• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 13:56
CEST 19:56
KST 02:56
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
RSL Season 1 - Final Week5[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall10HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0
Community News
Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation17$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced7Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles6[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China10Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL70
StarCraft 2
General
RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread TL Team Map Contest #4: Winners Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster Server Blocker RSL Season 1 - Final Week
Tourneys
RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo) $25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion A cwal.gg Extension - Easily keep track of anyone Script to open stream directly using middle click ASL20 Preliminary Maps BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/
Tourneys
2025 ACS Season 2 Qualifier [Megathread] Daily Proleagues Small VOD Thread 2.0 Last Minute Live-Report Thread Resource!
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project The PlayStation 5 Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine The Accidental Video Game Porn Archive Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Men Take Risks, Women Win Ga…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 570 users

Video Game Journalism, How Legitimate?

Blogs > kckkryptonite
Post a Reply
1 2 Next All
kckkryptonite
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
1126 Posts
August 19 2013 05:33 GMT
#1
Recently, I've been perusing metacritic quite a bit to check out what the critic's were saying about whatever game I'm interested in. It's always interesting to see what the metascore is vs. the user score. Initially, I've kind of generally regarded the former as having more weight than the user score because it's an average of the professional critics, so surely it must be more reflective of a game than what a bunch of random joes think? They're "professionals", they know more than me because they do it for a living and they're generally more articulate, their reviews more thoughtful, they're backed by companies, they get the game earlier, etc. Back in the days of Atari, Nintendo, SNES, what have you, when reviews were mostly gotten from magazines and small articles (I was around), I'd say this was the case. So the reasoning if they did the public well back then, they'll still do good now, right?

Reviewers of then, compared to the reviewers of today, were in a very different atmosphere. Gaming was a very niche thing, not the huge, mainstream, money market it is today; nor were reviews so easily accessible at the tip of a finger, at home, on your phone. Word of mouth was perhaps the biggest factor to a games success, so a game would actually have to be good to sell. Does that still apply today? Or do you just need good reviews to do well? Now, people just hit up IGN or Giantbomb or Metacritic because these websites employ people to review games, they should be good at it. They have the connotation of the word professional attached to them, do they need any further validation? How many people read full reviews versus a quick skim through, followed by a stern look at the score?

[image loading]


"This game got rave reviews from multiple critics, it must be good. I can't go wrong buying it."

Here's the problem. Say I go to a website for a review on Company of Heroes 2, but it has CoH2 advertisements plastered everywhere, am I really going to get an honest review? Is it going to look good to the publisher when a review blasts their game that they pay to have advertised there? When I go to check out some video review on Diablo 3, are major flaws going to be pointed out when the reviewer relies on Blizzard for his/her review copy? How inclined will Blizzard be to give them review copies of their future games after a less-than-stellar review? I guess you see where I'm going with this, quid pro quo happens, media blacklisting happens.

"Oh, that's the company that gave us a bad review, don't invite them to our next media event. They get no coverage."

I asked myself, why do such discrepancies exist between the metascore and user scores on games like Company of Heroes 2, Dragon Age 2, SWTOR, Diablo 3, Modern Warfare 3, GTA 4, etc.? It was easy to just brush off the user scores as troll garbage, but after playing all of these games, and many more, finding that many of my experiences reflected the user score closer, I couldn't really ignore that fact as far as actual game quality goes. Over-time, I've come to view that as a better metric than the metascore. Sure, I can continue to dismiss the user ratings on metacritic because of how polarizing or knee-jerk they can be, but I feel they balance out when you get enough of them (see: bell curve). And can you really dismiss the consumers? Aren't they actually a better representation of me? Are we, the consumer, still the ones who ultimately decide if something is good or bad? Or are we told by the critics? They can tell us a game is a groundbreaking masterpiece, but in the end, doesn't make it so. Look at Modern Warfare 3 (Xbox), which has an 88/100 metascore, but 8300+ people rated it to an average of 3.3! Are the critics this out of touch with the consumers, are the consumers confused about what they want, confused about the definition of good, or is something else going on?

[image loading]


Think about it, the metascore is an aggregate score from a handful of "professional" critics who may or may not be influenced by more than their opinion, while the user score is the average from thousands of CONSUMERS. You. Me. The ones that actually buy the game and aren't handed a review copy along with whatever baggage it comes with. We might not be able to hide behind a wall of rhetoric, discuss all of our points at-length, or clearly justify our criticisms, but most of us still know whether we like or dislike something!

