Does the amount of cash prize really help the tournament scene?

[Matt Ponton]

I was discussing this with my friend in Japan (A Super Turbo player who still plays in Japanese arcades to this day) and thought I would throw this out there for anyone else.

Personally, I feel that just throwing a "large pot prize" out there really hurts the community more so than benefits.

I'm not trying to say that having a large cash prize is bad. I am just saying that when the main feature of a tournament is the size of the prize, the competition surrounding that tournament can be flooded by those of a much lower tier. I feel that this was evident when Dead or Alive 4 was added to the Evo line-up and (I forget the exact number) but there were a number of players who just entered to get a chance at a "guess right" "easy" money, around five times the number of players who typically played Dead or Alive 4 competitively. Granted, the usual DOA4 suspects made it through the pools, but no one was going around saying "Wow, DOA4 had a 90-man tournament!" but just looked at the number of players playing for the prize and not the game. Bill Menoutis tried the same thing with DOATEC2k7, and looking back I wonder if it was the prize that enticed everyone to come. I don't remember the exact numbers as well, but I think it was within 20-30. It was also the first Dead or Alive 4 major shortly after the release of DOA4.1.

Then you have gaming events such as World Cyber Games, Major League Gaming, and Championship Gaming Series. My major gripe is with CGS. I will admit I didn't follow the community back alleys when this series was going on, mainly because I didn't trust the format. It distracted the player base from discussing their game by promising fame and riches (of a standard $30,000 salary). Although a few of them came out with fame, I know a few also didn't come out with any riches.

Also, there are certainly those who have the reason to play for the cash to fund the trip. But, as both ShoRyuKenand Sonic Hurricane have brought up many times: The odds are against you, even if you place, to break even on the tournament. Especially with a community as small as ours.

I wonder though, if you take out the cash prize from the tournament, what are you left with? I would think that you'd be left with players who just want to play the game, learn more about it, and share what they learn with others who strike an interest. I think that it comes down to the cash prize not making the tournament, but the community of players making the cash prize. As the community shares its knowledge, grows, and matures, I'm sure that more people will participate. Then, you have more heads for the fee, and in turn increase the level of competition and cash prize.

So, just curious, what are your takes on cash prizes being the main draw of a tournament? Should the community playing the game be the focus? or how much the first place placer receives?

 

[virtuaPAI]

-I for one feel that tournaments are losing what made them so great in the past. It was an
experience to travel and meet those people you have befriended on the forums. Now it
has become a race to get rich and we are at a loss. I remember going to a tournament and
having a blast just talking and learning from my piers, or simply just going to a tournament
because of the shared love for the game. Winning was something that came second, if not
third in my book.

 

[Rikuto]

We got spoiled was the problem, and lost the love of the game.

Too much money really can destroy the spirit of the game.

Unless its like a money match with Bill, then it's just funny as hell.

 

[Matt Ponton]

A money match at the end of the night when both of you want to lose. . . but can't.

 

[The HuBBs]

I feel that with our community it was more or less corrupted by CGS, WCG and others because of the money. Before that it was a steadily slow growing community that might've been strong enough to still hold annual tournaments besides GVN. Once the money came the top players only cared about making sure they got their paycheck. Those who didn't make the cut left the game and those who did make it but were left in the dust after doa was dropped from the wcg, or cgs going bankrupt, suddenly felt no need to play the game.

There's still the Fighter Club but for how long will doa be a feature game? And looking at the 2nd FC only 4 real members of the DOA community where present. The others where VF players who dabbled with the game before, and tekken cats who did it just for shits and giggles.

With DOATEC, BIll was really trying to keep the DOA community alive. There were 10 people who had a real shot at winning that $1000 and the other 19 of us weren't up to par but we still came and had fun.

 

[virtuaPAI]

We are the future, and the best thing we can do is set the tone for future tournaments. We need to have fun, and make the experience great for all of us.

