Approve already! It's from Alchemist! =D

duno how fox could fuck up that hard on hub3. but on the other side, zero4 showed really crazy gameplay!

z4 is goot

wow zero4 the legend killer

like killer raping cypher on dm6

zero4 < jaedong

true

JAEDONG FTW.

fox, one of the VERY BEST hub players, and Z4 one of the worst (at high level) hub players, and such an outcome :o

griffin commented in one of the sk videos that he couldn't fathom why z4 keeps performing poorly on hub in tournament. He said something like ..online z4 is unbeatable on hub. Given that he reportedly plays with all the other best players in usa (cept walter :P), that is quite impressive. So who knows why his performances haven't been great up to this point. O yeh, he also had a nice game where he beats avek on hub.

"..online z4 is unbeatable on hub"

ALL XERP!!

probably because i stopped trying and caring. i'm not saying he wouldn't have won it, just explaining the score.

aye that was pretty obvious

z4 is a very good hub player but I think this is a poor example of that (and not just because he rolled you) :(

You are a model sportsman.

i'm sure football players wouldn't complain if they had to play the world championships knee-deep in mud

And? It didn't stop your opponents from trying/caring to play against you.

i can only speak on my behalf and personally all the prestige and glory went out the window when they selected these monitors. others may still have had the urge to play, i didn't.

were they that bad? :(

they were for sure the worst monitors i've ever tried, including laptop displays. it was painful aiming worse than you did in 2001.

I call bs since you did beat him on ztn and z4's ztn is up there with the best. so yea, if you didn't care so much why'd you even play that first map? you simply lost it at some point and that's it.








considering it's on shitty monitors

while everyone did have to go through the same thing, i'd say the monitors really restricted certain players from playing at their potential. jibo's LG throughout the tournament was rather weak compared to how it is usually.

Agreed.
Some players are able to adapt and able to play without thinking about the shitty monitors, other players just think too much about it and it distracts them from the game.
I think this is one of the reasons why killsen managed to become second.

true. i used to underperform heavily when my mousepad was to sweaty or such stuff

I agree it should be about who's best at q3 and not who's best at adapting to crap hardware. But if it did distract him so much he wouldn't have beaten z4 on ztn would he?

was nod9 not ztn ..

ZeRo4's nodm9 is up there with the best as well (he destroyed cooller on it), so np.

To be fair it's already very hard to keep the kind of mindset required to comeback on a spawn-unfriendly map like hub, not least against a ZeRo4 caliber player, so I can imagine with an obvious setup problem like the monitors one could easily give up and think fuck this I didn't train to play on these monitors.

Plus didn't fox /quit a map he was losing in another tournament this year? I'd say his personality doesn't suit playing in the worst conditions in the same way as other people's might.

I think fox is just saying that after a point he got frustrated with the playing conditions and stopped trying on this map. I think that is understandable given the reported performance of the hardware though perhaps not admirable. Note that he said he is only trying to explain the scoreline, not claim that he would've won in other conditions. Whether he performed well on another map is irrelevant to his explanation of the scoreline on this map as far as I can see.

who needs tweaked cpma when everybody can own half-arsed lcd's :P

http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&a...&ph=12

the two monitors used; dells for tournament area and samsungs on stage. quite obvious what is a good lcd and what is a crappy one. avg 69ms mouse-delay, hello?

strange, I didn't notice any lag while watching gtv on my 120hz crt .

/facepalm

ouch. That dell gets nice reviews, but it's known for it's input lag. Sucks bro

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnApFzmd9NY

I believe most of the players knew what the monitors would be like before the tournament. Did you?

just because ppl knew that they will be shit doesn't make them any better, or the tournament.

No, but he has played on those monitors before (or very similar, at QCon). Either you enter and play all the way through or you don't do it at all.

There are people that stayed up all night just to watch their favourite player play. There are people that went across the ocean to play, not to receive forfeit losses. The least a player could do is show his opponents and his fans respect to put a bit of effort into playing a half hour more.

good point

you could turn it around and say that players, having spent countless hours perfecting their skill, traveling across the world only to get pissed on by organizers who take the easiest route (dell probably jumped in their lap and wanted to supply monitors)

sure the players are crybabies, but i would be pissed as well if the most important tournament of the year got ruined for no good reason

You could, but if you already think you will lose and there is no point in competing, then why even bother at all? I am sure most teams would not like that kind of representation, to have their players labeled as quitters.

I am not saying I do not understand fox or noctis's standpoints, but in a wider context I think they should have taken the effort to play their last two or three maps. Even if they meant nothing to them, they meant a lot to everyone around them.