Related links...
http://trickznstuff.net/articles/?id=1 (original)
http://kotaku.com/5892903/maybe-video-game-reviewers-are-con-men-maybe/
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/11/30/rumor-gamespots-editorial-director-fired-over-kane-and-lynch-rev/
http://bf3blog.com/2011/10/ea-tries-to-manipulate-battlefield-3-scores-in-norway/
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2011/06/duke-nukems-pr-threatens-to-punish-sites-that-run-negative-reviews/
http://gregorulm.com/metacritic-video-game-journalism-part-i/

***
RIP avilo, qxc keyboard 2013, RIP Nathanis keyboard 2014
WolfintheSheep
Profile Joined June 2011
Canada14127 Posts
August 19 2013 05:39 GMT
#2
One of the biggest issues with video game reviews is that few reviewers actually play through an entire game, or spend time doing things that an actual player is supposed to do. Or they do, but they've already released their article a week ago so that their website could be relevant with game release day.

Hence why games like MW3, D3 and SWTOR have such good professional reviews, but so much consumer backlash. The initial game impression and the first several hours of novelty are cool, but once you actually settle down to play the games for the long-hall, the major flaws start showing.
Average means I'm better than half of you.
rebdomine
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
6040 Posts
August 19 2013 05:52 GMT
#3
I guess the issue is some publishers hand out their games to reviewers who are guaranteed to praise their game.

And there is also the problem where reviewers do not finish or play the games long enough. Some people might review RPGs based on the first few hours of gameplay but I believe you have to finish the game to be able to provide an accurate review.

Like if we based The Witcher 2 on how the prologue plays out, we can easily call it as a pretty boring game. Although the game gets a lot better than the moment the storyline starts branching. (In particular I think Chapter 2 was easily the best part of the game, regardless of which path you took).

I guess there might also be pressure on the reviewers from their superiors. It could be possible that the writer does not think too highly of the game but is under instruction from his boss to give the game a positive review.
"Just because you are correct doesn't mean you are right!"
Bayyne
Profile Joined January 2011
United States1967 Posts
August 19 2013 06:01 GMT
#4
I've always wondered about that quid pro issue you mentioned and wonder how common it really is. It certainly does create for some potential disingenuous reviews.

I also don't think this is exclusive to the video game industry as well. It's one of those things that consumers should hopefully always keep in mind.
Remember not only to say the right thing in the right place, but far more difficult still, to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment.
Kerotan
Profile Blog Joined May 2008
England2109 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-08-19 06:53:47
August 19 2013 06:39 GMT
#5
One large problem with relying on user scores from meta critic is that many people give a game a zero or a 1 because it doesn't live up to their expectations, and thus screw up the aggregate. I think the majority of people who rate games lowly on metacrtic haven't played terrible games, just disappointing ones.
Realistically, I think both aggregated user reviews and professional reviews will always work better hand in that separated, however when forced to choose, I would much prefer the critical analysis of john walkers and tom francis's of this world, rather than the boo or hurrah mentality of bunch of pooled users on the internet.

In short, if you use video games journalism as a buyers guide, use your head and critique both the professional reviewers who benefit from sites wrapped in adds, and codphan420 who might be just sad that the ending sucked or that the left out their favourite gun from the last game.
-edit
I hope you like reading quality games journalism from totally unbiased consumers who totally don't call the developer of the game Nazi's
Nerdette // External revolution - Internal revolution // Fabulous // I raise my hands to heaven of curiosity // I don't know what to ask for // What has it got for me? // Kerribear
Talin
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
Montenegro10532 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-08-19 07:49:49
August 19 2013 07:49 GMT
#6
For better or worse, reviewers are becoming increasingly obsolete by the year. There are so many ways of getting a first look at the game nowadays that is not colored by personal bias or company interests that people no longer need to rely on someone's rambling and a numeric rating to determine whether they'll like the game or not.
Aylear
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
Norway3988 Posts
August 19 2013 07:53 GMT
#7
I try to refrain from raging at people who use scores of any kind to judge whether or not a game is worth purchasing. I personally don't believe that you can distill someone's opinion down to a numeric value, and I implore people to read the actual reviews -- as many of them as they can. I realize that I can't really change peoples' minds on this, though, and that human beings will always look for the quick and easy answer to any one question, especially when it's regarding something they just do as a hobby or as entertainment and don't want to think too much about.