 

[Game Over]

So then, the real question is what can be done to make the tournaments fun again so that even the players who are new or casual will be drawn to attend. In my personal experience, each of the tournaments I went to I did so for the fun of playing the game and hanging out with fellow community members. In the tournaments, I won some matches, lost most, placed Top 3 once, and at each one, I walked away having had a good experience and feeling like a better player than when I walked in.

I personally think one of the key things holding tournaments back is that the new and casual players don't feel welcomed and respected by some of the longtime members and established players. They see all the drama on the site, think that it is same at the offline tournaments, and don't go even when they have the resources to do so.

The focus on the money is another problem, especially when it leads to a tournament being advertised as a big money tournament. It does corrupt the image and put players' attention in the wrong place. While it is good to draw more players, it is better if the players are attending because they want to be there amongst many fellow community members rather than being there because "they could use the money". Also, when the focus is put on the money, the new and casual players look at that and see it as "Why should I go knowing I don't have the slightest shot at winning?".

This can be addressed, though, not necessarily by lowering or capping tournament pots, but by spreading out the winnings more to encourage more players to show. I would suggest spreading out tournament winnings according to the player turnout. Instead of having each tournament locked at awarding money to the Top 3 placers, have it vary like say

• 2-4 player turnout --> Top 1 wins $$$
• 5-7 player turnout --> Top 2 wins $$$
• 8-11 player turnout --> Top 3 wins $$$
• 12-15 player turnout --> Top 4 wins $$$
• 16-23 player turnout --> Top 6 wins $$$
• 24-47 player turnout --> Top 8 wins $$$
• 48-95 player turnout --> Top 16 wins $$$
• 96-255 player turnout --> Top 32 wins $$$
• 256-511 player turnout --> Top 64 wins $$$

**prize list edited to align with tournament brackets**

Also, IMO, the locked focus on placing Top 3 hurts more than it helps. ESPECIALLY, whether it was a joke or not, the common line "If you're not Top 3, who the **** are you?" that would come up time and time again. I found that to be so annoying. It's one thing to try to encourage players to learn and improve at the game, but it does no good to act as if a given player will get no respect unless he/she makes a Top 3 placing. That's just dumb. The community mindset offline doesn't even reflect that anyway as people get respect just for showing up, so why even say this and leave it for someone to get the misconception?

There is much that can be done to try to improve the progression of the community. It is good to have this thread to discuss these things, so that when DOA5 rolls around, and more players come back to playing the game, things can hopefully run as smoothly and positively as possible.



And IIRC, the EVO turnout was 67, and the DOATEC turnout was 28 with some in attendance who didn't play. No hate, just sayin'.

 

[Matt Ponton]

Thanks Game Over for the eloquent post. I see we primarily agree, you just said it better than me (as mine was more of a rant). I appreciate the added input. Let me just do a quick response to some parts of the post as I'm at work and can't really dedicate a full response.

In my personal experience, each of the tournaments I went to I did so for the fun of playing the game and hanging out with fellow community members. In the tournaments, I won some matches, lost most, placed Top 3 once, and at each one, I walked away having had a good experience and feeling like a better player than when I walked in.

I believe we both have had the same experiences. We have to be able to promote this experience to others.

They see all the drama on the site, think that it is same at the offline tournaments, and don't go even when they have the resources to do so.

Drama? On this site? Where? Seriously though, the DOA community does have a bad rap for itself due to its past trash-talking history. I had a gentleman in Japan who works with WCG bring up to me that he's heard the animosity on DOACentral was very high. That many players stay away from the site because of that, and in turn, information isn't shared. That stings man, and is probably a reason I took the steps to try rebooting the community's image. But rebooting the community's image requires the community to follow suit as well. I hope for our sake they do

This can be addressed, though, not necessarily by lowering or capping tournament pots, but by spreading out the winnings more to encourage more players to show.

