Here's something I've been savouring for a long while. This story goes beyond the time I became inactive, and has only reared its head thanks to a certain owner of this website causing me to think in things esports again. Before I bore you with a pointless introduction, I mean to state that I wish to talk about online content, and specifically those who write it.
For those of you who are perhaps newer to this site, or were lucky enough to not be around at the time of my 'contribute' phase, you may or may not know that in times not too recent gone I had something of a duty with this website. I still hold it deep within the
Quag/Whitey vestiges of my heart, but I refer to a time before that of CDC3, a time when I remember being overjoyed at promotion to administrative duties on the pro-ET site. This was an age when I scoured the interwebs for scraps of news and gossip that I could proudly flag-tag on the main page, and bask in the glory on my name being proclaimed to the masses. I admit my friend mr alcohol is probably telling more of the story than I, but in short I was proud to write on xfire, and felt like I was delivering a service for which I had been duly rewarded.
Now times change, and unfortunately, I seldom frequent this portal anywhere near as much as I used to, with any cookie update coming thanks to a journal which is probably related in some way to
Trevize's use of the site. But it raises an interesting point, and one that can be seen manifest in the latest v&e newspost. You may remember our very own German-man 
swine posting ream after ream of VAE news for you ungrateful people, who read and disgarded with varing degrees of flame or lack of care. This is beside the point you understand! The point I am attempting to make is that there is no more swineposts, and this is a long trend that has extended far beyond the desperate clutches of 2000 and eight.
Some time ago I wrote a column that I never published about writers on internet sites being an unsustainable breed. I regret having conducted a search of my computers cupboards that I seem to have deleted the text file, but I remember referencing writers on xfire (version1!) who used to contribute one impressively large amount of content, but who have since moved on to other areas. In a way this can be an explaination for the question, why should online journalism be so short lived? People move on, travel different avenues in life, and generally discover other activities aside straddling their beloved fan-cooled box every night. Yet deeper, there is also an inbuilt banality.
In black and white terms, you have web 2.0 (xfire) and you have employers (SK-gaming [for reference]). I hate the web2 term, but I refer to it as a way of saying the contribute site, what they/we/(I) would claim as 'free to air views website'. There have been admin-written newsposts on crossfire in the past that appeal to budding writers to simple hit their contribute button and they will, effectively, be guaranteed a place in whatever fantasy they desire. Then you have the employers, who look for quality and reward it. I only refer to SK because of a conversation I had a long time ago that I vaguely remember.
My point though is simple. Yes, you have your swines and I say without arrogance your foonrs who write for the love of it and provide content and analysis because it pleases them, but ultimately, the affection always wanes. I wish I could remember my writer research but sadly it fails me. But assertively, I can say that anyone who writes news, previews, predictions and so on online for the love of will, at the end of the day, find their interest fades, and they move on to other things. The industry, in effect, offers little incentive to stay working within it.
At this late stage I must stress that I was far more lucky than most. My involvement with this site has taken me to not only Enschede, but also Poznan and Rotterdam, for which I am eternally grateful. But the same cannot be said for those who are enticed into a project with little light at the end of the promised tunnel. My point in writing this column is to highlight the shame of the state of the free-to-air, free-to-provide online industry. It isn't Crossfire's failure, and I would go so far as to say the openness this type of system is, in its opposite form, a strength. But until there is a real sense of business, until people feel real incentive to provide their well-articulated articles in the long term, quality and consistancy will continue to have to renew itself within short spaces of time. With gaming seemingly going the ever-more professional route, I will find it interesting to see if online journalism follows the same path.
