SoulCast Episode #2: Esom

MLG and NCR are now behind us, and continuing on our merry path we HAVE to talk with some folks who were at these events, right? This episode we're focusing on the MLG experience and had a chat with a very well known player, Esom. (Before you ask, that is his real name.) Esom has a ton of knowledge not only from the fighting game community but specifically with Soul Calibur.

Funked and I were really excited to sit down with Esom and grill him on the MLG experience, as well as his matches with the top placers that happened outside of MLG. And, of course, we talk about a lot of random stuff with Calibur, even making a surprise appearance in the 8wayrun chat to take a couple questions.

Some notes on the actual video/audio tracks: I did upload the original audio file onto our Buzzsprout account, so if you're just looking to download the mp3 and put it on to your mp3 player, phone, or whatever, you can. I also used a different converter program, so hopefully the audio on the YouTube video is better for everyone this time around. Lastly, I think there are a couple moments where the sound either cutout or some background noise made it in. I tried my best to make it as smooth as possible. I am but human. :(

[Warning: NSFW/EXPLICIT]

YouTube

0 0 1,018

1:36:35

SoulCast #2 - Esom [EXPLICIT]

8wayrun thread: http://8wayrun.com/threads/a-soul-calibur-podcast-soulcast.12186/
VGF site: http://www.videogamingfederation.org/
Buzzsprout page: http://www.buzzsprout.com/3308/45068-soulcast-2-esom

Thanks again to the 8wayrun crew for letting us do this, and thanks to everyone listening. STAY FREE!... just like us. :)

 

Calling the extended sets a 'Starcraft rule' just shows your ignorance about the whole thing. That rule was used before Starcraft was at MLG, and several people in the Starcraft community don't like the rule.

Likewise I don't understand the hate toward the 'loser selects stage' rule. It's somewhat understandable since you guys have been playing with random stage select since forever. However no one has provided an adequate reason to me why it's bad.

In both cases while the rules may be unpopular neither one is unfair. It was a bad idea for MLG to change the rule so close to the tourney starting, but I also think it was a bad idea for people in the community to complain about it so close to the tourney date as well.

 

You lost to a bye? That's a new one.

Well, it is Jaxel...

But fo' serious...how did they come up with that? Under what circumstances can a bye be advanced? =/

 

Likewise I don't understand the hate toward the 'loser selects stage' rule. It's somewhat understandable since you guys have been playing with random stage select since forever. However no one has provided an adequate reason to me why it's bad.

In both cases while the rules may be unpopular neither one is unfair. It was a bad idea for MLG to change the rule so close to the tourney starting, but I also think it was a bad idea for people in the community to complain about it so close to the tourney date as well.

I won't go so far as to call the stage select rule "unfair," but the reason that it's not popular for certain fighting games is because winner is already stuck on their character and loser is given free will to change. With counter-picking being a reality with fighting games, this means that loser is already gaining one advantage. With certain fighting games, especially ones like Calibur and Tekken that involve walls, being able to pick the stage as well gives you another advantage. Esom's situation was actually a perfect example because he was playing a Seigfried player who, obviously, wanted to choose a small stage.

Personally, I've always been a fan of events that made players declare their characters up-front and then had every match be a new, random stage. But, that's just me. :)

 

I understand the stage select is giving the loser a second advantage in addition to counter-picking, but this is not a game-breaking advantage. And, again, it's simply not unfair. There are pros and cons to both systems, but since neither one is unfair complaining about it seems silly. Just use the system to your greatest advantage.

The con to random stage select is that you can be fighting at a disadvantage for every game in the set. For everyone that doesn't like a second advantage for the loser, why is it fair to randomly give an advantage to the winner?

Also consider this: with the stage-select rule even if the winning player walks away from the game the best the losing player can do is even up the set, and he'll still be at a disadvantage because the winner gets to pick the stage at that point.

In Esom's case if he loses the match against Seig then he gets to counter-pick him back. Simple as that. I don't think there is a character-stage combo that is so unbeatable that the better player won't be victorious in a 5-game set.

Also consider it from a viewer's perspective. This rule ensures that you get to see players at their best which in turn tends to get you more exciting and better played matches.

 

I didn't have a beef with the extended set rule. It has its pros and cons, but people already know going in that is something to expect at MLG.

My concern was with the loser picks stage rule because it's an unfamiliar rule to those competing with not alot of time to prepare for it, plus the advantage it gives to the loser when they already have the ability to counterpick. At least use the rule at some other tournaments before using it in a tournament with so much money on the line to make sure that it's not stupid. But when I brought this up as a concern, the response that I got was that it works for Starcraft.

 

@scamp: It's all going to boil down to what your opinion is on the subject. Personally, I could care less who picks what, but I come from a background where you're expected to win no matter what the circumstance; no excuses.