Here's one part where I disagree, and you're in turn falling into the original complaint. I feel that, after reading this, you are saying "Well, we just need to guarantee to spread the money around". To me, that appears like you're suggesting the money is the focus. Although, I'm not against higher pot tournaments - or spreading the pot prize to more numbers besides top 3 (Evo splits it across top 8 but has numbers of at least 100 to upwards of 1000 people in the tourney). Our 8-15 man tournaments can't support the money to spread out to top 8, unless we increase the entrance fee. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your intentions of that paragraph and suggestions, and if so, please correct me.

And IIRC, the EVO turnout was 67, and the DOATEC turnout was 28 with some in attendance who didn't play. No hate, just sayin'.

Thanks, I wasn't sure on the numbers but I believe that sounds close - if not right.

 

[virtuaPAI]

Drama? On this site? Where? Seriously though, the DOA community does have a bad rap for itself due to its past trash-talking history. I had a gentleman in Japan who works with WCG bring up to me that he's heard the animosity on DOACentral was very high. That many players stay away from the site because of that, and in turn, information isn't shared. That stings man, and is probably a reason I took the steps to try rebooting the community's image. But rebooting the community's image requires the community to follow suit as well. I hope for our sake they do.

-I wholeheartedly agree. The image Doacentral portrayed was and still is stifling to the community's growth. A reboot was not only warranted, but needed. As you put it so nicely, yes, we need the community to follow suit and support a better future with Dead or Alive.

Here's one part where I disagree, and you're in turn falling into the original complaint. I feel that, after reading this, you are saying "Well, we just need to guarantee to spread the money around". To me, that appears like you're suggesting the money is the focus. Although, I'm not against higher pot tournaments - or spreading the pot prize to more numbers besides top 3 (Evo splits it across top 8 but has numbers of at least 100 to upwards of 1000 people in the tourney). Our 8-15 man tournaments can't support the money to spread out to top 8, unless we increase the entrance fee. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your intentions of that paragraph and suggestions, and if so, please correct me.

-Agree/disagree...lol.. My thing is, we no longer have the numbers to worry about how much money/how many people will get a piece of the pot. Right now, our focus should be on the "community experience", and how we can continue to make Doa more inviting to those people who were shunned away due to their poor experience at DoaC. I am pretty sure that we are stepping in the right direction by taking a more hands on "grass roots" approach.

 

[Game Over]

By my suggestion of spreading out the money, it's notsomuch about a bunch of players getting a bunch of money (should be no need to increase entry fees), but it's meant to increase of the chances of player coming and feeling accomplished. For many people, I'm sure, placing high enough to win money is an achievement. And it doesn't really matter how much money is won, just as long as the player gets like most (or all) or his/her entry fee back. And it can help to attract more players because say a newer player would like to go, place, and win a few bucks, but doesn't feel so confident about placing Top 3 to do so ... maybe the player will, however, feel more confident about the possibly placing Top 8 and winning a few bucks. It can draw more heads simply by showing the community isn't all super focused on who places Top 3 at every tournament.

For an example, say there's a tournament that draws 30 heads with a $10 entry fee. That gives a pot of $300. And say by my second scale, that opens up a Top 8 payout, prize $$$ can go something like this

1st: 50% of pot = $150
2nd: 20% of pot = $60
3rd: 15% of pot = $45
4th: 5% of pot = $15
5-8th: 2.5% of pot = $7.50 each


I think that players can look at a spread like that and say "Y'know, I may not make Top 3, but if I make Top 8, I can go home feeling good that I placed well enough to win money." From my own experience, when I placed 3rd at the last Ohio Showdown tourney in April 2008, I won like $10 or $15, and it was GREAT because at the end of day, I went home with that "Win $$$ at an Offline Tourney" achievement! And hell, it could've been $5 and I still would've felt the same level of accomplishment. I think that right there, that simple return on the investment of the trip will keep players coming back for more. And when you increase the opportunities for players to earn that accomplishment, you'll only increase the chances of them traveling for future tourneys down the road.