For those of you who are perhaps newer to this site, or were lucky enough to not be around at the time of my 'contribute' phase, you may or may not know that in times not too recent gone I had something of a duty with this website. I still hold it deep within the
Quag/Whitey vestiges of my heart, but I refer to a time before that of CDC3, a time when I remember being overjoyed at promotion to administrative duties on the pro-ET site. This was an age when I scoured the interwebs for scraps of news and gossip that I could proudly flag-tag on the main page, and bask in the glory on my name being proclaimed to the masses. I admit my friend mr alcohol is probably telling more of the story than I, but in short I was proud to write on xfire, and felt like I was delivering a service for which I had been duly rewarded.Now times change, and unfortunately, I seldom frequent this portal anywhere near as much as I used to, with any cookie update coming thanks to a journal which is probably related in some way to
Trevize's use of the site. But it raises an interesting point, and one that can be seen manifest in the latest v&e newspost. You may remember our very own German-man swine posting ream after ream of VAE news for you ungrateful people, who read and disgarded with varing degrees of flame or lack of care. This is beside the point you understand! The point I am attempting to make is that there is no more swineposts, and this is a long trend that has extended far beyond the desperate clutches of 2000 and eight.Some time ago I wrote a column that I never published about writers on internet sites being an unsustainable breed. I regret having conducted a search of my computers cupboards that I seem to have deleted the text file, but I remember referencing writers on xfire (version1!) who used to contribute one impressively large amount of content, but who have since moved on to other areas. In a way this can be an explaination for the question, why should online journalism be so short lived? People move on, travel different avenues in life, and generally discover other activities aside straddling their beloved fan-cooled box every night. Yet deeper, there is also an inbuilt banality.
In black and white terms, you have web 2.0 (xfire) and you have employers (SK-gaming [for reference]). I hate the web2 term, but I refer to it as a way of saying the contribute site, what they/we/(I) would claim as 'free to air views website'. There have been admin-written newsposts on crossfire in the past that appeal to budding writers to simple hit their contribute button and they will, effectively, be guaranteed a place in whatever fantasy they desire. Then you have the employers, who look for quality and reward it. I only refer to SK because of a conversation I had a long time ago that I vaguely remember.
My point though is simple. Yes, you have your swines and I say without arrogance your foonrs who write for the love of it and provide content and analysis because it pleases them, but ultimately, the affection always wanes. I wish I could remember my writer research but sadly it fails me. But assertively, I can say that anyone who writes news, previews, predictions and so on online for the love of will, at the end of the day, find their interest fades, and they move on to other things. The industry, in effect, offers little incentive to stay working within it.
At this late stage I must stress that I was far more lucky than most. My involvement with this site has taken me to not only Enschede, but also Poznan and Rotterdam, for which I am eternally grateful. But the same cannot be said for those who are enticed into a project with little light at the end of the promised tunnel. My point in writing this column is to highlight the shame of the state of the free-to-air, free-to-provide online industry. It isn't Crossfire's failure, and I would go so far as to say the openness this type of system is, in its opposite form, a strength. But until there is a real sense of business, until people feel real incentive to provide their well-articulated articles in the long term, quality and consistancy will continue to have to renew itself within short spaces of time. With gaming seemingly going the ever-more professional route, I will find it interesting to see if online journalism follows the same path.
Though your column is nicely written, and structured. It seems you have actually been thinking on this!
i reference mr alcohol, i shall use this as an excuse towards your confusion. my point is that the romance of online writing wears off, and not enough is done to keep those with real potential continuing to produce material of a high standard. instead, their interest falls until they no longer write
agreed
on the style part you underestimate yourself
They are the wanabi ppl in the community just focus on the ppl who are nice to you.
its not easy to beloved by this kind of kids, so dont bother...
nice post man keep up goodwork!
Sadly, that isn't the case and I'm immersing myself in a dream-world to even think that naive notion was possible.
In particular with this site, there have been so many people who have contributed to the point of either gaining status/notoriety and then simply disappeared when either has been achieved. In cases when neither could be achieved, people have also moved on to pastures new, disowning this site and everything it stands for.
Nice column. Seems a bit strange coming from you though. :P
Nice sentence.
You say that it isn't Crossfire's failure that the romance of online writing is wearing off. As much as I like and admire the administration of this website, I can't help but disagreeing with you on this matter.
