New LCS Contract Forbids Streaming Dota 2, Blizzard Games

[Drejer43]

someone wanna explain why fatprincess is on that list, course I have no idea.

 

[Do4600]

Do other similar gaming competitions/leagues/whatever do the same thing or is this just them trying to erase knowledge of the competition? I can understand that they would want to get the most out of their investment if they were directly sponsoring everyone taking part but isn't this just a glorified tournament?

Not video gaming, but every single sports league I can think of has similar rules for it's players, it's a contract, like any other in any other entertainment industry, you're signed, and that includes a clause that you won't play in two different leagues, two different record labels or two different networks without negotiating with both parties present.

 

[Lunar Templar]

Going through the list, I half expected to see Super Smash Bros on it, still, just a lot on the excessive side I think, cause while I'm not up on how many of those are MOBAs, pretty sure Fat Princess and World of (thing here) are totally different animals to LoL.

 

[Reaper195]

Not terribly surprising. You don't usually go out of your way to support advertisement for your competition.

This. How are so many people not thinking like you, kind sir?

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

I thought twitch was the only service worth its salt and would this contract affect it? It's the corporate nonsense that's found its way into online gaming.

 

[Lex Darko]

Not terribly surprising. You don't usually go out of your way to support advertisement for your competition.

This. How are so many people not thinking like you, kind sir?

Oh people do understand it but the problem comes from actually having retention when one is streaming that is the problem.

I mean when I played LOL and I got up to the point where my elo was the same as the pros I was literally waiting 20 minutes to an hour WAITING for the system to find enough people at my level. Now imagine if you are streaming, do you really want either nothing but the LOL client to look at for about half an hour or just the person's face on a webcam? Hell no, and neither does the streamer in question want to do NOTHING because that isn't what the viewer comes to the stream for.

Also, this only builds bad rapport among consumers and the players because while Riot would be more than happy to be the only game in town the fact of the matter is you need competition and the act of simply playing the game isn't promotion as much as Riot would like one to believe. I mean hell video games are meant to be our hobby and being able to enjoy multiple video games and new video games comes with the territory to building a bigger audience. Certainly offering consistent content is the best but you still need to shake things up once in a while especially when we are talking about the time said people are streaming which when they aren't actually doing scrims but playing to entertain or for leisure.

Certainly it is important to when on the clock or participating in an event to be professional. That is what we all expect regardless of the job. But the moment you get to come home, what you do in your private life is your own damn business and not of any company. It is creating needless problems for both Riot Games and the pro players(and from accounts to be confirmed streamers like Guardsman Bob who aren't even connected or paid by Riot as an employee is also under the same contract and was for a moment pulled from being a featured streamer). Hell the only occupation that actually requires someone to be on duty 24/7 is a police officer and even then they still get to enjoy their private lives and only have to hop into action when they are called into action or if the situation demands police intervention.

http://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/1s38ea/lcs_2014_contract_stipulates_players_cannot/cdtgg9d

EDIT: At the end of the day this will only become legal if the teams do NOTHING and honestly that will only hurt the future of both Esports and streaming because it creates a needless divide and intrudes into the personal and private life of players both present and future.

Personally I hope teams fight this and use that bully pulpit to get consumers of LOL to help fight this contract.

My only other complaint is that once again Riot's solution to a problem is focused on the negative and comes with another severe punishment. I mean for having a dedicated psychologist it is pretty sad that you never see any sort of mercy or focus on the positive.

Sorry but the simple act of playing a game is promotion when the game is in beta and inaccessible to the thousands of people watching you play it.

I didn't even know Heartstone existed until I started seeing on LoL streams. Is it really surprising that Riot doesn't want other companies to piggyback their popularity to advertise the games of their competition?

 

[Rblade]

you can't survive on streaming one game only, it will get boring. So basically they are saying: "You'd better find a way to live of what we are paying you, because you aren't getting your money anywhere else."

 

[Adeptus Aspartem]

A professional LoL player in the LCS can easily earn 500k-1M bucks a year with only streaming/play LoL(+tournaments).

If you're in the LCS you're employed by Riot, so you've to play by their rules. Seems fair to me. Sure, it's a harsh restriction but it's definitly not worth that amount of fuss.

Are you sure about those figures? Because either those are a bit high or I'm going into the wrong line of work.

Uhm, i could only give you a link in german, but the player Ocelot once did an Interview for ABC where he stated that he earns roughly 700k per year.
Most of it trhough sponsoring + merchandise though.

 

[PcaKes]

I for one, love it. Riot took the time to compile a really neat list of games that I should check out. Thank you Riot for telling me about all of the games that are probably better than LoL. I'm going to go check out infinite crisis I think.

 

[shrekfan246]

Not terribly surprising. You don't usually go out of your way to support advertisement for your competition.

Yes because a trading card game, and online multiplayer games about tanks and airplanes are TOTALLY a competition for a Dota game. Yes, definitely.

Well... yeah.

It's not even a matter of genre. Any moderately to highly successful online multiplayer game poses valid competition to League of Legends, even those that are not MOBAs. All that matters is that, despite being more or less free to play, people are willing to spend money on these games. For the most part, they spend money on them because they are actually good. World of Tanks is a huge one in that regard.

