Profesional Gaming
- Thread starter M3707ik
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Nothing in the Smash Bros series lends itself to major professional gaming. While it has some basic combos hacked into its clunky control system, the game is mostly a button mash-a-thon without the refined controls and such for a true competitive title. I don't think it should move heavily past the game con tournament game that it somehow already is (personally I think it should have died during the development of the first title, but that is a whole different set of opinion.)Graustein post=9.72495.762654 said:
Starcraft, while I might not like the title (dislike it very much) is a heavily played competitive game, and many speak of its balance. I have only played enough to know I dislike it, so I'm not sure about the balance argument, but it seems like a safe bet that SC2 will be a big tournament title.
While I agree that pro gaming is not as impressive an undertaking as it should be, it is a viable athletic-styled career. There are Korean Networks dedicated to it. Western Pro Gamers are signing rep products regularly.Caliostro post=9.72495.762695 said:
The training regiments on multi-million pro gamers are more work than fun. Where is the paradox?
I don't know though, so many FPS games work off the same equation, calling a pro successful one is tough. Especially when games that don't offer themselves to a pro environment, like TF2, are taking the lead with consumer appeal and fun.
StarCraft II is a given though.
The paradox lies in games are conceptually the diametrical opposite of a job. The idea behind games is not to be a job, it's something to be fun and relaxing...But then again our culture tends to corrupt anything of the sort (like sports, the olympics, etc)... So this really shouldn't be a surprise.mark_n_b post=9.72495.763180 said:
Then again, maybe the word isn't so much "paradox" as it is "irony".
Starcraft (and Warcraft) have a few things about them I can't stand.Gxas post=9.72495.762991 said:
A: The artstyle. With warcraft, it is too cartoony and feels like it's meant to be a parody of fantasy settings, but then you get into the story (which isn't terrible) and realize they are serious about the artstyle. With StarCraft, it isn't as cartoony, but the overall thematic feel of the game doesn't step far from the cartoon roots Warcraft setup.
B: The Controls / Scale. Starcraft and Warcraft both have the same style of control, which is to say that they have many different things to do within the game. While normally this branching of choices would excite me, the game itself doesn't seem to fit it. The speed of slower than chess (worker units alone take a few minutes to build up enough to matter, and yes, I played it at max speed) and the most units you can select are twelve. Thats little more than a standard fire team. An RTS is about directing armies and building up a stronghold/base/whatever, but with Warcraft/StarCraft, you feel more like your building a neighborhood and sending a few children out to play with the neighbors.
Overall these are the two biggest problems I have with the games. The critical one is the fact that I can only select 12 units at any given time. Any RTS that does this starts with bad blood with me. I have played some that limit your max selected units to a rediculously small number, but the hide it or adapt to it well. Warcraft and Starcraft do not.
-Starcraft works well because it is balanced and each faction has their own ups and downs.
-Call of Duty 4 is slightly more difficult because even if you have the highest rank and are the number 1 bad*** in the game, a level 1 n00b could come up behind you without you seeing and kill you so it's a more difficult idea.
-World of Warcraft Arena - Ok now even though people will say that, "omg you can't play that because everyone will have different armor, speels, and skills but as of spells and armor, EVERYONE HAS THE SAME ARMOR IN TOURNAMENTS and same goes for spells. Skills is something you develop no matter who you are so leave that out.
Battlefield 2 - Good amount of team play, vehicles somewhat balanced (Tank > soldier > jeep)but solid game over all.
-Counterstrike Source - No. Easy to kill a person just by hiding and doing cheap shots.
-Fighter Games Overall - Ok this is more difficult than FPSers because this is all based on skill of players and so the veteran players will kick the newer teams butt without a second thought. Yes every Player Character in-game has its ups and downs but when you can kill 3 level 9 NPC's in SSBB under 10 seconds then you are clearly overpowered.
-Call of Duty 4 is slightly more difficult because even if you have the highest rank and are the number 1 bad*** in the game, a level 1 n00b could come up behind you without you seeing and kill you so it's a more difficult idea.
-World of Warcraft Arena - Ok now even though people will say that, "omg you can't play that because everyone will have different armor, speels, and skills but as of spells and armor, EVERYONE HAS THE SAME ARMOR IN TOURNAMENTS and same goes for spells. Skills is something you develop no matter who you are so leave that out.
Battlefield 2 - Good amount of team play, vehicles somewhat balanced (Tank > soldier > jeep)but solid game over all.
-Counterstrike Source - No. Easy to kill a person just by hiding and doing cheap shots.
-Fighter Games Overall - Ok this is more difficult than FPSers because this is all based on skill of players and so the veteran players will kick the newer teams butt without a second thought. Yes every Player Character in-game has its ups and downs but when you can kill 3 level 9 NPC's in SSBB under 10 seconds then you are clearly overpowered.