EPTE-Sports Largest Games? - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
LittLeD
Sweden7973 Posts
| ||
|
Trumpet
United States1935 Posts
But, to give a reference point though, last years Evolution tournament in Las Vegas had somewhere around 1700 players for the SSF4. 1700 people traveled across the country for a one weekend tournament. Paying out of pocket to play in it, with nothing in the way of invites and sponsored travel to cover it. That type of community is going to grow one way or another =) I expect things to get even bigger for fighters with Marvel 3 about to pop. | ||
|
Jswizzy
United States791 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 55994
949 Posts
On November 20 2010 06:21 trancey wrote: WoW: Arena lol, you'll just never give it up, will you? | ||
|
son1dow
Lithuania322 Posts
On November 20 2010 08:42 Sm3agol wrote: And people knocking its skill level.........................LOL. Any of you you people knocking it....try it. You will NEVER be anywhere close to Ogre1/2 in skill. NEVER. If the game was skilless and shallow, then you would hit a plateau, and soon everyone decent would reach that plateau. But players like the two halo 3 twins have seemingly gotten more and more skilled at the game, to the point that noone that has just picked up the game in the last couple years is ANYWHERE close. On the surface, in it's random online format, yes, it's easy to do well in. The competitive and teamwork side of it, however, is ridiculously difficult. Any of you you people knocking it....try it. You will NEVER be anywhere close to Ogre1/2 in skill. Of course we won't, how would you imagine that if we fucking HATE the gameplay? If the game was skilless and shallow, then you would hit a plateau, and soon everyone decent would reach that plateau. Do you believe that yourself? Imagine football and bowling up on the same stage, and bowling players arguing that if it only required a tenth of the skills seen it football it would've hit the plateau years ago. There obviously are some skills to work on, but that doesn't mean that what separates the players on top is the same thing as in different competitions. Disclaimer: I'm not dissing Halo's, or bowling players\spectators\tournament organizers. It's fun, it gives you money and\or fame so why would you stop it, really. I'm just saying that as for esports, it's not going to becomes something like in South Korea if you have your, extreme example here, mobile phone games and stacraft in there. | ||
|
Sm3agol
United States2055 Posts
On November 20 2010 20:16 son1dow wrote: Of course we won't, how would you imagine that if we fucking HATE the gameplay? Do you believe that yourself? Imagine football and bowling up on the same stage, and bowling players arguing that if it only required a tenth of the skills seen it football it would've hit the plateau years ago. There obviously are some skills to work on, but that doesn't mean that what separates the players on top is the same thing as in different competitions. Disclaimer: I'm not dissing Halo's, or bowling players\spectators\tournament organizers. It's fun, it gives you money and\or fame so why would you stop it, really. I'm just saying that as for esports, it's not going to becomes something like in South Korea if you have your, extreme example here, mobile phone games and stacraft in there. That is NEVER the argument I see when people diss Halo. Its always the old "omg consoles, rofl, no skill involved". And your second argument just makes no sense whatsoever. I can't even follow what you're trying to say. And if you'd followed Halo at all, and you obviously have no clue, you'd know the plateau hasn't been reached. Just taking a single skill based thing like sticky grenades. i remember back in the Halo 1/2 days, and even way back then people called it skilless and n00by . Good sticks were pretty rare and were huge moments. 4 kills hardly ever happened. Look at it now. Any game you watch usually has several ridiculous plasma grenade kills, and there's videos everywhere of ridiculous killing sprees players are starting to go on. And I want to know, if it's not skill that separates people at the top, then what does? Ogre 2 has won something like 30 of the last 35 Halo championships. What is that? Pure blind luck? | ||
|
NIIINO
Slovakia1320 Posts
USA - Console gaming EU - FPS Asia - RTS | ||
|
son1dow
Lithuania322 Posts