And just picture it, I'm sure there are A LOT of players who would fight tooth and nail to place for a mere $5 return on entry fee! That's LUNCH money! And it could be fuel for some HYYYYYYYYYYYYPE upsets!!

 

[The HuBBs]

if there is one thing I fell victim to it was listening to the top players that said to increase the pot fee. In turn I now feel that hurt the community the most and will do the best not to allow that again. There should never be a $25 pot unless the majority agree upon it like the high stakes 3S tournaments that are held at giant tournaments like NEC or ECT.

 

[virtuaPAI]

Game Over, I see what you are getting at. Just there mere fact of having a larger pool of winners will not only garner more interest in the tournament, but will make the players feel good in actually competing(instead of it just being the top 3).

Hubbs, I agree with you. 25$ is a lot of money for an event. unless it a Major that is agreed upon. Such a high fee is also a deterrent. A lot of people simply cannot afford it, especially when venue fees are included.

 

[Game Over]

Another idea that can be incorporated is the idea of Region Battles (which has been mentioned a few times) going down at most/all tournaments. Regions would be split like, West, Southwest, Midwest, South, and East. At tournaments where players from various regions are in attendance, players from their particular region will join up to form 3-man or 4-man teams. Depending on the number of teams, there will either be a RB match or a RB tournament. If it is a RB match, each player from each team puts like $5 into a pot, the teams will face-off, then the winning team will split the pot. If it's a RB tournament, same deal, and either the winning team splits the pot or the Top 2 teams split the pot like 75/25. And just as an extra element, results from these team events (and results of players individually in singles) can be applied to rack up points for each region on a sort of yearly tracking board for national bragging rights.

Tag tournaments can be dropped in order to accommodate the team matches. Players would still be free to play tag in casuals if they so choose.

This idea would hopefully encourage players in each region to take part in more online/offline gatherings with one another to help build the strength of their region, and to pool together to travel more to represent and earn points for their region. And regions would also be encouraged to bring more players to tournaments so that they can have chances to score more points at each outing.

 

[virtuaPAI]

A regions battle would do well. Players will love to face off against their local peers to see who will dominate. Right now, I think Online will be the best way to go, unless certain regions have a strong offline scene. For a game Like Doa3.1 (possibly doa2u), we have to push hard for an offline scene. We can try to get players to transfer over their doa4 skills into 3.1, while having them learning 3.1 specifics.

 

[Matt Ponton]

It's very tough to go from 4 to 3, as the mental game is entirely different.

But, Game Over, region competitions are a nice idea. It's great to see you giving ideas and everything, I'm just wondering how viable they are in the current state of the community. For region matches to do well, you typically need a lot of peeps from different regions to really pull it off, and those regions need to travel to the event as well. I worry that again, our community is too small for the idea. However, I hope to be proven wrong.

 

[Game Over]

The thing is, though, if you lay the groundwork for these things ahead of time, it only inpires players to play more, travel, and take part. Region Battles would be just one more reason for more players to attend tournaments. And some may very well have more fun taking part in and watching the RBs than they do in the main singles tournament. The potential of these things would serve to motivate player development and increase offline numbers ... which, after all, is the long term goal.



Oh ... and just to be clear, my suggestions made are with the assumption that DOA5 will be coming sometime in the near future. Layout a groundwork ahead of time to properly make the most of the resurgence in activity. As for DOA4, I think if a revival is to be sought for that game, unfortunately, only online efforts seem realistic at this point. Most of the formerly active players lost interest and are now playing other fighters, and the few players that are still playing the game are almost entirely casual. For starters, something would have to be done to renew the interest of the established players, who will then, be able to draw more interest from the newer/casual players. It's a tough proposition, though.

 

[Game Over]

Hey. I recently put up a thread on DOACentral on a similar topic asking people if they thought activity for the game was dead, and if not, what they felt could be done to bring players to play.

