EPTMuch respect for the players regardless.
Why are FPS Commentaries boring? :( - Page 2
| Blogs > DocNemesis |
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
Much respect for the players regardless. | ||
|
Belano
Sweden657 Posts
| ||
|
Gingerninja
United Kingdom1339 Posts
Halo commentaries, or at least back during Halo 1-2 were good. haven't really followed the scene since Halo 3 came out to know if it's changed. MLG is more for console gaming that PC gaming however. Other than something like WCG no gaming organisation caters for everything. EVO for fighters, MLG for consoles etc.. SC2 being at MLG is an anomaly, not the norm. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28914 Posts
quake has always been my fps favourite, this video really confirmed it for me. | ||
|
DocNemesis
Philippines446 Posts
| ||
|
rkffhk
474 Posts
On May 15 2011 01:15 Belano wrote: Imo what Quake is to FPS is what SC is to RTS. Simply amazing. They also have some really good commentators, like 2GD and company. This. When I think of esports I think of three games: Starcraft, Quake, and Street Fighter. | ||
|
Zlasher
United States9129 Posts
| ||
|
gurrpp
United States437 Posts
On May 14 2011 22:49 Sm3agol wrote: Imo, Quake > UT is mainly because the Quake movement system is so much better. Plus UT has some really gay weapons. I personally preferred ut's movement system, just because it let me dodge off walls and stuff. Quake movement always seemed to me more about moving between powerups and less about dodging stuff. | ||
|
kainzero
United States5211 Posts
i guess quake 1v1 would be different because you only really need two perspectives, but most team games really need better camera work in order to enjoy viewing it and for most commentators to really grasp what's going on. | ||
|
insanet
Peru439 Posts
But man, that video changed my mind about FPS commentary, is really a great video So, i urge everybody to see that video. is a must. | ||
|
Thrill
2599 Posts
Where do these people come from? If you stumble over shit you like - you dig! | ||
|
Lucumo
6850 Posts
On May 15 2011 00:27 emythrel wrote: I'm with you, just pointing out that in NA for some reason people go ape for what in EU are considered "Casual" games. Quake is the only FPS i still play. I gave up on CS because i sucked and couldn't find a good team of friends to actually get good with lol. Yep, that's the way it is, Halo, CoD etc were never really important. Years ago, I remember seeing Starcraft, Warcraft and CS 1.6 on TV(Starcraft got replaced by FIFA later). Occasionally, they broadcasted DotA, Quake 3, sometimes UT2k4 and pretty much never CoD 2(CoD 4 wasn't released at that point). On May 15 2011 03:04 Zlasher wrote: Thats true to an extent I mean, CS has a longer streak of popularity, and a duel FPS and team FPS are almost two different genres. Starcraft is definitely THE RTS, SF is THE fighting game, even though everyone plays every game from guilty gear to marvel vs capcom etc. but Quake is definitely THE duel FPS and CS 1.6 is THE team FPS. Completely right, couldn't agree more. | ||
|
YejinYejin
United States1053 Posts
Anyways, it was cool and all, but it seems like all of the strategy is just dodging bullets and getting headshots. I didn't see any real strategic depth. | ||
|
Zlasher
United States9129 Posts
On May 15 2011 12:37 DTK-m2 wrote: Can someone tell me where the complexity is in competitive FPS? I watched a commentary of a recent Halo game in MLG (apparently a really epic game that ended 50-49. It was game 5 of the series. Final Boss was one of the teams). Anyways, it was cool and all, but it seems like all of the strategy is just dodging bullets and getting headshots. I didn't see any real strategic depth. Halo tends to just be 4 guys all yelling at each other to give the illusion of communication but for the most part they don't set up well for a team shooter. In CS there is a ton of locking down different entry points and swinging around for defense, which then leads to mind games on late rush strats or delays, etc. The strategy involved in CS also comes from predicting money and buy rounds, semi buys, deagles, or eco-rounds from the opponent so that youc an set up how you save your money and take control of the rounds. None of that happens in halo either. | ||
|
Coriolis
United States1152 Posts
| ||
|
Mortician
Bulgaria2332 Posts
| ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
| ||
|
xarthaz
1704 Posts
On May 14 2011 18:42 corumjhaelen wrote: The problem with Q3/QL is that they are slow games. Hence while the tactical aspects can be discussed, the casting opportunities are much more limited, as there is not much things going on. Compared to QW, for example:There ar pretty good fps commentaries. Watch some quake. | ||
|
deathly rat
United Kingdom911 Posts
| ||
| ||