Look at some of the games on the list.

One of them no longer exists, one of them is Fat Princess, and the likes of Team Fortress 2, Lord of the Rings Online, Guild Wars 2, Planetside 2, etc. are nowhere to be seen.

OT: Hilarious stuff. I'm glad I have little interest in competitive gaming in the first place, though I wonder what the fallout will be over this, if anything actually happens.

 

[Not Lord Atkin]

How is the competition commission (or whatever its US equivalent is) not all over this yet? What Riot is doing there is kind of against the law.

EDIT: I just realised that wherever Riot is based, this will have impact on competition within the EU as well (some of the studios affected must be european and I'm way too lazy to do my research) therefore EU competition law will apply. So where IS the bloody CCEU?

 

[Kevin Lyons]

I don't know if anybody's said this yet, but I'd like to bring everybody's attention to the contract itself. The contract only forbids streaming non-League of Legends material "during or adjacent to League of Legends content..." (Line 1)
This means that they can't stream, for example, a DotA game while also streaming a League of Legends game.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Total Biscuit has waded into this.


A breakdown from Reddit explains it well.

On the pro Riot side:

1) LCS players are employed by Riot and represent not only themselves, but the company as a whole. Thus Riot has a legitimate interest in maintaining a positive image.

2) You don't see NFL players promoting Arena Football, LoL players should not promote competing games as well.

3) The reason these streams are popular in the first place was due to these individuals playing Riot's games

4) LCS brand owns these players and, in the end, they are well within their rights legally and ethically to impose these limits

Against Riot:

1) Queue times are very long for popular streamers due to their high MMR. The down time can be very boring for the audience, so these streamers play other games to pass the time. Banning games will decrease the quality and entertainment value of these streams which, in the end, hurts these streamers.

2) Pro players playing other games is a compelling piece of media. It's fun to watch a popular streamer play a different game and does not take away from the fact that they are still professional league players.

3) The list of banned games is very inconsistent. An example is that World of Warcraft is banned, but other popular MMOs such as Planetside 2 or Guild Wars 2 do not make the list. One can argue that they banned direct competition and popular games, but why is Land of Chaos Online banned, but not TF2 or CS:GO?

4) EDIT: Streamers built their stream fanbase on their own and in their own terms. Riot's contract seems to try to control what a pro stream should contain, making it seem like the streamers' popularity was built only because of the Riot sponsorship. It diminishes the individual work each pro streamer did to develop his fanbase, particularly in cases where other games were used to entertain and attract new viewers, or where League of Legends was particularly criticized. Credit: Skeptycal

I don't know if anybody's said this yet, but I'd like to bring everybody's attention to the contract itself. The contract only forbids streaming non-League of Legends material "during or adjacent to League of Legends content..." (Line 1)
This means that they can't stream, for example, a DotA game while also streaming a League of Legends game.

No, its been confirmed that players cannot stream those games in public.

Update, 11:20AM PST: onGamers has confirmed with the team representatives that LCS players are disallowed from streaming the games listed below outright, not just when adjacent to a League of Legends stream. Under Section 3 Rule 4 of the new contract handling 'Non-League Events and Streaming', it states that "... the [LCS] Team shall ensure that, during the Term of this Agreement, its Team Members do not publicly stream gameplay of the titles set forth on Exhibit B". Exhibit B states "the specific restrictions on streaming are set forth in the Sponsorship and Streaming Restricted List, as updated by the League from time to time", which is the document listed below.

Source: http://www.ongamers.com/articles/riot-season-4-lcs-contracts-stipulate-players-cannot-stream-dota-2-blizzard-games/1100-261/

 

[lacktheknack]

I guess what I was saying is Blizzard is the top dog of the market in their field, and they're willing to go along with it. They're not the CAUSE, but they're clearly not interested in standing up for their gamers.

Though, well, shame on Riot games for coming up with the restrictions in the first place.

What the what.

Blizzard had literally nothing to do with it. They have no say in Riot's contract, nor do they have any pull on what's in it at any point of its existence. Hell, they'd love for this clause to NOT exist. Your implying that they support it is literally saying "Blizzard wishes to be less popular".

You're only bringing Blizzard into it because you wish to complain, so you literally forced them into your complaint in a way that they don't fit. At all. Let them out, their spines can't take it. D:

 

[lacktheknack]

If those players had any functional brain cells left they would refuse to sign that contract.

Unless I'm mistaken they'd have to give up their spot on the tournament if they don't agree to the contract. Speakin from Starcraft experiences tournament level players exclusively get their money from tournament wins and sponsorship deals. Not signin the contract means they forfeit the ability to compete in the LoL tournament and since they wouldn't be competin there'd be no one to sponsor them.

They'd basically give up their livelihood not signin that contract.

Yes. But sometimes you need to take a stand for what's right. If they all boycott the tournament these assholes wouldn't have a choice.

For that to work, you'd need literally ALL good LoL players to refuse the contract. Including the ones that have nothing to lose (ie. don't stream anything else anyways). That's never going to happen. You'd be giving up your food for the next week or more for literally nothing. THAT'S something that any player with functioning brain cells wouldn't do.