On November 20 2010 20:36 Sm3agol wrote: Its always the old "omg consoles, rofl, no skill involved". perhaps because you've always been on halo forums, or you haven't been listening at all? And your second argument just makes no sense whatsoever. I can't even follow what you're trying to say. And if you'd followed Halo at all, and you obviously have no clue, you'd know the plateau hasn't been reached. Just taking a single skill based thing like sticky grenades. i remember back in the Halo 1/2 days, and even way back then people called it skilless and n00by . Good sticks were pretty rare and were huge moments. 4 kills hardly ever happened. Look at it now. Any game you watch usually has several ridiculous plasma grenade kills, and there's videos everywhere of ridiculous killing sprees players are starting to go on. And I want to know, if it's not skill that separates people at the top, then what does? Ogre 2 has won something like 30 of the last 35 Halo championships. What is that? Pure blind luck? As you said, you can't follow what I'm trying to say. That may or may not be my own fault, but that doesn't make me clueless, so I'm gonna try and make this more clear to you: Quake, possible skills: X [-----------------|-] Y[-----------------|-] Z[-----------------|-] C[-----------------|-] D[-----------------|-] G[-----------------|-] Halo, possible skills X[-----------------|-] Y[-----------------|-] Z[--|----------------] C[---|---------------] D[---|---------------] G[--|----------------] Everybody has those easier, Z, C, D and G skills in halo but your Ogre 2 is better at X and Y. The fact that you couldn't predict what I was going to say still kind of points to your own lack of knowledge, either you haven't heard something like this before or you haven't been listening. | ||
|
Brad
2754 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On November 20 2010 20:59 son1dow wrote: perhaps because you've always been on halo forums, or you haven't been listening at all? As you said, you can't follow what I'm trying to say. That may or may not be my own fault, but that doesn't make me clueless, so I'm gonna try and make this more clear to you: Everybody has those easier, Z, C, D and G skills in halo but your Ogre 2 is better at X and Y. The fact that you couldn't predict what I was going to say still kind of points to your own lack of knowledge, either you haven't heard something like this before or you haven't been listening. Blech... imo it's much more like Quake, possible skills: X [-----------------|-] Y[-----------------|-] Z[-----------------|-] C[-----------------|-] D[-----------------|-] G[-----------------|-] M[--l----------------] N[---l---------------] O[---l---------------] P[--l----------------] Halo, possible skills X[-----------------|-] Y[-----------------|-] Z[--|----------------] C[---|---------------] D[---|---------------] G[--|----------------] M[-----------------|-] N[-----------------l-] O[-----------------l-] P[-----------------l-] Again, until you get someone who has been pro in both you won't really know which was harder, but you're arguing the point with Trancey who was CAL material and says Halo is harder in his opinion. This all boiled down to opinion, since the difficulty of games is in large part a subjective argument. My opinion, again for you, is that Halo is harder. Whether it's because the controller is harder to use than mouse/keyboard (a fact outlined by cross-platform interactive games) or just that there is more to learn, I don't know. You're beating a dead horse at this point man, you've already implied you didn't play Halo much b/c you didn't like the gameplay, which is fine, but don't make these blanket statements without the proper qualifications to back them up. Edit: I thought your football analogy was fine, that kid was just trying to be disagreeable. I get what you're saying, I just don't agree with it | ||
|
icemanzdoinwork
447 Posts
1) sc2 2) halo (even though reach is horrible and will eventually kill it's popularity). Halo has actually gotten worst from each game. Halo > halo 2 >>>> halo 3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reach. 3) cod which honestly I don't understand because it's a poor fps. Cod4 and cod2 were great, but cod mw2/cod Bo is a complete joke to me as an avid esports fan for 10 years. 4) cs1.6 CSS Games that should be played in America don't get played due to lack of advertisement. Asia/mainly Korea 1)sc series (I'll just put them both together don't flame me -_-) 2) sudden attack free to play fps Sudden attack is an absolutely amazing fps game. Its real name should be c-s 2 as it is the only fps even closely comparable to cs. It reminds me so much of cs1.3 and 1.5. It's the most popular online game in Korea outside of mmorpgs and even then I think it's still #1? It was #1 for a 100 weeks straight, has a huge following, and even has celebrity Kpop stars big bang as characters and weapon skins you can purchase on the Korean server. Like cs it's CPU requirements are very low, it's fast paced, and skill determines how well you do. It fails in NA due to a few things, management, advertisement, and the old saying OMG graphics are horrible -_- I have no idea about EU. | ||
|
Deleted User 45971
533 Posts
As for the Halo skill debate I think playing competitive FPS games on consoles is like a healthy person choosing to play handicap football or something like that instead of normal football because they can't handle real competition. Saying things like mastering a controller is hard is silly, just like a healthy person giving the argument that them playing handicap football in a wheelchair is hard. They aren't equal and never will be. Just like people who play CnC competitively can't handle BW/SC2 competitively. Comparing it to Quake though is kinda bad since Quake is 1on1 deathmatch, I think CS is a better comparison. | ||