You could, but if you already think you will lose and there is no point in competing, then why even bother at all? I am sure most teams would not like that kind of representation, to have their players labeled as quitters.

Is there a specific agenda behind repeatedly spinning this fairly minor incident into something it wasn't? You tell it as though fox looked up the monitor model online in Sweden and then thought 'fuck it, I'll go anyway and waste some sponsor money on a free plane ride despite the fact I have no desire to compete at my peak level'

Take your comment and think about it from this perspective: what organization with the progression of esports as an ideal would want a player who goes to events and then loses despite sub-par equipment being a factor and then says nothing about it? Your comment doesn't even make much sense bearing in mind there's next to nobody his sponsors could have selected instead who would stand a better chance at that event than even a 75% motivated fox who would give up if he got frustrated at a mixture of good play from the best American Q3 dueler of all time and using technology which doesn't deserve to be in the 21st century at a gaming event.

It's too bad us lesser mortals have to settle for imagining things from others' perspectives, what with lacking your rare omniscience. Whether you as a player would play on in a match you are 95% certain to lose is entirely a different matter as to whether or not fox realised his chances of success at ESWC were quickly narrowing to slim to none, combined with his frustration at the equipment, and then decided to relent as opposed to expend all of his energy losing by 10 frags.

You may not want to believe it but playing some Q3 matches at ESWC where you are highly likely to lose isn't quite on par with some high profile professional sports event where your only job is to give 100% and talking back against the organization will have a massively negative impact on your career.

It's not like if he'd been winning he'd have missed some standard rails or died due to undershafting and then thrown the game like a prima donna.

And TBH pleasing you by playing out a pointless map or two shouldn't be high on fox's priorities, what does he owe you in particular? You got to see more Fox games than if he had stayed at home due to not wanting to play on those monitors at all, that kind of crumbles your own argument:

Either you enter and play all the way through or you don't do it at all.

The world isn't black and white, you don't have to do one or the other. There are a multitude of options, one could play 3 maps of a tournament then quit, one could drop one map then come back in the rest revitalized. You seem to be mistaking real life for a hollywood movie from the 50s where all decisions are good/bad, right/wrong, honourable/dishonourable or to be lauded/to be chastised.

Thanks, Jamerio, my times of spending time to respond to 50 paragraphs of a comment on ESR, let alone reading them, are over.

You've succeeded in trolling it with the best of them. A few feeble attempts to deflect, ignore or spin some pretty reasonable points and now you're down to calling me Jamerio because I took the time to articulate my thoughts on something related to esports. Do you even have any concept of irony or were you too busy to read my post because you had something more important to do with your life like have someone pretend to be the new owner of CXG?

For some of us reading is enjoyable, guess that makes us the idiots though in carmac-bizarro world. Stick to asking fascinating individuals obscure questions about their own lives which have next to nothing to do with esports but satisfy you in letting us all know you talk to their friends on IRC. You're not too hot when it comes to composing something readable when you can get direct feedback you can't thumbs down.

I'm too lazy to read a particularly long response, it's as simple as that. I hope you didn't consider writing it time wasted.

haha thats so weak

ye, especially when he wants be a journalist...

You tell it as though fox looked up the monitor model online in Sweden and then thought 'fuck it, I'll go anyway and waste some sponsor money on a free plane ride despite the fact I have no desire to compete at my peak level'

I should hope he did, as it would be irresponsible and unprofessional to simply assume things will be the way he wants them to - especially with the history of both ESWC and gaming in general. What would he have done if they decided to use a different map without first researching it? Complain that it wasn't fair because he didn't know it?

Whether you as a player would play on in a match you are 95% certain to lose is entirely a different matter as to whether or not fox realised his chances of success at ESWC were quickly narrowing to slim to none, combined with his frustration at the equipment, and then decided to relent as opposed to expend all of his energy losing by 10 frags.

You mean "Coward."

The world isn't black and white, you don't have to do one or the other. There are a multitude of options, one could play 3 maps of a tournament then quit, one could drop one map then come back in the rest revitalized.

Nice hypocrisy. You try to hold the tournament organizers responsible for being professional, but you're just fine with players who don't.

This is going around in circles, if you think fox was unprofessional great I hope that thought keeps you warm at night. Personally I think he just didn't feel like playing a Q3 game for a 10 minute period in his life, I'm not about to label him a coward for that.

Hey, that's fine. Maybe next time he can do the competition a favor and not waste a spot in the tourney.

Carmac's 100% correct here. This is an example of really seriously poor sportsmanship.

