Jump to content

Killabrewster

Member
  • Content Count

    238
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Killabrewster

  • Rank
    Best of the Lousiest
  • Birthday 11/27/1992
  1. It was, but in order to view it, you have to be able to send them a friend request. Apparently that account's friends list is full.
  2. Anyone know how or where to download the MLG settings and/or octagon? Now that the online file search is gone, it's tough to find a gamertag that has them.
  3. Yeah, 11-game finals are legendary, but they're also few and far between. At least in single-elimination games, you know the teams will be even-up at some point. I like the continuation series idea in that you play other gametypes, but it's kind of funky when you get to the "Grand Finals" and magically the score is already 3 to 1, or something.
  4. The lower seeds are playing for the same amount of money. The higher seeds already have a much higher probability of winning that money in a single-elim format, why should we increase their chances by giving them a losers bracket? I realize this is important to people because these players aren't making a salary, but in the end, we're still talking about a competition here, not a charity.
  5. Gonna have to disagree with ya on this one. The issue with the 2nd best team being eliminated early is due to the random seeding they used for HCS, not single elimination. This is a "professional" competition, the best teams should have to perform well just as much as the lower seeds do. Through all the years we had double-elim with MLG, very rarely did we have a very compelling finals (obviously there were some great ones, I know). Each time, the Loser's Bracket winner was already fighting an uphill battle in the series. Not to mention the fact that I still don't fully understand the rationale for a continuation series. If you're a fan of only seeing the best teams face each other, then yes, I suppose you would support double-elimination. But some of the best parts of tournaments like this are seeing "underdog" teams make a run deep into the tournament. There's a reason why so many people, even those who don't like basketball, love March Madness. If an 8 seed knocks off the 1 seed, they shouldn't have to worry about facing them again later on. If a team loses early, their "do-over" should be at the next tournament, not in the losers bracket. Side note: Having 3-game series in a single-elimination format is asinine.
  6. You're tryin to tell me Skirmish is a map name and not a playlist or gametype? And yes, I realize there are much better things to bitch about than this.
  7. Halo CE: N/A (only played it in MCC, which was a ton of fun, but, ya know....MCC) Halo 2: 9 Halo 3: 7 Halo: Reach: 4 (the ZBNS part brings this up from about a 2) Halo 4: 2 Halo 5: 7
  8. I definitely understand that point of view. And really, I think it's ESPN doing everything it can to connect with younger demographics since younger generations aren't watching tv as much. While esports may not fit into "extreme" sports, they both are sports that are pretty popular with millenials. I was just referencing all of the posts on Twitter last night from people freaking out that Halo and their "fat nerds" were on ESPN. Who gives a shit if it doesn't involve physical exertion? It's fun to watch and it still involves a ton of natural skill. Some people just need to chill out.
  9. I always love watching people get into pissing matches over which sports are more "athletic" than the rest. As far as I'm concerned, if there's a game that's fun to watch and involves people separating themselves based on a combo of natural ability and practice, then I don't give a shit if a person competing can run a marathon in under 3 hours or if they're 400 pounds and never leave their house. As a NASCAR fan, I get to listen to this stuff all the time.
  10. Personally, I think you've done a phenomenal job in all of the cups and Xgames so far. I honestly thought you'd have more trouble with it considering how little experience you had with Halo. Also, while I'm sure there are some areas of your play-by-play that could be improved by more knowledge of the game (I haven't paid enough attention to give any examples), you don't necessarily need to be a master of the game in order to be a good play-by-play caster. In my opinion, your job is to quickly and succinctly talk through what we're seeing on screen and get hyped if something crazy happens. It's the color guy (e.g. Walshy, Bravo, Elamite) who should be responsible for talking through the strategy behind what's going on and analyzing if something was a good play or not. I know this is probably obvious for you and most people, but I feel like some people on these forums want every caster to constantly be discussing high-level strategy all the time, when really, play-by-play announcing is not supposed to be that way. Compliment what's going on on-screen, and then pass it off to the color guy when you feel like going more in-depth.
  11. If it's true that these teams are actually host booting to advance, it's really sad to see people with absolutely no respect for competition. I honestly don't know how you could even get any enjoyment out of advancing that way.
  12. I feel like if Stellur actually is Renegades' 4th, it'd make more sense for Optic to follow Stellur and back Renegades than to stick with the remaining 3.
  13. Really curious to see what Renegades do for their 4th. I feel like they showed enough potential in just one week together to potentially be able to poach a player from a top team instead of just settling for a free agent.
  14. Just did quite the double-take when I pulled up Twitch and saw Halo 4 as the top game with 100,000+ viewers. Charity stream...
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.