What I will do, however, is rage at people who rely on Metacritic. It's a very flawed system and it's bad for the industry.

For starters, every site has their own value range wherein a game is considered good -- 60% on one site is a solid title, and on another it's considered mediocre. Even discounting this fact, Metacritic's conversion method is vastly flawed. For instance, Giant Bomb has a rating system of 1-5 / 5. A game that GB would consider a rock solid 3/5 is given a score of 60% by Metacritic, which is not the same thing. Some other sites use A/B/B-/C, and the way Metacritic handles a lot of these values is obfuscated.

Second, Metacritic never alter their scores. Ever. Even when a site posts a fucking abysmal review full of factual inaccuracies, and then later pull and replace that review with one less full of shit, the original score remains on Metacritic, forever tainting the game's actual score. At that stage the entire point of Metacritic becomes invalid.

Third, and most frustrating to me, Metacritic uses weighted average, which means that the way individual scores affect the average is based on the popularity of the site in question.

Thing is, all of this wouldn't even bother me so much, except publishers are using Metacritic scores to determine how a developer gets paid. This is some absolute bullshit, and I admit that it clouds my opinion. It makes it hard for me to support the site, even if its abuse is not actually the fault of Metacritic itself.

Their arbitrary and non-transparent nonsense doesn't help, though.
TL+ Member
lichter
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
August 19 2013 08:05 GMT
#8
As the guy who keeps trying to improve Recommended Game Polls, let me tell you, public polls where the rater has no incentive to vote properly are usually useless, and at best, inaccurate. Just read as many reviews as you can, 'try the game', then buy it if you like it.
AdministratorYOU MUST HEED MY INSTRUCTIONS TAKE OFF YOUR THIIIINGS
Tobberoth
Profile Joined August 2010
Sweden6375 Posts
August 19 2013 08:13 GMT
#9
Never ever rely on, or even read, the user score on metacritic. CoD games are a great example, reviews love them and players love them (which is why they sell so well) but there's a VERY vocal minority who hates them with a passion and they make sure every single cod game has terrible user scores which reflect reality by about 0%.
Zoundsforsook
Profile Blog Joined August 2011
Scotland636 Posts
August 19 2013 08:36 GMT
#10
Very good games can get a terrible score on metacritic from the (extremely) vocal minority.

It's always some irrational people rating something either 0/10 for a bad PR move by a company or 10/10 from people who are blindly loyal to franchises.
Paint it bright and bold.
kckkryptonite
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
1126 Posts
August 19 2013 08:41 GMT
#11
On August 19 2013 16:53 Aylear wrote:
I try to refrain from raging at people who use scores of any kind to judge whether or not a game is worth purchasing. I personally don't believe that you can distill someone's opinion down to a numeric value, and I implore people to read the actual reviews -- as many of them as they can. I realize that I can't really change peoples' minds on this, though, and that human beings will always look for the quick and easy answer to any one question, especially when it's regarding something they just do as a hobby or as entertainment and don't want to think too much about.

What I will do, however, is rage at people who rely on Metacritic. It's a very flawed system and it's bad for the industry.

For starters, every site has their own value range wherein a game is considered good -- 60% on one site is a solid title, and on another it's considered mediocre. Even discounting this fact, Metacritic's conversion method is vastly flawed. For instance, Giant Bomb has a rating system of 1-5 / 5. A game that GB would consider a rock solid 3/5 is given a score of 60% by Metacritic, which is not the same thing. Some other sites use A/B/B-/C, and the way Metacritic handles a lot of these values is obfuscated.

Second, Metacritic never alter their scores. Ever. Even when a site posts a fucking abysmal review full of factual inaccuracies, and then later pull and replace that review with one less full of shit, the original score remains on Metacritic, forever tainting the game's actual score. At that stage the entire point of Metacritic becomes invalid.

Third, and most frustrating to me, Metacritic uses weighted average, which means that the way individual scores affect the average is based on the popularity of the site in question.

Thing is, all of this wouldn't even bother me so much, except publishers are using Metacritic scores to determine how a developer gets paid. This is some absolute bullshit, and I admit that it clouds my opinion. It makes it hard for me to support the site, even if its abuse is not actually the fault of Metacritic itself.

Their arbitrary and non-transparent nonsense doesn't help, though.