Here's a response posted by Highguy:

not dead yet and prob nev will b till theres no more online support much like ultimate. less constant bashing could always help though.

but a big online tourney with a decent prize would bring alot of ppl back atleast for said tourney. maybe make it a series of em to keep em here longer lol. just look at that bs tourney finale tried to run. alot of ppl came back for that

So, as an attempt for starters, what do you guys think about organizing some major online tournament with, say, various MS Point cards put up for prizes? I know Allen Paris does that for online tournaments he runs and he draws fair numbers.

Maybe even getting a steady run of these online tournaments going, like 4 a year or bi-monthly or monthly, while also making use of the idea for region competition. Players who compete in these tournaments can earn points for their region by placing, and the top region(s) each year gets the bragging rights.

 

[Matt Ponton]

As I replied to him on DOACentral. Hubbs and I were doing that exact same idea, and it did little to "revive" the community. We were granting a $100 prize to the victor of a long string of tournaments, with minor $20-50 prizes given to second and third. It didn't pan out to well as the community still couldn't manage to get its act together with even 2 weeks notice. Again, it's not really the prize that we can put out there, but the community appeal of people getting together to game.

 

[Allan Paris]

So, as an attempt for starters, what do you guys think about organizing some major online tournament with, say, various MS Point cards put up for prizes? I know Allen Paris does that for online tournaments he runs and he draws fair numbers.

Maybe even getting a steady run of these online tournaments going, like 4 a year or bi-monthly or monthly, while also making use of the idea for region competition. Players who compete in these tournaments can earn points for their region by placing, and the top region(s) each year gets the bragging rights.

But wouldn't that be like buying people into the game, starting out like that? That is a good idea Game Over, once a solid community is established. For my tournanments those people play because of me and not what I am offering them.

I think that's the angle that needs to be approached. Letting people know that everybody in the community is not a douche. I use to ask poeple about joining the community, the first thing they say is, "NO, I heard about that place". So, they keep in touch with me but they won't fully join with the community. I like hosting tournaments and giving back to the commuity, I really do enjoy it, but I won't buy people.

For the record I am not saying that's what you are purposing Game Over. I just read that, and it sounded like, "Lets buy players/people".

 

[Game Over]

As I replied to him on DOACentral. Hubbs and I were doing that exact same idea, and it did little to "revive" the community. We were granting a $100 prize to the victor of a long string of tournaments, with minor $20-50 prizes given to second and third. It didn't pan out to well as the community still couldn't manage to get its act together with even 2 weeks notice. Again, it's not really the prize that we can put out there, but the community appeal of people getting together to game.

Then, instead of focusing on the prizes, focus instead on the points and the competition between regions. Make the points the prizes, and encourage players in each region to get more players to play so they can have a chance to rack up more points. In effect, it would be using tournaments to inspire an increase in participation. Sometimes all it takes is a little "tweak" to elevate a good idea to a great one.

But wouldn't that be like buying people into the game, starting out like that? That is a good idea Game Over, once a solid community is established. For my tournanments those people play because of me and not what I am offering them.

I think that's the angle that needs to be approached. Letting people know that everybody in the community is not a douche. I use to ask poeple about joining the community, the first thing they say is, "NO, I heard about that place". So, they keep in touch with me but they won't fully join with the community. I like hosting tournaments and giving back to the commuity, I really do enjoy it, but I won't buy people.

For the record I am not saying that's what you are purposing Game Over. I just read that, and it sounded like, "Lets buy players/people".

IMO, it's not really the same as "buying players" unless you make the prizes the main selling point of the tournament. CGS "bought" players because they marketed the idea of getting paid to play games so grand and epic. But if tournaments were to feature something like region points alongside prize winnings (or as the prizes themselves), then it is no longer so much about getting paid to play, it's about playing to represent your region, and winning something whenever you do really well.

I think introducing a new kinda "team" element like that would serve well to renew people's interest since they would be playing for more that just their own personal gains. It is something that could be worth a shot, at least.