You cite Crossfire as an example of a "web 2.0" site because it allows for, and thrives upon, the contributions of its users. While this is entirely true, I feel that, in spite of the ambiguity of the web2 term, applying it to Crossfire is highly problematic. Why? Because, from the point of view of a web designer, this iteration of the website, though fairly new, has been obsolete since the day it was first put online. To illustrate, this website fails horribly at complying with web standards (598 errors returned by the W3C Markup Validation Service), it uses a deficient layout (see http://www.andyrutledge.com/bad-layout-conventions.php), it's navigation is unintuitive and does not directly encourage for user contributions (among other things, the 'contribute' button is not visible enough, even to users who are logged in, and the site lacks bottom-of-the-page global navigation), and the site generally fails to follow the overall look and feel of typical web 2.0 sites to such a degree that it appears out of date to the point that it might actually scare off new users and encourage contributors to seek other pastures.
I am by no means very knowledgeable about the design of websites, but when visiting Crossfire after having paid a trip to last.fm or similar sites, the deficiency of the site becomes too apparent even for me to ignore. Because this site has a number of dedicated users who will probably visit it regardless of how it looks and feels, this inadequacy perhaps does not translate into low web traffic. However, in the long run it will no doubt prove detrimental. Indeed, I would go as far as saying that it helps explain why the romance of writing on this site is wearing off.
Another complaint I want to lodge against Crossfire is that it fails to represent its userbase proportionately in its administration. Not only does this lead to tiresome friction and argument between users and admins, but it also seems to convey an actual distrust in the userbase. Although he has nothing to do with this subject, I will take the liberty of quoting Linus Torvalds on this matter, as I think he has put it very fittingly in saying: "If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will use it."
EDIT: I am sorry if I derailed the discussion by posting this. However, I feel that these concerns cannot be ignored.
Primarily the producer of the site has to think about his demographic, competitive video gamers are on the whole between 15 and 30 years old and predominantly male. This usergroup may all have accounts on Facebook and Myspace and may all follow a sport, but that doesn’t mean they want their gaming website to be the same as the other sites they visit. One must look beyond the quantative aspects of the demographic and look at the trends of the user group. Firstly and most importantly they spend a great deal of time at their PC and all have medium to advanced understanding of how to use them and the internet. Video gamers have been pushing the technological limits of the internet since its inception, because their realm of competition exists only on the internet.
Sites and technology that have become popular with the general internet demographic have been used by gaming communities for years before the mainstream adopted them.
Skype has become a very popular voice over IP technology, however the reality is that long before Skype existed gamers were using that technology under a different brand, called Teamspeak or Ventrilo. These existed in their most basic forms since 1998 where group conferencing for a team to talk to one another was being made possible.
There are other examples such as Video and Audio streaming facilities like Youtube and the unicast live streaming used by the BBC. For years any method of gamers broadcasting their matches has been tried, tested and adopted, the most popular method was using a technology called shoutcast. Its only recently that gaming has been given airtime on TV, but millions of gamers have been wanting to see the latest big matches and so have worked around it. Online broadcasting of video games reached its peak in February of 2007 when the World Series of Video games had 7 million concurrent viewers on its peer-to-peer streaming platform for their chinese event.
Gamers have been adapting to new technology as soon as its become available, at these points its been buggy and doesn’t always function correctly. For example, getting peer-to-peer video streams to work is quite a challenge for both user and supplier. Gamers will rarely use the finished product because its been created for different uses than theirs, Skype for example has millions of users online at any one time, but gamers will tell you it takes up too much internet bandwidth so they’d rather use a gaming alternative.
The result was that the gamers have become a technologically demanding usergroup, and their websites are no different. A gaming website does not need to educate its audience, it assumes that they already know some basics of how the site they’re visiting will operate, and focuses the space on their page on content rather than education.
The Design of crossfire is not geared to towards blogfire.com which is where the broad market of new internet users is headed and I will never let it become that. I am a purist and Crossfire will remain a pursist attitude.
Foonrs point and the problem inherent in it is with gamers rather than any other internet usergroup is that gamers need to be lead, why? becuase I'd hazzard a guess that 75% of the users of this site are 20 and under, and have non concept of leadership nor self preservation, because their identity has not only been changed but is ready to be changed.
