriage advice.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
Posts
You're missing the point. If a streamer is doing something on stream, they are effectively endorsing it. Guns are a very controversial thing with a very, very negative image so why even open yourself up to the controversy by having it on stream? It's completely unnecessary.
https://www.youtube.com/user/StandardQK/videos
When you are effectively a payed representative of League of Legends and Riot Games, I think there's nothing wrong with Riot saying:
"Hey, we're trying to cultivate an image and culture and we don't want it poisoned with things people often negatively associate with video games, like guns, alcohol, and tobacco. P.S. please don't advertise shit that undercuts our business as we pay you to live your dream."
QT streams a lot more than 3-4 games at a time!
qt also plays intense god hands on streams
How much are Riot actually paying? If they are paying for an entire occupation's worth of wages and benefits, I mind substantially less than any other scenario.
Also, the idea that guns, alcohol, and tobacco limit business potential, well, [citation needed]. Particularly among young males, who are the main demographic.
I only ever see him stream a few ranked with a Dominion or two before he calls it a day. I don't watch him every day, but it always seems like he doesn't play all that much.
Last year Riot announced a $100k salary for players.
as for drugs, guns and alcohol, you really don't understand why a company that is trying to appeal to a broad base would steer away from these things? really?
Joe's Stream.
As evidenced by the people who have posted in this thread saying that they don't have a problem, no.
well meh meh meh haven't gone through everything yet.
If that's accurate, that's garbage, and fuck them.
Alcohol isn't on the list. And FWIW, if a player has a doctor diagnosed disability and takes a prescribed medicine within proper parameters, that violates the contract, which may make it illegal under the ADA. The guns thing is vaguely politicalish among silly geese, but I'm convinced said geese make up <1% of Riot's revenue. And again, my main criticism is from a labor rights perspective, but it's just a tape worm cherry on a shit sandwich.
They pay enough for the dudes to do it full time
EDIT: do you not watch any news where random TV commentator talks about how horrible GTA is, and how video games beget violence, and so on and on.
They pay less than what most of the prominent streamers make off of streaming.
Personally, I don't even mind the player's side of the equation though, which is what the thread seems to be focusing on. I just find it a little gross when you contrast the extensive amount of time and effort Riot devoted to talking about growing esports during the last season with them actively trying to stifle competing games.
Steam: Drokmir
That being said it makes for a shitty show.
Steam: Drokmir
They are doing a fairly good job of stifling league as well to be fair.
Them not letting anyone else create a proper league is keeping the scene way smaller than it could be.
If I had to take medicine before dinner every day and did the constant stream w/ webcam thing, you'd bet I'd taken medicine on stream not as any protest against The Man, but purely because it would be in my computer desk drawer, like the prescription medicine I have (which is like 800 mg Ibuprofen. SRS BSNS) is right as I type!!!!
People largely stopped taking that seriously when Jack Thompson went out of style. Besides, Riot should take a proactive position much like Newegg does with patent trolls. If it's not a matter of being in the red vs. in the black, supporting your own industry by fighting against the barbarous enemy forces is a morally commendable act, and likely fairly profitable due to your customer base (video game players) caring a lot about it, whereas people who think violent video games are bad are as worthless as militant vegans to a steakhouse.
If the 25K figure is accurate, that's not enough to do it full time. That's a supplement at best, and while supplementing income is nice and all, it doesn't entitle you to dictate unrelated economic actions.
dude.
Joe's Stream.
The game is insanely popular despite their strategies, not because of it.
They have restricted it a tiny amount of teams, with terrible commentators and horrible analysts. Overall, good production values, but not really getting anything done with them. They prevent other organisations from making events with the game, to make sure it is all concentrated to the LCS. If they just let other people sponsor and make events they could probably have twice as many teams competetively active at least, probably more looking at the dota 2 scene, which supports more than that with less money flowing around.
stahp
Joe's Stream.
Why wouldn't you take the medication before starting the steam?
This is true of all major competitive sports leagues. If you look at the Season 3 world championships, there are some incredibly one sided matches. There simply isn't a deep enough talent pool to insure top level play if they expand the league. Would people watch lower quality players? Possibly. But quality control isn't just about locking out competitors, it's about trying to make sure your product is good in the long run and that your fans don't get sick of your game from watching crappy matches.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
I am sorry, just no. You can't say something like that at all. I cant even begin to imagine why you would think that riots strategy is harmful. I doubt just by happen chance the game survive and goes from 2 million unique viewers for worlds to 8 million in a year. That is crazy talk. Riot does what they believe is best for the game. do I like the idea of limitign streamers to what they can do on stream. Hell NO. Its a dick move and I can't defend it.
HOWEVER the idea that dispite riots efforts to 'stifle the game, aside from, jungle changes, vision changes, map changes, visual updates, new and interesting champions. That is really just the player base making the game popular. That is crazy talk.
Its true. LoL just materialized out of the Aether and Riot snatched it up first.
Honestly, I don't think any of us know enough about contract law to know if this is enforceable or not. I would love to see a player's union, as I do think the current talent pool has something special to offer an audience. Beyond that though, it's all speculation on our part.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
What's the specific issue with Riot saying to people that it's employing "Hey, while you're doing the thing that we're paying you to do, don't do stuff that will make us look bad, and don't give our competition advertising?"
The question is whether or not the action of streaming takes place as 1) a representative of Riot or 2) a representative/endorser of the other product. See my post on the previous page. If they wanted to play Street Fighter at an arcade and someone took video of them, that's fine. If they want to broadcast themselves playing Street Fighter and get paid for it, is that significantly different? I think so, but that's the question at hand.
Edit: Quite honestly, we have a lot of problems with the way labor and labor contracts work in this country. The screwy contracts that entertainers sign is just icing on the cake.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
That point of view represents the company's interests above that of the individual, which hasn't really been that great for society for the last 30 years. It's a labor vs. capital issue, and better reserved for D&D than the LoL forum. I brought it up to indicate that there ISN'T anything weird about this specific employment contract, but there IS something weird about the way we think about employment contracts in modern life.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.