Loser Interviews in Esports
Should loser interviews be a thing in esports?
Hey lovely readers, it’s that time of the week once more and that means I’m posting another new blog – woohoo! So now that it is off season for a few esports, let’s talk interviews. Interviews with players more specifically, and if we want even more detail than that, then let’s talk about post match interviews – which are typically winner interviews. This blog was inspired by the wonderful Ashley Kang who set up a discussion on Twitter centring on if loser interviews should be a thing within the LCK, and having watched Yinsu Collins’ interviews on her Twitch stream – where she did loser and winner interviews with players (both will be linked at the end of this blog), it felt like a good time to bring this discussion back up. So, without further ado let’s get into it!
So why loser interviews? Why bother doing them? Is it not just a further kick to the losing team like rubbing salt in the wounds? There’s a lot of questions that can surround the idea of loser interviews and putting them into practice, and in combination with these ideas, there are a few other points I want to highlight and discuss today in this blog. Mainly whether they’re a good thing to include in esports (like how they are involved in mainstream sports through press conferences), are they of any benefit, does it encourage sportsmanship, and finally were loser interviews to be introduced into esports would it benefit the industry and pro play/the players overall (we will use an example to best answer this question).
There’s a lot to unpack here, so let’s begin by discussing what significance loser interviews could have in esports and whether their success in mainstream sport could be carried over into pro play (specifically at the highest levels). Loser interviews in mainstream sports (I'm thinking football/soccer here specifically) are usually done in the case of press conferences or a pitch side interview, and being able to hear the coach/players discuss the match from their perspective is definitely interesting for spectators. It offers an interesting insight beyond the standard winner interview, which could be argued to be largely based on ego and less on the series of events that led to a win. Whereas a loser interview allows for a realistic potentially less sugar coated version of the events and for fans to have insight into the team’s working (through other means of content than the usual mic comms). Fans obviously get a benefit out of loser interviews taking place, but there is an arguably benefit for the player of being able to communicate directly to fans how they felt with the match and to be able to hear what a player made of a game is something that could help the industry be open to discussion loses openly without blame placing or trolling players who ‘didn’t perform well enough.’ For esports, these are surely good things, being able to actually discuss losses openly without backlash provides sportsmanship, insight and encourages open discourse on something that will always be inevitable – whichever way you look at it, in the vast majority of esports, one team (or person/duo) always has to win and one always has to lose. So is it a loss holding off on loser interviews when winner interviews are such big content and viewed as a huge piece of exciting content for the community?
Furthermore, giving a losers’ interview does demonstrate good sportsmanship (which is key in any sport and arguably even more so in esports – especially as there are always discussions on toxic players at all levels of play), and is a good way for fans to see how their team plans to come back from a defeat to do better. As an idea, this fits nicely into esports, and it is easy to imagine it being highly successful – especially within the higher level of esports where fans have been known to hold specific players accountable for a loss. Being able to hear players speak their mind on a loss, in front of fans could be largely positive – demonstrating a vocal resilience but also could soften fans who may be prone to attempting to outright blame a singular player for the team loss (and subsequently troll them online). Essentially, the significance of loser interviews being bought into esports could be a largely positive change for the community, seeing pro players doing loser interviews and discussing the pros and cons of a defeat; could influence solo queues of games to be a less blame driven place and more productive in terms of ideas to improve a match instead of outright blaming someone for something they couldn’t control. The arguable negative of loser interviews being bought into esports is how words could be twisted and edited to make it sound like something that wasn’t said (though this is a risk that is seen across society) – and this could lead to pros preferring to discuss post-match defeats on personal Twitch streams as opposed to at the event itself. This raises the question as to whether esports as a wider whole is actually ready to move into loser interviews at all – but from taking a look at winner interviews and post match chats (PGL – post game lobby – in the LEC), there is no inherent reason that loser interviews couldn’t be bought into esports at all levels across all games – albeit not immediately but certainly over a period of time.
So, in that case would an esports press conference be a solution as opposed to a one-on-one loser interview directly after the match? It could be, it’s certainly a solution and it would allow a team to put up a united front in the face of discussing a defeat. Fundamentally, allowing both teams to have air time to discuss their thoughts and feelings once the match is over, and speak directly to fans, could be of huge benefit to everyone involved. A press conference – though it is usually seen in mainstream sports, could be positive in esports. Firstly, it allows the whole team to be together at once and be present for the interview instead of one player alone, so if one player is particularly poorly affected after the match, they aren’t the sole person who has to answer questions. Secondly, loser interviews also allows coaches the opportunity to clearly state not to attack players (which shouldn’t be necessary but apparently is) rather than having to wait till later to post on Twitter by which time social medias are often alight with hate towards the team and specific ‘dislikeable’ players. Thirdly, being able to provide a united front in the face of a loss can be argued to be beneficial not only for team moral but also for fans alike, as fans expect to see proof that their team isn’t so tilted that they won’t be able to bounce back. The counter to this last one though is of course when the loss is so substantial that there is barely anyone speaking and no correct or easy question to be asked (or at least not one that won’t make the situation any worse) (we’ll discuss this later as part of a example) – we can of course say this up to the journalist to figure out, but that’s not a fair statement to anyone involved.