One must point out that oBs you left Crossfire as you left Cadred, your own personal record MUST come to play when assessing your response, you've tried contributing but inherently failed dealing with the audience you write for, so instead of trying to asses the audience of this site, you need to realise that on two sites you failed to accurately represent your audience in your writing. So I would discredit your ability to critique userbase representation, let alone design.
You must realise that Crossfire has sustained month on month growth since May 05 when I purchased it, so any suggestion that it is failing to represent the needs of its users is wrong and far fetched. As mentioned it required leadership and concept, the first goal and concept, crossfire achieved now its time for evolution and the next goal is far bigger and far more harder, but will be achieved never the less but if you doubt its potential then I look forward to proving you wrong :)
Foonrs column as much as I love him and will never hold this against him is infact an insult to myself and the few esports website owners that have proved to be successful, what he points out is that the owners have lost their ability to galvanize volunteers and that is no more apparent than one of my favourite websites (and on i admin on) esreality, but gamers and the users of crossfire must appriciate that on this site specifically, 2008 is the year where Crossfire and the conglomerate attached to it either evolves or dies, and I've no intention of letting that die, otherwise TosspoT dies with it.
Evolution (in esports) leads to success, revolution leads to failure
I admit that using last.fm as a basis for a comparison was a mistake. However, it is not a mistake that undermines my critique. While I fully agree with what you have said about the importance of focusing on your demographic, and while I am able to follow your analysis of the site's userbase, I feel that you are missing an important point.
Scratch last.fm from my original post and replace it instead with GotFrag, GGL, or SK-Gaming, for instance. These sites are all eSports orientated, and so using them as examples makes for a more sensible comparison. Yes, I realise that it's still not an apples-to-apples comparison since none of these sites allow for the same level of user contribution as Crossfire but they all serve to underpin my point nevertheless. If you do not trust in my ability to design, then let these sites do the talking. Yes, they cater to a broader audience than Crossfire, and yet, at least in the case of GotFrag and SK, the demography of these sites could be described in terms very similar to those that you have used to describe that of Crossfire. Looking closely at these sites, you will see that my critique is in fact legitimate.
No website needs to educate its visitors in trivial matters such as navigation. Indeed, good web design dictates that this be avoided at all cost. A site's navigation should be an easy and convenient way for visitors to explore and move through the website. To this end, navigation should be created with users and usability in mind. In short, it should be user-friendly, and it should encourage users to utilise the services that the site provides. There are no good arguments for making a lot of assumptions about your users during the design of your global navigation if it can be avoided. Catering to your specific demographic in no way justifies the poor state of this website's design.
You will have to acknowledge that there are best practices in web design and that Crossfire simply is not following them. You cite the site's continuous growth as an indication of the opposite. I find this argument void for two reasons. Firstly, you have arranged several LANs since you purchased the site. Because these LANs have been important to the niches that are represented on this site, users have been willing to overlook the deficiency of the website in order to ensure that they participated at them. It has always been thus in eSports, and, in the case of the niches represented on this site, it will remain thus until such LANs are arranged on a more frequent basis. Secondly, though it is deficient, this iteration of the website has been a slight improvement over the former.
Crossfire is a ghetto in terms of usability and accessibility. Furthermore, the site is starting to lag behind in terms of functionality. Where other eSports sites are introducing functionality that allow users to share content through digg, del.icio.us or the likes, this website is struggling with poorly designed navigation and lack of flexibility. This prevents it from following in their footsteps. Crossfire is showing its age and unless you realise and act upon this quickly, it will be to your detriment. With regards to the solution to this problem I will not be misunderstood. I do NOT want you to copycat social networking sites. What I want is usability, accessibility and modern functionality. I'm not asking for a revolution. I'm asking you to pursue the same evolution as other popular eSports sites, to embrace the terms of modern web interaction, and to design your site so that it encourages for user contribution and interaction instead of making unnecessary assumptions. I don't think that is too much to ask.