-Grahm

I'm sure they would have played until the end if I were around :p

spectators at the bottom of the list

fuck them, as annoying as it is. conditions for the players should be absolute perfect before considering anything else.

so anyone wonder why sponsors don't invest much into duel fps as a spectator sport?

because tournament organizers are to stupid to create proper conditions for the players first?;d

as long long as the best or most still play then I don't think so.

It's the "spectators last" attitude. From a sponsor's viewpoint it matters fuck all if the players are happy when the spectators are pissed off for some reason or other. (Obviously seeing games played on shitty hardware, doesn't make the specs happy either!)

But at one point tournaments have to dare saying "and fuck you too" to the players, for example regarding schedules of course often the schedules often are too tight or badly timed, see semis at ESWC. But I don't think the players are completely innocent when it comes to starting on time.

Coverage is another thing, but there mostly the organizers have to do the work, including, again, the schedules.

In the end that is what the cgs is doing right, they really try to make the whole thing a spectator experience, despite choosing crappy games!

If I were in charge of sponsor giving away say 100.000€ to gaming, it would hurt me to do it but it's give it to the cgs cause then my company will be seen in a spectator friendly atmosphere, while people who hate the games won't see it anyway so no hate from them. On the other hand with the duel scene at the moment eswc with bad screens and a non-existant schedule is as good as it gets, while you even risk being linked to a cpl failure or worst case another CXG disaster.



Yes, yes, I know "rant", "column", "too long even for jamerio", etc,
so tl;dr:

you don't care about the specs first and foremost(!), chances are the money is going somewhere else

So would you say if organizers of a lets say allstars football match have to decide between having the players play in knee deep mud or beeing able to broadcast the game live (instead of maybe recording and showing it later), they should go for live broadcast and let the players have their worst nightmare game ever?

(not that this is a realistic example but its just how i feel about this whole thing ;) )

you missed the point.

I did write the part where bad performance due to bad circumstances sucks for the spectator, too.

It doesn't only suck for specs, it completely ruins it for specs and also destroys the whole purpose of the tournament imo. So why anyone would still consider following such a tournament is beyond me (and why should sponsors put money into a unserious tournament) which would lead me to the conclusion that tourney organizers should first of all make sure that the tournament is run properly and meets at least some kind of standard. (I'd rather watch a good game on demo than a bad one live)

But maybe im alone with this and everyone else is happy with watching mediocre games.

rant out :/

uhm, no you're not alone????

I mean I wrote the same thing.

again: my point was about something DIFFERENT than the use of crappy monitors.

i thought your point was sponsors investing into tournaments in which specs are interested :E

nevermind then

it is, but your reply was the everything should be done for the "players first", with which I disagree.
my point is that from a sponsor's view players (competitors, just to be clear!) are secondary ands specs come first.

Sure the games are better and the spectators enjoy them more under perfect circumstances and therefore that should be taken care of as well, but not because of the players first.

And you definately should not put the specs at the bottom, as Aaron wrote which is the statement I replied to in the first place.

ye well but i meant, if the tournament doesnt even have any quality why would specs be interested, and if specs arent interested why would sponsors be interested, thats how i see it. But apparently specs are swallowing everything they get thrown at so they way i thought is wrong i guess.

Maybe it's just me but I would figure if you wanted to create a grass roots sport then ensuring you had as ideal tournament settings as possible would be high on your list I'd figure. Then you get the maximum number of players who would want to compete attending your event. Then a relatively small amount of effort put into making sure people can spectate the event with ease would allow your event to reach a larger audience and increase its following. All of which one would think would help getting more and better sponsors to sponsor said event, which could then be improved even further becoming something akin to a professional sport where the competitive environment is respected, even revered sometimes.

But nope we're idiots and instead it's better to just follow this kind of system:

Sponsor offers poor equipment -> accept their offer -> piss off players and spectators alike -> abandon those games in favour of the next flavour of the year -> rinse and repeat.

Being an idealist can be frustrating work but apparently even being a realist is too much to ask for :P

Maybe it's just me but I would figure if you wanted to create a grass roots sport then ensuring you had as ideal tournament settings as possible would be high on your list I'd figure.

if/maybe/should/would/bluemoon/etc... The point is, THEY DIDN'T. It wasn't a secret as to the conditions that he would play under. The only professionals in gaming are the guys in the marketing division that make you believe that you're taking part in a sport.

...All of which one would think would help getting more and better sponsors to sponsor said event, which could then be improved even further becoming something akin to a professional sport where the competitive environment is respected, even revered sometimes.

Got it all figured out, don't you? If it's so easy, why aren't you hosting one?

Sponsor offers poor equipment -> accept their offer -> piss off players and spectators alike -> abandon those games in favour of the next flavour of the year -> rinse and repeat.

CS/WC was fine, and have been standards in professional games in their respective genres for quite a while.