Importantly, especially in a game like League of Legends (yes I know this blog said I’d cover Valorant too, but League is on my mind a lot at the moment so that’s what I'm using for most blogs and its Worlds’ season so its valid), sportsmanship is so crucial and vital for a community that is known for being toxic. Loser interviews do encourage sportsmanship and considering any time I mention League of Legends to any gamer, they usually tell me they like the game but can’t be doing with ‘such a toxic’ community (this is not to say the whole community is toxic but I'm sure we’ve all had a less than pleasant solo queue game), loser interviews could be very beneficial. Pro players are looked up to by many in the community – and without saying they should do everything, if they exhibit sportsmanship then maybe the community will see this, and want to follow suit. Yes it’s probably a stretch, but we’ve all seen the hate that exists in solo queue – so if we could minimise it by adding something into esports that already exists in mainstream sports, then why not try? If it doesn’t work out, we don’t have to keep it – therein is the joy of a developing industry, there isn’t a pressure to keep it, and as esports is developing, surely trying new things is of benefit.
So, having said all of that, who do the loser interviews actually benefit? If anyone? We’ve said they’re a good idea and if they don’t work out, that’s ok we could always remove them, which is all well and good. But aside from fans (and even that could be debatable) is there any actual benefit for those involved in conducting loser interviews? For the interviewer, some noted that loser interviews are a lot harder to conduct, with the challenge of ensuring to phrase everything even more carefully and correctly – and arguably there is the additional pressure of knowing if the interview is skewed or misinterpreted it could drive more hate towards the team and specific players. There could be great reward in loser interviews for interviewers especially at live events but it’s still worth considering all the possible elements of difficulties that could be created as a result of them being bought into esports mainstream. For the fans, the benefit of loser interviews revolves around what has been said already – insight into team, encouraging sentiments that the team will come back stronger, so on and so fourth – arguably, fans are the ones who benefit the most from loser interviews; as there are few issues that could come back on fans from these types of interviews. We’ve already noted that for the industry itself, loser interviews could be a large positive step forward but there are likely voices of doubt and those voices of doubt I would expect, focus on the players. So, let’s discuss the impact for players.
Now to discuss the people who take part in the actual interviews; do loser interviews actually help and/or benefit the players at all? A big reason that can be argued to stop the existence of loser interviews moving into esports is because of the mental impact of a defeat (specifically in front of a live crowd), followed by an interview about why you lost. It isn’t the most comfortable conversation to have aforementioned, but the mental impact on players is something that should also be taken into consideration. Yes esports players are athletes (and if you don’t agree with this statement, we aren’t having that discussion right now), but they’re people too and depending on how they feel after any given match, a loser interview could be argued to be demoralising, damning and potentially completely tilting if the player feels guilty for a play (and that is without factoring in Twitter, Reddit and everything else). With this in mind, are loser interviews good for content but bad for the players? This is something I personally think you would have to answer on a case by case basis – for some players they may be completely fine and comfortable following a loss to do an interview, be that alone or with the rest of the team, for others maybe not. It is very case by case basis; but an example point I saw made on Ashley Kang’s thread was about Team Liquid loss in Houston where the team went 0-3 against Evil Geniuses in Spring split 2022. Many of those commenting on this event said that the press conference was silent, with players saying little to nothing and no comment felt quite right for the occasion – the only bonus that can be taken off this example is that it was the whole team rather than one player trying to formulate an answer within the interview.
So there we have it, that’s this week’s blog on loser interviews in esports done, what are your thoughts on loser interviews? Personally, I think they could be a great idea and a good addition to further develop esports but time will tell, as to what will happen. And of course the topic is one that requires a lot of consideration for everyone involved and how they would be affected by the introduction of these kinds of interviews - but there is hope for these and interviews and it will be interesting to see what happens and how they are bought into esports (especially if they are bought in, in the near future).
Thanks for reading, hope you enjoyed it, see you on the next blog!
Byeeeeeeee ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ
Notable Sources of Information –
Ashley Kang Twitter Discussion (Should loser interviews be a thing in the LCK?)
Yinsu Collins’ YouTube Interviews:
Chronicle from M3C: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26d-8KD2wYI&t=30s
Jamppi from Team Liquid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFyZVpfn2Yo
Travis Gafford YouTube Interview with Bjergsen:
Bjergsen: how Team Liquid Fixed their issues before summer – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Avb_uvzEXPk
Comments
Post a Comment