Thanks for the post, I didn't even know they used weighted averages! I know of people who just discount numerical scores altogether. If not sites like GameRankings or Metacritic, as convenient as they are, what metrics should we be using?
RIP avilo, qxc keyboard 2013, RIP Nathanis keyboard 2014
Zocat
Profile Joined April 2010
Germany2229 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-08-19 09:59:58
August 19 2013 09:59 GMT
#12
People are idiots. People who write reviews are most often idiots or jump bandwagons (hype / hate).

So what do you do?
You _read_ the reviews and dont give a shit about some random number.
Oh that guy gave a 1 and his review is "shit game", well you should probably ignore that.

If someone writes "there's no pvp in the endgame, some classes are fucking OP, and it gets boring really fast after you reached Inferno" (i.e. D3) you have a better idea.
You dont care about PvP. You dont care that other people are more efficient. You didnt plan to play the game for months.
Well - this just might be a game you might enjoy. While apparently not a 10/10 it will be a decent & enjoyable time for you.
Of course if you enjoy PvP etc etc you should skip the game.

And if not - you will survive. You have to play some shit games to really appreciate the good games.
unkkz
Profile Blog Joined December 2007
Norway2196 Posts
August 19 2013 10:11 GMT
#13
For the launch of BF3, EA sent out invites with a form to fill in to journalists for a sneak peak at the game close to release. On the form were questions about the CoD vs BF series. Along the lines of "Do you like BF more then CoD?" "Have you played CoD and what did u think of it?" "Have you played BF? Was it better then CoD?" those who showed criticism towards BF or leaned towards liking CoD better were not invited.

Gaming journalists are bought or strong armed into writing positive reviews just about all the time for big releases tbh. Play DA2 for 10 minutes and you see that it is not "RPG of the year, one of all time´s greatest RPGs" and there have been reported several instances of game journalists sitting somewhere on camera, reviewing a game with advertisement for the same publisher in the background. Hell i remember PC-Gamer's review of Diablo 2 years back, the screencaps they showed the player had the level 1 potions well into act 3 and 4(far into the game) so i assumed he played with godmode hack. And i was right, they admitted it a few months later citing time as an issue. How do you get an even remotely accurate review of a hack n slash aRPG, where dying is a huge part of the challenge and skill usage and character development - if you play with freaking godmode on?

Tbh anyone can be a game journalist, as long as you have a pulse and can type somewhat decently you qualify. Reviews are bogus to begin with since it's just your opinion so you can write whatever you want. That opinion is however, from what i have seen again and again - usually very 'lobbied' or how you might want to call it. It is at the very least very skewed and does not reflect how an actual consumer would experience the product.
dartoo
Profile Joined May 2010
India2889 Posts
August 19 2013 11:05 GMT
#14
I rarely ever depend on reviews these days...most of the time I buy something it's because of recommendations from a trusted forum/friends, or seeing something in a letsplay. Reviews,even user score based reviews I feel dont really cut it.
JimmyJRaynor
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Canada16684 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-08-19 11:36:39
August 19 2013 11:11 GMT
#15
On August 19 2013 16:53 Aylear wrote:
Second, Metacritic never alter their scores. Ever.

good point, i've noticed that myself as well.

On August 19 2013 16:53 Aylear wrote:
Third, and most frustrating to me, Metacritic uses weighted average, which means that the way individual scores affect the average is based on the popularity of the site in question.


weighted average HAHAHAHA
i didn't know that.

[image loading]

As far as CoH2 goes.
The "User Score" started off at 5.9 from users about 3 weeks after the game was released. This score included a few CoH2 fan-boys with no other metacritic user reviews other than a single "10" for CoH2.

Then, 3 weeks later a bunch of Russian citizens got angry about the content of the campaign. I do not want to debate the MERIT of their complaints. I only use this fact to show why the Metacritic user score went from 5.9 to 1.6 after a bunch of people posted 0s and said nothing in their "review" about the game itself. The metacritic score dropped from 5.9 to 1.6 in something like 3 days.

So...
is 5.9 truly the accurate assessement of the "users"?
or is it 1.6?

I'd go with 5.9. CoH2 is missing many features most expect from a $60 RTS game in 2013. What the game does have it does fairly well.