Got it all figured out, don't you? If it's so easy, why aren't you hosting one?

That's not even an argument. I don't agree with sending troops into Iraq, that doesn't mean I could run the American/British military or manage their operations. If you think you have to be able to do something to critique it then you live in a very limited world.

If your apartment building collapses during a mild earthquake due to poor construction material choices on the part of the company I don't have to be capable of building you a better apartment block to state that the company didn't do it right.

I see... So you're the type that thinks that you can get things done by complaining instead of doing it yourself. Nobody forced the players to enter the tournament. If you don't like the setup, don't watch/play/attend.

You and Fox are the type that would complain about how bad your food tastes, but still eat it because you'd starve otherwise. Go get your own damn food.

Your logic is amongst the worst I've ever seen.

you're the type that thinks that you can get things done by complaining instead of doing it yourself.

Complaining is when someone hands you some ordinary apple juice and you say this is terrible, I hate apple juice. When someone says here is some apple juice and there's a shit in the glass unsurprisingly saying nothing doesn't help your cause there. Telling them you'd like a drink of real apple juice is not unreasonable...except in your world.

Nobody forced the players to enter the tournament. If you don't like the setup, don't watch/play/attend.

Again, what are you not following?

Stay at home: win $0 DEFINITELY
Go to the event anyway: win > $0 POSSIBLY

Yeah I can't imagine why one of the best Q3 duelers would still attend as opposed to guaranteeing himself that sweet 100% shot at $0... *rolls eyes*

You and Fox are the type that would complain about how bad your food tastes, but still eat it because you'd starve otherwise. Go get your own damn food.

Do you even read what you're writing? First of all you give us an analogy where we have the choice between eating some food we don't like the taste of or starving. In that imaginary scenario we are hypocrites because we eat the food rather than DIE OF STARVATION. But wait, to make matters even worse it turns out that even though we only had the choice to complain and eat, not complain or starve suddenly you rape us all with amazing logic by telling us there was a 4th option all along known only to you. TURNS OUT WE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN OUR OWN FOOD...YES EVEN THOUGH WE WOULD STARVE IF WE DIDN'T EAT THE FIRST EXAMPLE OF FOOD.

Complaining is when someone hands you some ordinary apple juice and you say this is shit, I hate apple juice. When someone says here is some apple juice and there's a shit in the glass unsurprisingly saying nothing doesn't help your cause there. Telling them you'd like a drink of real apple juice is not unreasonable...except in your world.

Except for the fact that if he bothered to do some research before the tourney, he would have found out that it was indeed shit in the glass. Instead, he said "Give me anything." and got what he asked for.

Stay at home: win $0 DEFINITELY
Go to the event anyway: win > $0 POSSIBLY

Yeah I can't imagine why one of the best Q3 duelers would still attend as opposed to guaranteeing himself that sweet 100% shot at $0... *rolls eyes*

Hey, that's true, or get a real job and get money for sure! You could also play poker or just gamble randomly for money. Nobody forced him to play in THIS tournament, or even THIS game. It's not like this is the only way for him to get money as he has to go out of his way to participate.

Bolded for cock sucking.

TURNS OUT WE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN OUR OWN FOOD...YES EVEN THOUGH WE WOULD STARVE IF WE DIDN'T EAT THE FIRST EXAMPLE OF FOOD.

Still in grade school? I'll dumb it down a bit for you: You'll happily sit by and be fed, but you'd sooner die than do real work for your food.

Your main problem here seems to be that you haven't read the rest of the thread so you're rehashing points which have already been resolved.

Except for the fact that if he bothered to do some research before the tourney, he would have found out that it was indeed shit in the glass. Instead, he said "Give me anything." and got what he asked for.

Fox knew in advance what the monitors were like, but as has been stated maybe 10+ times HE DIDN'T GO THERE WITH THE INTENTION OF QUITTING PLAYING BECAUSE OF THE MONITORS. Instead once he was in a position where things were going really badly and continuing on meant very little he decided he didn't want to keep playing, especially in light of the conditions. Based on your theory of how it all went down he'd have lost a map earlier in the tournament and just taken the next flight home to Sweden, that's not how it down.

You could also play poker or just gamble randomly for money.

Actually that's probably part of why fox doesn't care about a losing Q3 map like it was life or death as you do. He has been successful playing poker and most likely can earn more in a single year playing that than he would in most of his esports years.

Still in grade school? I'll dumb it down a bit for you: You'll happily sit by and be fed, but you'd sooner die than do real work for your food.

What ARE you talking about? You're not even attempting to debate the actual topic at hand, you're picking imaginary scenarios which will never exist and in which you get to decide what I would or wouldn't do based off 2-3 comments you've read regarding my opinions on the importance of finishing Q3 matches.