As for your personal comments, I shall be quite brief. It was never my goal to accurately represent my audience. I had no intentions of conforming to the terms of writing for the internet. All I wanted was to practice my English writing and to give people the impression that there were still people caring enough about ET to spend hours writing about it. I am, and I was, aware that few read what I wrote. That wasn't why I decided to leave Cadred nor Crossfire. No, my motives for doing that were entirely different.
Now, I could make personal comments about the real reasons why you oppose my critique so strongly. However, this I shall refrain from.
Now let me retort to your point which has some valid foundations.
Design -
Firstly, until a month ago SK Gaming was the worst looking website in the world. It updated itself, putting GGL Wire at the bottom. In circles I frequent, they were disliked by advertisers and users alike, because of their design. However, what I have maintained on Crossfire is a clean design, Crossfire version 2 had a very clean design and when building version 3, the design was sent to marketing managers that I knew to take opinions on its marketability and navigation. This design was not just randomly approved, there was a professional research strategy behind it. What has happened in the 12+ months since then? The Facebook generation has been born, tastes and desires have evolved - something Crossfire will have to do.
Usability and Functionality -
Does this need improving? Yes - Is Crossfire a ghetto for usability? Hell no. Crossfire has now outgrown CF 3, tournaments, LANs, multiple games, an evergrowing userbase - but that doesnt make it a ghetto. The average user, wants to read and write on the site, something thats just as simple on CF as it is on Facebook. The functionality presented to users is still industry standard, the functionality presented to content producers on CF needs improving to continue offering things to read and write to the average user.
However what you have to understand is that functionality can never replace content and can never replace a userbase, something this site maintains and expands upon. You quote SK and Gotfrag, I quote ESRealitys (biggest quake site) old design and TeamLiquid.net (biggest western starcraft site) old everything as examples that functionality/design are not fundamental keys to success in an esports site, but nurturing a userbase is.
You must also be subjective in your approach, this may be an excuse from me but, Gotfrag got bought by MLG for $5million+, SK is worth a similar figure and has a massive budget and monthly income. Crossfire has my wallet and my time to make business happen, to pay for upgrades because thats where we're at, I'm never going to ask tala for a crossfire sized favour again, im going to pay him a good price for it because he gave me a platform to succeed and now I must suceed and deliver back to him (this is my morals and principal, not an agreement/contract). If I view what Crossfire has achieved versus the achievements of multi-million dollar companies, then Crossfire is doing bloody well in that battle. Comparing a volunteer site funded by one guys student loan, to, in the case of GGL a company with 60 employees in a Santa Monica office, then I'm pretty fucking satisfied with whats been achieved.
What you want and ask for in your site (crossfire) is what I dream of being able to offer. I'm not saying your wrong wanting what you want, but I am making the excuse and defending why you havent got that yet. I am not blind to flaws and I am not blind to nice sites, but you have to wait, whilst I do have a master plan to offer a better product across a vast range of things, even beyond crossfire, I've a long way to go before I can tell you when its gonna happen.
Stupid web2.0 full of spinning flashes and streamable videos. CF got all it needs and I like it being to simple and easy to adapt.
EDIT: and to Tosspot: CF's user base is growing just becouse everybody from Loekino's Love Island is making a new account everytime the old gets banned :D
Loekino rocks:P
and at the end of the day im not one to judge as i even had to think hard over writing this short comment in my current state :P
- - - - -
Gamers are impressionable, stupid, naive and lazy, although I think my exact words were 'slightly distasteful obsession with interaction', most of them anyway. I've no doubt that there are intelligent and mature gamers somewhere out in the wild, but generally they've as much disdain for the 'majority' as I do and choose not to post.
In the same vain, that also means that there's a disproportional amount of people willing to invest their time for others. Even less so than normal, writing wise and when there are people willing to give it a go, there is a chronic shortage of support so generally they don't improve and then lose interest as you put it.
Websites like Crossfire and eSreality are fine to be honest. You know your boundaries and there are no expectations, it's a win win situation for a writer who has the intention of doing some good or improving his writing, and you can put in as much or as little effort as you please. It's the more mainstream websites that are the problem.
