Tashi0106 said:
Maps and gametype changes have been happening for years and years, it's something we're very used to.
Yes, but that doesn't change that putting in no-bloom is on the same level. It gets rid of a inherently random game mechanic and in turn makes the game more consistent then it is in it's vanilla state, and most competitive leagues and games drive for consistency because it then in turn allows for a larger skill gap and a more competitive nature. Just because it isn't a change that has been happening for years and years doesn't necessarily mean that it shouldn't have happened.
I can't remember a change this big coming to the pro circuit in the middle of the season.
Halo 2 BR Spread patch got put in in the middle of a season, in fact almost the same thing that has happened with no-bloom happened back then (the patch came out close to an event, they polled the pros to see if they wanted it to be put in at the event, I believe the results were a landslide in favor of applying the patch, and then they didn't until the event after.) Not only that, but Starcraft 2 patches get applied regardless of how close to an event they come out, including a few that have had some big gameplay changes.
An actual game mechanic change. I guess it would be more like changing the baseball bat in the post season.
I really don't think there's really any comparison to real sports that holds any merits. The reality is that no-bloom would've been a mechanic change that would have only made the game more consistent (as in it wouldn't have given anyone an unfair advantage, everyone would've been on the same playing field just like with bloom and the better teams would've shined,) and would've most definitely improved viewership and competitor numbers. The teams were at Orlando were almost as low as the number of teams that showed up to MLG Toronto, which isn't good for them business wise, and I guarantee you that if they had put in no-bloom for Nats, that there would've been a drastic increase in both viewership numbers and teams, aka a smart business decision. But instead they decide to go with "league consistency" that only a small percentage of the players guaranteed to play for the big money wanted (I think the final poll numbers were 40 to 26 in favor of no-bloom.)
They may have gotten the majority of votes but it wasn't a landslide. If it was near unanimous then I would understand why they would want to change it.
Given MLG's past history upon implementing changes like this, I don't think they would have even if the voting was unanimous. The way I see things is like this, MLG is your competitive league, and there's a change available that will make one of your games more competitive that both their pro players and community wants, regardless of if it's nationals or not, and the viewership and competition numbers last event were less then stellar, shouldn't league consistency goes out the window and the change be implemented so that your community will be happy and so viewership and competition numbers increase?