Here's a nice little example you might want to ponder: in 2001 I went to the UK Q3 qualifier for the WCG to play and see people like blokey play. At the event the guy who finished 2nd lost narrowly and was clearly as deserving of a ticket to the finals, only at the time the UK's funding was so low only a single duel player could attend as opposed to countries like Sweden or Russia. It just so happened as part of my work I had travel expenses to attend that WCG so I gave them to that player and he went to the grand finals, played and that's the end of the story.

But great work Columbo you've nailed me completely: I'm someone who is offered one type of food I don't like and I choose to die of starvation instead of eating. Here's a thought: you're someone who is offered simple facts connected with some basic logic but rather than even engage either you create fantasy scenarios where you know my personality and nature intimately...AND ALL BECAUSE I DON'T THINK FINISHING A Q3 MATCH IS GROUNDS FOR SOMEONE NOT ATTENDING AN EVENT.

Sort yourself out you mess.

Fox knew in advance what the monitors were like, but as has been stated maybe 10+ times HE DIDN'T GO THERE WITH THE INTENTION OF QUITTING PLAYING BECAUSE OF THE MONITORS.

...which is unprofessional and has been pointed out to you... how many times now? You're trying to say it was the event at fault, when he should have been responsible enough to avoid it to begin with.

Based on your theory of how it all went down he'd have lost a map earlier in the tournament and just taken the next flight home to Sweden, that's not how it down.

How it SHOULD have went down is that his sponsors should have said "Get your ass in gear or get in line for unemployment." Due to their lack of action, his team represents his unprofessionalism accordingly!

Your story is both unrelated to the situation and boring. Thank you for wasting my time. Do try to pay attention, hmm? You're defending the actions of Fox and attacking the situation provided by ESWC. Here's a hint: I agree on ESWC being unprofessional - we just disagree on Fox.

We don't even disagree on fox, it's not like I think not trying/quitting is a positive thing. I just understand that like Renoir said: everyone has his reasons.

excuse != reason

ah, good ol' fashioned ESRage

Yeah, but you can't blame him, he's probably ugly.

Good point, it's better just to sit at home and not bother trying when conditions aren't perfect. I'm sure fox boycotting this event would have both helped him and the cause of using good equipment.

Let's review those scenarios again:

A) Sit at home and don't bother going to ESWC
-best possible financial outcome: you find some coins down the back of your sofa which can be used to purchase a hot chocolate.

B) Go to ESWC despite the poor equipment in the hopes of still being able to play to a level where one might get into the prize money
-best possible financial outcome: win 1st prize

Scenario A has ZERO chance of encouraging a tournament organizer to change their setup. Fox isn't Tiger Woods and ESWC isn't the PGA, so it would go on without him.

Yeah you really nailed him there.

If you want to talk about fox getting money out of gaming etc. etc., then you should also consider what kind of an image gets attached to whoever pays him money when he quits mid tournament.

BTW good job ignoring any valid points I made and answering with a fairly redundant hypothetical appeal to authority for either of us seeing as how we don't fund esports players and have no justifiable reason to demand they play up to our own standards.

No, you are just your scenarios out of the context. The context is that a sponsor is supporting a player in return for representing their brand well.

Sure, not going at all will not win fox money. But going and quitting does not do him good in the long run either. As far as I know, he may be done with this gaming thing anyway, so he may not care at all.

The context is that a sponsor is supporting a player in return for representing their brand well.

If fox was trying 100% to be the best Q3 player he could every second of his life he wouldn't be playing for some Belgian multigaming team. They knew what they were getting: one of the best Q3 players in the world, albeit one who treats your passion as only a hobby, who would raise their brand so that now we know who Lowland lions are as opposed to just some people who have played one of their teams in a clanbase ladder match.

If you want fox to run the 100m in dress shoes maybe you aught to see he gets one of the world's elite sponsorships, until then him acting according to his own personality, whims or frustrations doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Did I say it was unreasonable? I said it's disrespectful to his peers and to the people that stayed up all night on a weekday to watchi HIM play.

Ok but would the thought of some people you don't know explicitly being cheesed off for a few minutes outweigh the supreme frustration of fighting an uphill battle against both a superior opponent and sub-par equipment*?

I don't know about you but when I am playing on another computer I find it very difficult to stay motivated to play if something is wrong with the mouse or the keyboard or the monitor hz etc etc. I can only imagine how much more annoying that would be in a high-pressure situation.