|
son1dow
Lithuania322 Posts
On November 20 2010 22:47 Risen wrote: Blech... imo it's much more like Quake, possible skills: X [-----------------|-] Y[-----------------|-] Z[-----------------|-] C[-----------------|-] D[-----------------|-] G[-----------------|-] M[--l----------------] N[---l---------------] O[---l---------------] P[--l----------------] Halo, possible skills X[-----------------|-] Y[-----------------|-] Z[--|----------------] C[---|---------------] D[---|---------------] G[--|----------------] M[-----------------|-] N[-----------------l-] O[-----------------l-] P[-----------------l-] Disagreed, I'll comment on that later on. Again, until you get someone who has been pro in both you won't really know which was harder, but you're arguing the point with Trancey who was CAL material and says Halo is harder in his opinion. This all boiled down to opinion, since the difficulty of games is in large part a subjective argument. No, games are comparable. For example, if what I heard is right (and if it isn't, you can just imagine something that could constitute a equivalent argument) and CoD has no recoil, than aiming on it is, overall, easier than in CS and Quake. Why? Because the distances and most other factors are similar, but in cs you have to learn recoil and in Quake, many of the weapons are NOT hitscan and also the players actually dodge instead of standing still\moving slowly. See? I don't have to be pro to know this. Also, even 2GD, who Tracey mentioned himself trashed Halo - using the same arguments I'm about to use, but that's just if you need someone famous to confirm to consider an argument agreeable  My opinion, again for you, is that Halo is harder. Whether it's because the controller is harder to use than mouse/keyboard (a fact outlined by cross-platform interactive games) or just that there is more to learn, I don't know. You're beating a dead horse at this point man, you've already implied you didn't play Halo much b/c you didn't like the gameplay, which is fine, but don't make these blanket statements without the proper qualifications to back them up. I think I have these proper qualifications, here are a few examples: The harder to use controller is not only bad because it's less impressive because you have to balance the speed of the game so the players can keep up so you end up shooting targets moving at a third of the speed they'd be moving if it was a PC FPS, it's also making the game easier because you don't have nearly as much work for the eyes\reflexes with the smaller speed. Secondly, the movement makes not only moving from point A to point B something a newbie and a pro can do in the same amount of time, it also heavily limits the choices in combat. Circle jumps, various types of speed and\or height you can come up with if you're good, in quake, just make the combat a whole lot harder, there's hardly anything like that to do in halo. Also, imagine how that works around corners\etc - a variation of shots\tricks can be done and different ones are viable with different distances to the ledge, corner or whatever else there is, while in Halo you're just stuck with a few simple, and repetitive choices. These are just a few points of what could probably be a 50 page long paper if I'd actually bother and write my mind out including the slower weapons and so on. Overall, I consider Halo to be, like some of the people I've heard talk about Halo including the one and only 2GD mentioned, a handicapped version of Quake - you make one thing harder and then you see how you have to tone other factors down to make it balanced, which in the end turns up to be not enough to have all the skills seen in other games it's based on [Deathmatch = Quake in this case]. The usual argument against that is that then, you have different skills, but that's a logic fallacy - the skills don't create themselves out of thin air, they just emerge because now, they aren't dumbed down like some others and constitute a bigger part of the game - like teamwork. But who's to say that the Quake guys are absolutely distracted by the NOT dumbed down skills and can't do teamwork at the same time? My point here is, they can. PS. I did not say I haven't played halo, I said I'd lack the passion to go all the way and become someone like the top Halo guys. And talent most likely, too. I didn't play it for a too long time actually, but I did watch enough of it to form this opinion. It's, of course, your right to consider it clueless A equivalent example that people here are more likely to relate to is the wc3 vs sc1 debate - it is often said that starcraft is a 60% macro and 40 % macro game, while wc3 is something more to the micro end, like 40% macro and 60% micro when it comes to mechanics. What these percent do not show you is the amount of, and this