That being said, you have to understand the perspective of those who don't like the rule: How much of a handicap should one gain for losing? I agree that picking a stage isn't game-breaking, but it is a significant advantage. But, a stage has to be picked somehow, and random is unbiased towards either competitor, so it's considered fair. Ultimately, fighting games are games and some bit of luck is going to be involved; it's just going to boil down to preference.

As it pertains to Esom's case, though, I think you're a little confused on what happened. They had picked random all the way up to the final match (i.e., they were sitting at 2-2) when his opponent suddenly decided he wanted a specific stage. At that point, it's very important what the rule distinction is. Because of the circumstances, I have to completely agree with you when you say "Just use the system to your greatest advantage." That's exactly what Esom was trying to do, and exactly what his opponent was trying to do, yet only one of them can be right. But, as many people have already said, it was an unfortunate circumstance where there was a great deal of confusion. Although he doesn't like the rule, I guarantee Esom would've gone ahead and played the match if he knew that loser being able to pick the stage was OK.

 

What did happen to Esom, exactly? He got DQ'd because he wouldn't let his just defeated opponent pick a stage?

Sorry, but I don't have 90 minutes to listen to that podcast. I did read the thread, but only xiang's post immediately above alluded to Esom's issues.

 

What did happen to Esom, exactly? He got DQ'd because he wouldn't let his just defeated opponent pick a stage?

Sorry, but I don't have 90 minutes to listen to that podcast. I did read the thread, but only xiang's post immediately above alluded to Esom's issues.

Summed up: One of his first matches, he played a Siegfried player. It eventually got to the fifth match, Esom having won match 4. His opponent tried to manually select a stage, which he could not do because of a rule change just before the tournament. The judge they asked said it was fine, but Esom (being Esom) went to find a main judge. While he was doing this, they DQd him for that last match and moved on without him.

 

Not much research into MLG, But I guess that's expected from a biased podcast. MLG hires from the community to run their games. That's what they have always done with the games they've picked up. MLG themselves expected this event to be a disaster even though they hired ppl from team spooky and other ppl from each of the scenes within the FGC.

Give em feedback

Just listened to the podcast, and I like how you say RyuJin is a good guy, then proceed to say that he sucks at the game. RyuJin lost to Keev and RTD, and ran through some solid players (SwordLord, Wing Zero and Hawkeye to name a few), yet because he hasn't learned the Voldo match-up, he sucks at the game? The game is two months old, I think it's okay for him not to have every match-up down to a science yet.

This is another fine example of the elitism that runs rampant in the Soul Calibur community. If you weren't around back in the SC2 days, you obviously must suck. Clearly placing top 16 at Final Round, knocking out Link, and placing 3rd at MLG, knocking out a slew of respected players means nothing.

You called out Keev, but didn't say he sucked. What happened to the days when winning in casual play didn't mean shit? I guess a few wins in casuals (not even a money match) suddenly means more than a top 3 placing at a major? You wouldn't call out your Seig friend, but you call out people you didn't even play in the tournament.

You need to make a formal apology Esom, that's really messed up man. I expected much better from you.

 

That being said, you have to understand the perspective of those who don't like the rule: How much of a handicap should one gain for losing? I agree that picking a stage isn't game-breaking, but it is a significant advantage. But, a stage has to be picked somehow, and random is unbiased towards either competitor, so it's considered fair. Ultimately, fighting games are games and some bit of luck is going to be involved; it's just going to boil down to preference.

I've already pointed out that I understand (or I think I do, anyway) the side that prefers the random stage select rule, and I don't think that version is unfair either. In general, however, for a competitive game it makes sense to take out as much randomness as possible.


Malice that just looks like bad PR comparing the Soul Calibur rules to SC5 rules. I'm curious as to who you brought your concerns to. Anyway, I disagree with what you said about testing the rule out. It's honestly not that big a deal, and it's certainly not unfair. Also where exactly could they test it out? Also aren't all the MLG tournies going to have similar payouts?


I personally like how MLG sticks to their guns and use the rules that they want despite their relative unpopularity, such as the extended sets. However, I really have to condemn their decision to change the rule so close to the tournament starting. If I were practicing for the tournament I would have been very upset about the change because you know I would have prepared specific stages for my counterpicks. The change led to the whole Esom situation, and while I imagine most of the players there were fine with the change it's still unprofessional IMO to change it, especially considering that people pre-registered online expecting that ruleset.

Likewise I also think it was bad form for people to be complaining about it so close to the tourney as well. Are you guys really so unable to adapt to a rule that isn't unfair that you'll consistently complain about it over three weeks, right up to when the tourney starts? I seriously have to question people like Jaxel who claimed that his influence helped get the rule changed at MLG. I understand that the majority of the community probably wants the stage to be randomly selected but again, changing the rule that close to the tournament shows a clear lack of understanding of how a tournament should be run. And again I think both sides made a mistake here. (Moreso on MLG's side, though.)