If this does end up being the last Q3 tourney and/or fox retires you might have a more understandable point, I don't know that many people with the ego to be great duel players who wouldn't fall into the trap of thinking about themselves over others albeit it momentarily. I think fox's point is that the setup wasn't perfect but he tried until it become too annoying or expending effort just became an frustration.

* we're not just talking about a small problem, that youtube video of the input delay is ridiculous

Again, weren't the specs available beforehand? Going to a tourney and simply EXPECTING things to be the way you want them to is just as unprofessional and irresponsible as making other players have to deal with you taking up a spot in the tourney. It's not like the other players didn't have to deal with the same situation.

Think of it more like this: the monitors were the straw that broke the camel's back. It wasn't just the monitors, it wasn't just losing and it wasn't just the map. It was probably a combination of all three and hell who knows what else could be going on in fox's head/life. Point is you can't predict 100% what you will do/say in a future situation when there are a lot of factors can play into your decisions.

Are you trying to use vague causality as a means to justify his actions? Maybe it was this, maybe it was that, it could have been this, he wasn't feeling well here, just this one time... Man, if these excuses worked with a REAL job, I'd be set for life. "Sorry boss, I just couldn't bother coming in to work today with my suit and tie on, I just didn't feel like it." Your parents are supposed to beat this kind of tantrum out of you when you are three years old.

Your parents are supposed to beat this kind of tantrum out of you when you are three years old.

All of a sudden I'm no longer surprised you look at things in terms of boolean logic where you can either do this OR that, not any of the other million options. So you can either attend or you can stay at home, you can't attend and play some of the time. We don't live inside a computer circuit board where something is TRUE/FALSE with no area in between. That kind of thinking went out a long time ago, along with beating your three year old child. We're trying to have a civilization here.

Respond to the wrong post or are you attempting to write gibberish to hide your lack of argument? Your jabberwocky is inneffective, if so.

My 'jabberwocky' is called reason and logic and I'm applying it to the few facts we have at hand. I can see why that might be confusing for you. Don't mistake you not understanding what I'm saying with what I'm saying containing no pertinent information or sound reasoning.

Let's have fun with irony:

All of a sudden I'm no longer surprised you look at things in terms of boolean logic where you can either do this OR that, not any of the other million options.

...

Stay at home: win $0 DEFINITELY
Go to the event anyway: win > $0 POSSIBLY

My argument has been from the start that he had tons of options, and he picked the most lazy and irresponsible choice. Don't like the event? Don't go. Don't play, don't attend the event, don't watch the matches, and don't visit the website. It's not hard. If fox is afraid to lose his sponsorship because he wouldn't attend a tournament with an unprofessional setting, his sponsors are no better than the system which you profess to dislike.

Keep going, I can make fun of you all night.

The only irony is that you picked an example where there WAS only two choices. Either he goes to ESWC or he doesn't, where is the third option regarding attendance of ESWC?

At this point I'm not even debating a human, this is like shooting fish in a barrel so I'll invoke the mercy rule and save us both some time.

The force was weak with this one.

Again, weren't the specs available beforehand?

Yeah they were but it makes little difference and hardly makes shit poor decisions acceptable. Imagine being a male discus thrower to be told before the Olympics 'we can only supply rubber one kilo discuses' or a boxer 'sorry, no locker room to settle in and warmup' This would never happen in any professional competition of any discipline and for good reason.

Going to a tourney and simply EXPECTING things to be the way you want them to is just as unprofessional and irresponsible

No, no it isn't; not 10 years down the line, not with something as crucial as monitors and most certainly not happening in the bounds of something important, prestigious and professional that ESWC is supposed to be.

Yeah they were but it makes little difference and hardly makes shit poor decisions acceptable. Imagine being a male discus thrower to be told before the Olympics 'we can only supply rubber one kilo discuses' or a boxer 'sorry, no locker room to settle in and warmup' This would never happen in any professional competition of any discipline and for good reason.

If it DID happen, the players who decide to attend have no right to complain.

No, no it isn't; not 10 years down the line, not with something as crucial as monitors and most certainly not happening in the bounds of something important, prestigious and professional that ESWC is supposed to be.

No matter how much you want gaming to be professional, the fact remains that it isn't. The standards we have are high, but if the tourney isn't living up to them, the best thing you can do is to NOT attend. Participating in shitty tournaments hasn't done wonders for the game to this point, and players need to stop running into the same wall.

I agree with what you're saying, more so the last part about not attending but sadly gaming is light years away from boycotting players having any effect on the events.

It doesn't matter who turns up, the top 10 favorites might not show but who cares, a semi-decent player will win and a few more lesser skilled players will fill the gaps.

I think they have every right to complain, knowing before hand or not. Acting a cunt is a totally different question though.