 

[Strazdas]

Remember when Blizzard's entire EMPIRE was built on the backs of fan support, fan communities, fan passion, and fans taking their games to parties, making eSports out of them, and generally putting them on the map in the first place?

... And now that they're king of the mountain, Blizzard doesn't seem too appreciative of all the little people who made it possible. Sorry, thanks for getting us to the top, now stop trying to play and promote a game or create a community outside of our authorized permission zones. We're only the biggest dogs on the block so we obviously can't do anything about this.

Read the article again. Its a contract from Riot Games, a direct competition of Blizzard. Blizzard is doing nothing here than being a victim.

I guess what I was saying is Blizzard is the top dog of the market in their field, and they're willing to go along with it. They're not the CAUSE, but they're clearly not interested in standing up for their gamers.

Though, well, shame on Riot games for coming up with the restrictions in the first place.

willing to go along? what, exactly, can they do about it? Riot is legally in their right. The people should not sign such contract. peopel who sign it are the worst party.

Yes. But sometimes you need to take a stand for what's right. If they all boycott the tournament these assholes wouldn't have a choice.

That implies people can work together and make a stand. You are asking too much of people.

 

[Trishbot]

*SNIP*

*SNIP*

*SNIP*

*SNIP*

*SNIP*

*SNIP*

*SNIP*

*SNIP*

Okay, so I freely admit that I entirely misunderstood the story (though I DID read it). I am not an active PC player and the last Blizzard game I played was StarCraft 1 back in the good ol' days of LAN, so I am not familiar with the PC gaming scene, tournament streaming, modern Blizzard affairs apart from lots of anti-consumer backlash and DRM fiascos, and I freely get things like DOTA, LOL, and its ilk mixed up.

So I was wrong on this. I misunderstood. It's the same sort of embarrassment I get when my friends or family point out how little I know about football when I'm watching a game and getting upset over technical rules I don't know or fully grasp. It's not my environment or my passion and thus I'm ignorant of much of it.

Thank you for those that actually took the time to contact me and educate me on this, rather than resorting to calling me an "idiot" or rubbing my face in the dirt at how little I knew about this and at how misplaced my outrage was. I appreciate it.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I didn't even know Heartstone existed until I started seeing on LoL streams. Is it really surprising that Riot doesn't want other companies to piggyback their popularity to advertise the games of their competition?

Actually, it is, since LoL piggybacked directly off of the original MOBA community DotA Allstars.
Their initial developers LITERALLY include people who worked on both the original DotA and at Blizzard.
(notice how Riot has been phasing out the initial "WoW-toony" design work. It's primarily to make people forget that fact.)

Unsurprisingly, LoL's popularity spread much through those exact channels: How did I learn about LoL years back?
Via other DotA players. How did my friends learn about LoL? Mainly through their WoW clans, which included DotA players.
I imagine this is why they've forbid ALL Blizzard games, since the genre originates from a custom Warcraft 3 map.

MOBAs grew out of communities, that much is certain, and Riot knows this. That's why they have to invent a strawman argument about "taking the game and genre seriously as an esport", despite the fact that their competition (namely Blizzard and Valve) is already doing this. It's quite obvious they're terrified of losing relevance not to other games in their genre, but to other popular online games in general.

As a business decision, it makes sense because it's a power grab. Riot is big enough to absorb any outrage from little guys like us, and any pros that dissent on these grounds will find themselves out of work and readily replaced. (as so many professional athletes are)

If you want to just take it as a business decision, then fine. It's a business decision and big business gives no fucks about ethics unless legality is involved. (even then, they might not care)

Personally, the decision doesn't suggest they're doing this to move the genre of esports forward, but rather they want the genre to enter a holding pattern purely for their own benefit. They're employing anti-competitive practices and they know it. It's corporate bullshit.

I find unethical and supremely hypocritical on Riot's part, and business decision or not, I condemn it.
Everyone shits, but just because everyone shits doesn't mean Riot's shit stinks any less.

 

[General Twinkletoes]

So, I don't mean to be rude, but... all this is saying, from what I gleaned, is that they aren't allowed to STREAM these games. They're perfectly capable of still playing the games, but they can't stream anything, basically, but LoL.

While, I guess, if they wanted streaming freedoms, that's greatly curtailed now, but overall it's not as bad as people seem to say. They're still being paid generously, and the only condition is that they simply stream the games they want and they turn off the stream if they want to play World of Tanks or something. Nothing says that the gamer can't organize small get-togethers on their FB, Twitter, or personal webpage or something like that.

Yeah... doesn't matter. A lot of them play these games for money. There wouldn't be such a huge problem if it was just their leisure time being cut down, but streaming is how they live. If they have a long queue, they can no longer play hearthstone to entertain their viewers. If they have viewers that don't like them watching league and watch the other games, they'll stop watching entirely.

No one's misunderstanding here. This is actually a very bad thing for league streamers. It is as bad as people say, they aren't making a huge fuss because they can't play random games in their free time like you seem to think, it's because a large part of their income is in trouble.