 

Well I guess coming top 13 at FR means nothing? I guess getting Top 3 at MLG means nothing? I guess Hawkeye, Wing Zero, and Swordlord are trash? I thought these were known players and beating them during tournament was a good thing (I'm not talking shit to the above players who I believe are great.)

http://s3.majorleaguegaming.com/2012-columbus-soulcaliburv-open.html

I guess my bracket was just a cake walk...Well gg's to all I played at MLG and FR. Sorry I...won a few matches vs you all?

I'm not saying I can't be beaten because there is SO much more I need to learn about SCV but to say I only placed due to the brackets being messed up??? Are you kidding me? Did I not playing anyone who knew frame data, match up info, etc, etc?

 

snip

You can read here and see for yourself.

http://8wayrun.com/threads/mar-23-2012-mlg-winter-championship-mk9-scv-kofxiii-columbus-oh.12227/

Also, I'm not complaining. MLG can do what they want, so I made the choice to not go. But if their goal is for fighters to be a mainstay, then they can't add a rule that no one is familiar playing under two weeks before the tournament is supposed to take place. Not to mention that people had to wait a week to see what the actual rules were going to be.

And from my perspective, I want SCV to be a success. I like alot of the things that MLG does. All I want to see them do is keep that rule out of SCV and seed by region. That's all.

 

Omg. MLG actually flying top 8 out to their next tournament and paying for their hotel with a guaranteed pot for top 8 again. Seriously, when has SC seen that type of support...ever? Everybody's always talking about how they want SC to blow up but MLG has already met us halfway on this shit. The bigger the showing, the bigger the payouts, the more people he get paid out, the more exposure SC gets.

Seriously, the only sad thing about the first SC MLG was the number of entrants. Like my bro said, we all need to get dressed like SU and support this shit!

 

Tell them to announce shit earlier and maybe they will get more people. Oh and not to do it on the same day as an evo major.

 

Tell them to announce shit earlier and maybe they will get more people. Oh and not to do it on the same day as an evo major.

Yeah, someone who has contact between us and them should get them to start announcing the stuff here. I'm not sure if the events clashing thing can be helped as they prob plan theirs a year out and barely anyone in the FGC does.

 

I have a feeling they don't plan that far ahead for fighters. If they did, I would expect we would have gotten a ruleset far sooner than we did.

As for growing the scene, money helps but it isn't everything. In fact, that's where a lot of people draw the line: Do you take the money but have to accept their terms; or, do you deal with less money and have the ability to stay "true to your roots." I'm not picking sides, I'm just saying that's why there's an MLG argument in the first place. One side like efficiency and bigger prizes and the other can live with lesser prizes if it means a more informal atmosphere. Eventually, the two are going to have to compromise.

 

Well if they are going to start flying people out and top 8 gets big prizes, it makes their events worth it to go to for more people. That is one thing I hope the FGC copies from "esports", top 8 prize pool is a great idea.

 

That's cool for top 8, but not for the rest of the field. But, paying to more than top 3 is something a lot of tournaments have started to adopt, especially big events. I've always been a little skeptical of top 3-only payouts at anything over 64 entrants. If you get top 8 at a big event, you should at least break even.

 

I have a feeling they don't plan that far ahead for fighters. If they did, I would expect we would have gotten a ruleset far sooner than we did.

As for growing the scene, money helps but it isn't everything. In fact, that's where a lot of people draw the line: Do you take the money but have to accept their terms; or, do you deal with less money and have the ability to stay "true to your roots." I'm not picking sides, I'm just saying that's why there's an MLG argument in the first place. One side like efficiency and bigger prizes and the other can live with lesser prizes if it means a more informal atmosphere. Eventually, the two are going to have to compromise.

What compromise has been made? The 3 out of 5 that lots of people like? Or the whole revenge or whatever it's called? I mean, I don't like sc5 as much as a lot of you but MLG did damn near everything right, actually listened to the players, and, for once, made SC not seem like a glorified side event that they're just putting up with. I won't comment on the logistics side of things, but you can go ahead and read through a bunch of tournaments going even years out and you get a feel of how much these 'grassroots' tournamnts shit on sc (and just about anything not Capcom).

Honestly, I feel like we're a group of women in an abusive relationship and I found me some new dick. I'm not saying I won't take part in majors by the FGC but, to anyone who travels who doesn't give MLG a chance, don't come bitching about how SC gt the shaft at such and such a tournament.

 

snip

Aside from the fact that the two sides are playing the same game? None, really. Different rules, different format, different structures all around. I wasn't suggesting any compromise had been made. I was mostly referring to the mentality of the two arenas. Individual feelings aside, MLG is a business and is run as such. Most FGC majors don't make a lot of money, so they don't have quite the same values or concerns.

But, more to your point, I don't think anyone was complaining about SC getting the shaft; in fact, I think most people have recognized that MLG was excellent exposure for the game. It's mostly community members that have certain gripes and feel the community is being taken advantage of. Again, I'm not taking sides, but I can see how both ends of the spectrum feel.

At the end of the day, as you suggest, everyone will have to make up their own minds.