I feel I can write so much better than I could when I first started at SK, but since I've chosen to write about 'boring' or controversial topics, the attention shifts from what you've specifically wrote to your background, style and particular stance on something. People come into a discussion with a preconceived notion of what they're going to say before they've even read something. I think they somehow feel offended that someone even exists and has the nerve to say he doesn't like the way eSports works and has a different opinion, they feel threatened by a lack of respect.
I'm by no means perfect, and yeah I often write with absolutely no intention or thought for my audience – but it's disheartening when you're bound by 500 word limits and the vocabulary of a five year old. But I'm personally heading for cross roads I feel. When I make the front page on the likes of rakaka.se and people leave comments on Carmac's columns saying nothing specific about the column itself, but purely to make mention of me (even bad press is good press), I think I'm raising my profile somewhat.
Carmac, bESEL, Midway and the likes have been writing for eight years or even more in some cases, whereas I only joined SK late last year. So being compared to writers with that much experience, does that flatter or impede me? I wonder. Though it must be noted, even I have a tolerance limit, somewhere high up in the clouds and an ego can only take so much bashing without something happening.
For those who are interested, Carmac gave 'us' his writing guide for the SK website, I've rar'd it and you can download it here. Might be interesting for some of you. (File has been made non public, and I'm not brave enough to link again.)
Too lazy in fact, to even write a good response.
well written though =P
Ever been here ?:D
walls of text <3
Hi foonr!
Dont get me wrong, i love this game, but i got the feeling ive seen most of it. For me the best part in gaming is learning and getting better, and somehow alot of ppl reached the end of their ET learning curve.
Most community posts used to be about either news about the top players or about how to improve the game and how to improve urself. And because so many ppl reached the end of their learning curve, its harder to look up to the better players or to try to become better.
I think that in other games their definatly is a future for online journalism, just not for ET. And besides alot of those ppl that used to be obsessed by crossfire and ET are now getting older and dont feel like taking up a new game activly, they are fine with an occasional war with some old e-friends.
All I would as a "stupid and lazy user" is that though crossfire has done well as tosspot states, I regularly find my self wishing for some more content on crossfire. As much a teams announcements pimping themselves is in interesting, there is a lack of journalistic content of any standard, impartial or otherwise. Though I have no idea how to remedy it. I admit I maybe complicit in bringing about this sad state of affairs and may have made comments which possibly could be view with a negative slant, which could possible have indirectly cause disillusionment and disaffection with contributing to crossfire.
"have been inactive". stay away, thx!
Unfortunately most comments/contributions to this site are made by the "impressionable, stupid, naive and lazy" gamers.
Besides that i do believe "good writings with a sence of romance" are recognized even when it is by the minority of the users/contributers.
Anyway, nicely written. Mostly this:
"eople move on, travel different avenues in life, and generally discover other activities aside straddling their beloved fan-cooled box every night. Yet deeper, there is also an inbuilt banality."
Most do it because they really like a game/site whatever. They also like writing (or their own opinion) and they contribute. Sooner or later that interest in a game will disappear. Most often because they get old and get/have to do other things!
sorry mr infensus
Mr infensus? Please explain.
E-mail: jin at infensus dot se
ok, lolol mr gmail
Placing a single "Contribute" button alongside the "Home", "Movies", "Columns" etc buttons would certainly help the situation in my humble opinion. After all, user contributions is what Crossfire is all about and you should emphasize this as much as you can.
I found the terms web2.0 and employers real enjoyable to read, but there should be said as well, something like this:
I myself write on the internet (Considerable E-journalism) in order to keep up my english skills but as well since I enjoy it more than anyone else. I wrote for various websites and I enjoy it ever since.
Yet, I'm the type of guy which thinks that a reward is on its place once you devote much time to a website and make as much newsposts/articles etc as possible. Does this make me someone who "writes for Sk-Gaming", in other words, being an employee?
Not that I have anything to contribute, but I know that I'm not the only one who feels this way. :)
edit: and i keep on trying not to reply to admins...i always get a ban for weird reasons...there is no offend in this reply.