As was mentioned earlier in this thread; do not take my word for it. Head on over to Twitch.tv and check out CoH2 for yourself.
Ray Kassar To David Crane : "you're no more important to Atari than the factory workers assembling the cartridges"
QuanticHawk
Profile Blog Joined May 2007
United States32051 Posts
August 19 2013 16:00 GMT
#16
reviewers are awful shills, nothing more. crowd sourced gamer reviews arent much better though. consumer reviews are filled with stupid shit like 1stars to boycott some kind of thing in the game instead of actual reviews
PROFESSIONAL GAMER - SEND ME OFFERS TO JOIN YOUR TEAM - USA USA USA
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
August 19 2013 16:24 GMT
#17
Giant Bomb covered this a while ago and has said that you have to pick your reviewers and know where they stand. Just like everything else in the world.

Also, Metacritic is shit and their user reviews are shit. People actively review bomb that site and small groups of people make large numbers of acocunts just to bring down the score. Users scores are worthless and you are better off just asking a friend if they liked the game.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
StarStruck
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
25339 Posts
August 19 2013 16:40 GMT
#18
I haven't touched a video game magazine in years. I think I was about twelve when I made this realization. They're like picture books for little kids.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
August 19 2013 16:47 GMT
#19
On August 20 2013 01:40 StarStruck wrote:
I haven't touched a video game magazine in years. I think I was about twelve when I made this realization. They're like picture books for little kids.

I use Giant Bomb, TB and a couple of other people on the internet to get my information about games and if they are good. In the era of Youtube and twitch, you pretty much can figure out if a game is good for you on your own.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Vaelone
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Finland4400 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-08-19 16:53:17
August 19 2013 16:52 GMT
#20
On August 20 2013 01:24 Plansix wrote:
Also, Metacritic is shit and their user reviews are shit. People actively review bomb that site and small groups of people make large numbers of acocunts just to bring down the score. Users scores are worthless and you are better off just asking a friend if they liked the game.


I personally find the user scores to be decent if you're looking up some niche games that get ignored by the masses and shat on by the critics that don't personally enjoy the genre.

Do indeed stay the fuck away when it comes to AAA western games though.

But yeah I make my purchases based on what I hear from friends if they got the game and by watching gameplay footage, doesn't matter to me whether it gets a 6 or 10 from IGN.
1 2 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
CSO Cup
16:00
#82
Liquipedia
FEL
16:00
Polish Championship - Group B
Gerald vs SpiritLIVE!
PAPI vs ArT
IndyStarCraft 360
CranKy Ducklings274
Liquipedia
PSISTORM Gaming Misc
15:55
FSL week 5 - CN vs IC
Freeedom18
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
IndyStarCraft 360
BRAT_OK 91
MindelVK 27
StarCraft: Brood War
firebathero 1570
EffOrt 1008
Mini 837
Larva 412
Stork 368
HiyA 103
Mind 101
soO 97
ToSsGirL 92
Dewaltoss 88
[ Show more ]
Movie 35
Rock 31
Terrorterran 26
Dota 2
Gorgc9401
qojqva2231
monkeys_forever10
League of Legends
Grubby1323
Dendi677
Counter-Strike
fl0m1557
flusha496
Stewie2K407
Foxcn283
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor760
Other Games
B2W.Neo1237
Fuzer 428
KnowMe417
Lowko301
Hui .151
ToD101
Trikslyr53
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick46116
EGCTV1672
BasetradeTV24
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 19 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• kabyraGe 103
• HeavenSC 56
• printf 49
• Kozan
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Migwel
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
StarCraft: Brood War
• 80smullet 8
• Michael_bg 6
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
League of Legends
• Jankos1495
Counter-Strike
• Nemesis3104
Other Games
• imaqtpie1169
• Shiphtur270
Upcoming Events
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4m
Bonyth vs QiaoGege
Dewalt vs Fengzi
Hawk vs Zhanhun
Sziky vs Mihu
Mihu vs QiaoGege
Zhanhun vs Sziky
Fengzi vs Hawk
DaveTesta Events
4m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
16h 4m
RSL Revival
16h 4m
Classic vs Clem
FEL
21h 4m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
Wardi Open
1d 17h
Replay Cast
2 days
WardiTV European League
2 days
PiGosaur Monday
3 days
[ Show More ]
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
The PondCast
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Epic.LAN
5 days
CranKy Ducklings
6 days
Epic.LAN
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
HSC XXVII
NC Random Cup

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters

Upcoming

CSL Xiamen Invitational
CSL Xiamen Invitational: ShowMatche
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.