It doesn't matter who turns up, the top 10 favorites might not show but who cares, a semi-decent player will win and a few more lesser skilled players not show.

Even still, attending the events hasn't helped to shape the pro gaming model. All our loyalty has done is ruin what we were working for. I understand players having fun attending, or maybe just trying to live off of sponsorship, but there are really better ways to earn money. If you're just out for the competition, then it's much better to play for fun in properly hosted online/LAN tourneys and wait until these events have some stability.

I don't see Quake going that far, no matter how much I'd like to see it happen.

agree

I knew we'd agree on something eventually.

oh no, I like tons of what you troll :D

^_^

You seem to not be getting my point. I can indeed imagine the frustration and I do know how bad the monitors were. I understand the decision but I just do not support it.

P.S. Me "arguing" about this for this many comments might make it look like I think it is a big deal. It's not.

Your opinion is your opinion, that's not up for debate. The first post I saw on the topic from you implied the onus was on fox to not attend if he didn't like the monitor setup, which he knew about beforehand. If that's not the case then fair enough, but based off your comments to others before and the fact some other players didn't have as big a problem with the monitors that certainly seemed to be your position.

Anyway it's quite clear this whole topic has reached a standstill/is cycling around so I agree there's no reason to turn a molehill into a mountain.

Let's put it this way: if you decide to attend, it means you have accepted the rules. In this case, do finish. That's my standpoint.

I have had worse things happen to me in meaningful competitions. At the end of the day it is your choice to act sportsmanlike.

Aaron and Thorin sitting in a tree
P-L-U-S-S-I-N-G

if it was the champions league i seriously doubt they would just walk around on the field and threw the match after a bad start.

Do you not remember Man United beating Roma 7-1 in the CL? There's a difference between doing nothing and not giving your all when defeat is inevitable.

there is even bigger difference in giving up due to being inferior, and giving up due to bad conditions. i guess you didnt follow.

Guess you didn't follow the first leg where they beat Man United 2-1 then. And yet when they are clearly out of reach in the SECOND leg which will see them eliminated they didn't seem to try as hard...yeah your point is solid as a rock buddy.

Um...fox..others didn't have much of an issue with aiming, I am fairly sure other people didn't like the setup........

You didn't notice how poor players aims were compared to gamegune and masters? Just check out the difference in hitscan percentages between events.

cypher's aim seemd just about the same.. he hit all the retarded rail shots he usually does. same goes for other aim whores..strenx etc.

rail aim seemed pretty solid from all players

but shaft and mg was absolutely way off (which is why so many people got away with using rockets as much as they did)

the only time when shaft really excelled was the impossible to miss straight line shots

in the first few games, cypher's aim was terrible compared to what he pulls off normally. he got back his rail towards the end but his LG was far off.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but people were saying that the monitors on the big stage were way better than the ones in the tournament area, and if I remember correctly Cypher got to play 3 games on the big stage...

that explains it then. cause I only watched few cypher games including the finals and his aim was top notch both lg and rg.

cool, nice to know!

u so qt! <3

needs more pt4

Some people are more uncomfortable on TFTs than others. fox, noctis, me are really affected by it while some others just shut that part of the brain down (you know the part where you start complaining IF THIS WAS CRT) and play as good as they can.
Get over it.

i think its good that players protest. otherwise it will be the same crap next time, and next, and next. the games from san jose were really low quality, even compared to recent online games

I do like the shut up and play mentality but as players it's one of the worst and most damaging things you can do.

Just because people offer shit doesn't mean you should lap it up, because the second you do they not stop feeding you shit. I could insert a mass CPL rant here but I'm sure you know what I mean.

Fuck, I must be responsible for like 200 of your [+]s so far...this is getting embarrassing ;P

You've got nothing on me

circlejerk fun

noctis just has a shit attitude in general.

5 shots of vodka and np, it will look like a crt

Cypher still won. CRT's or not I don't think the outcome of this tourney would have been much different, up to this point fox hasn't shown he is the best, regardless of monitors.

yea but he could have atleast come seccond.

He didn't come in 2nd at masters, gamegune, or qcon :o

oh yeah? check masters..

o yea, forgot that! I still think av3k has shown to be a superior player to fox, but thats just imo

all of these guys keep beating each other regularly. fox definitely had a good chance to place high this ESWC.

True, I'm not saying he couldn't have, just that in this tournament it really didn't seem to have an effect on who was the superior player in each specific game. I think the people who placed definitely deserved it. Sure the whining about monitors was a valid complaint, but it didn't prove to be a game-breaking instance in any specific match, the better player won, simple as that.