is just a part of it, APM you need to pull that off. In wc3, the macro is easy enough to be almost perfect in high level play. Now, what this does is limit the amount of choices you have - you don't have to decide whether you need to micro or macro, you can do both because it, apparently, is possible to do both perfectly (well at least macro ), simultaneously. This demolishes the diversity seen in starcraft in the successor, so you also have less styles to learn how to play against - and these include way more than just percent of macro\micro, you actually have more difference between the units micro'ed and many other things, because of that and also the more "squishy" units and buildings it, in actuality, is my opinion that the more macro oriented game has more interesting micro - but this part is just opinion, nothing actually objective, obviously.The APM limit hasn't really been reached in starcraft, at least in most of the strategies, so the game is less "solved", if you will. That's just a basic summary of my thoughts but you probably get what I mean  Edited in No2:You could make the same argument about CnC, that'd be even more obvious.If anyone disagrees with the points I actually did make (because many others are bound to be left not mentioned obviously) feel free to point them out, same goes for the whole point of this writeup if you have more\ more valuable points to make, just write them out please And please excuse me for my English, I'm not a native speaker PS. No 2 - Again, I have to repeat myself as nobody is actually nerdy to follow the whole discussion and read all of my deluded posts ( ) - I do not diss the players or anybody involved in these games, I diss the games themselves and only as competitive titles, nothing else.Edit No2: On November 21 2010 00:54 Potatisodlaren wrote: Just like people who play CnC competitively can't handle BW/SC2 competitively. Do you really think that? We seem to share the opinion that they limit themselves to these more shallow games, but I personally have absolutely no sight on proof that they couldn't handle harder games - I just know they don't try. | ||
|
icemanzdoinwork
447 Posts
Top CnC Red Alert 2 player who switched to SC:BW. Henl another Ra2 player http://www.esl.eu/nordic/vikingcup/sc2/cup10/player/996091/ Losing to morrow on esl http://www.esl.eu/nordic/vikingcup/sc2/cup10/rankings | ||
|
delusive
75 Posts
| ||
|
hhrn
157 Posts
While usually a 5v5 game, and completely broken in 1v1, theres nothing but raw skill and experience in this 1v1 solomid nevermore showmatch between 2 of the best in the world, YaphetS, or PerfectIsShit, and Yamateh | ||
|
TheAngelofDeath
United States2033 Posts
On November 21 2010 00:54 Potatisodlaren wrote: As for the Halo skill debate I think playing competitive FPS games on consoles is like a healthy person choosing to play handicap football or something like that instead of normal football because they can't handle real competition. Saying things like mastering a controller is hard is silly, just like a healthy person giving the argument that them playing handicap football in a wheelchair is hard. They aren't equal and never will be. Listen to this man, you might learn something. Keyboard+mouse>controller in both challenge, and skill. I don't understand the argument that using a controller is more difficult, when I've played on both console and pc and there is really no comparison in terms of challenge. | ||
|
Aegeis
United States1619 Posts
On November 20 2010 10:22 Jswizzy wrote: LOL isn't the most popular but it is one of the best to watch. CLG streams all the time and they won WCG. CLG Stream I feel that LoL will get bigger once the whole replay system comes into effect, as a LoL player it looks alright for an E-sport but I think that 1 hour games might be bad for it's success in E-sports. | ||
|
Deleted User 45971
533 Posts
On November 21 2010 08:03 TheAngelofDeath wrote: Listen to this man, you might learn something. Keyboard+mouse>controller in both challenge, and skill. I don't understand the argument that using a controller is more difficult, when I've played on both console and pc and there is really no comparison in terms of challenge. You are agreeing with me Maybe I worded my sentences badly. Although I do understand the argument that using a controller is difficult because they are so extremely restrictive that it is a skill by itself to master them since they are so annoying to use but yeah as I said it's just a silly argument.@son1dow Yeah I guess you are right, I just did an unnecessary stab at CnC. Though I still think it's like people who play Tic Tac Toe and people who play Chess. Sure Tic Tac Toe people can move to Chess and be successful, anyone can be successful if they really try. But really if they are playing Tic Tac Toe competitively instead of Chess I really don't know how to see it any other way than that they can't play a real game. A bit exaggerated example I know. | ||
|
Harpwn
Australia253 Posts
#2 CS 1.6 #3 Quake #4 CS:S #5 WC:3 | ||
| ||