Losing is ok as long as you have played your best and your oponent was simply better. Losing when you didn't perform your best because of external stuff (no matter what) can be very frustrating and I understand very well fox on that point.

However, I agree that the best player of the tournament won the entire thing but that just doesn't make it ok to play on such monitors. Such delays are ENORMOUS at a high level play and can affect any player differently. That's so bullshit to provide that kind of monitors for a world cup.

hey man play q3... im belive in you

hehe that's cool to hear that, atm im back in studies but i've planned to play quakelive as soon as I feel comfortable with my work. Don't know if i'll have time to get back on the level I used to play though.

I agree that any complaints about the monitors are fully justified. They were terrible and inexcusable, however, all I'm saying is that at this level, you better damn well try your hardest, otherwise is there really any point in going?...Regardless of ANY circumstances you are in, the paycheck is going to go to the top 3 competitors.

i don't think it was the better player winning. fox played a brilliant tournament very recently to place #2 at Masters over a lot of the people who attended the Grand Finals. it's not like his skill would have gone down too much in such short time. the other players didn't improve that drastically either. in fact fox even beat killsen 2:0 in group stage 1. apart from a few like rapha, killsen and cypher in his matches on stage, i don't think anyone was playing close to their best.

in the end it almost turned out to be a matter of who sucked less than the others. luckily the monitors on stage were much better making the games more memorable.

True, fox has shown he has no trouble competing with the best. I just don't like the fanboyish statements many are making about the monitors.

You said it yourself, all of these players are capable of beating each other pretty evenly. Cooller didn't even make it to the 2nd group stage but judging by his play in his games he certainly could have won the entire tournament if each game he played out happened to favor him.

I mean, it really seems like just the luck of the draw of spawns and who makes the fewest mistakes once you get people like cypher/av3k/jibo/k1llsen/fox/cooller/z4/rapha/noctis/czm(tho czm seems past his prime) etc... all playing each other. Though, so far, cypher has proven to be the most consistent player aim wise and probably is playing each game at about 95%(in terms of making errors) once he gets a few games into a tournament. I think if av3k really practiced aimwhoring he would be pretty damn difficult to beat as well.

jesus fucking christ at this thread

You see what you created here???

stupidity and bias created this monster \:D/

(//_^) emo harder

(/////)

They used monitors with 80ms delay? Damn, I think thats worse than most HDTVs. ><

Sometimes you people scare me.

nice nice... fox was on one level with noctis jibo + rapha killsen zero4 in good shape and he in top8 only

There is a long history of tournament organizers taking shortcuts in their events at the expense of the players and the competition. Either they take a shortcut, or they are ignorant to the affect their decision will have on the competition as a whole. (Shortcut or ignorance, neither is good or acceptable if you wish to call this "professional")

One of the multitude of reasons that made me lose all interest and desire to compete. You spend your time practicing and getting ready for an event only to get there and see that the setup and/or scheduling is completely out of wack.

There is no insurance/back-up plan for players if there is a poorly ran/organized event, costing prepared players thousands of dollars in possible winnings.

I completely understand where fox is coming from. It is very frustrating when the organization of a tournament is poorly constructed as well as executed. It really does make the event "no fun" in my honest opinion. If you're not having fun, you begin to question why you are even there in the first place, which will have a dramatic impact on your level of play in the matches.

agreed. in the case of clueless and incompetent tournament organizers, protesting by quitting is the least they should've done.

people that are putting the blame on them, and not the tournament organizers of the "prestigious international world-championship", such as Vedic and Carmac are cluess.

I believe that the manufacturers of the monitors were not listed as an official sponsor of the ESWC in 2008 (I might be wrong). Therfore, I am assuming they had no other choice or, better put, were not able to afford another choice.

Not that it's an excuse for having bad monitors. Of course they should be blamed, so I guess you haven't read what I wrote above carefully enough.

Wise words i must say...

Picture paragraphs unloaded, wise words being quoted.

weird how the guy that was ranked #1 going into eswc came 1st, even with these shitty monitors hmmm?

he also got to play the most games on stage with good monitors hmmm. (not saying he doesn't deserve it ;)

Understood.

Cypher gets the commemorative mouse deal and I'm sure some people don't :Care: about that too.

fox needs to stop being a cry baby bitch - sad he represents FPO

sad he represents FPO

nope.

youve been living in a cave aparently

oh, that's an evil one

*SPECULATE* *SPECULATE* *SPECULATE* *SPECULATE* *RAGE* *RAGE* *RAGE* *RAGE* *SPECULATE* *SPECULATE* *RAGE*

Holy fuck, wow.

I hope people realize that we wouldn't have ANY problems even RELATED to this if tournament organizers were to just use CRT's.

Seriously, come on.