Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I don't really see what's wrong with that quote.

 

There's a difference between "competitive" and "skilful". I could make up a ridiculously hard Halo rule set that required players to wear blindfolds and play with their feet, but if no one else is doing it it's not competitive.

 

Pretty much no one played Shadow Run, which means there was little competition. Hell, the competition for Shadow Run was so easy that players practised both Shadow Run AND Halo and still took top positions in tournaments.

 

The less players there are the less chance anyone will reach the skill ceiling and the easier it is for the competitors since there's only a few decent teams to play against.

 

Great example is the competitive scene in Australia. We had Halo 1 tournaments which were skilful but it wasn't very competitive since there wasn't a lot of prize money on offer and the scene was very small. Australian teams that attended MLG didn't stand a chance at winning because there's less competition here.

 

Off topic, I have no idea why anyone liked Shadow Run in the first place.

 

It was definitely ahead of its time (some of the abilities ended up in games like Destiny years later) but it also had a lot of issues. I mean, having bloom affected simply by turning your gun - reducing your ability to make twitch shots? This was done because the game had cross system support between console and PC so they handicapped PC players on purpose so players using keyboard and mouse didn't gain an advantage. Doesn't seem very "competitive" to me.

 

 

Some pretty big generalizations in here. I mean the number of people playing a game definitely helps the skill gap increase at launch, but you have to know about a games history I think to judge it. Sounds like you only know of maybe like the first 6 months of SR, and probably played even less. Shadowrun was more competitive with less teams at one point. It was more skilled gameplay but the overall level of each teams skill was definitely higher than when it was retired from MLG. Instead of 30 teams and 3 good ones you had 20 teams and 12 good ones. 

 

If you don't know why people liked Shadowrun idk what to tell you. It's such a complex and skillful game so there's that to start. Bloom doesn't bother a lot of people since the point isn't to run and gun. Also the weapons have way more control even at full bloom or while moving than everyone had thought.

 

The word competitive gets bended quite a bit to fit whatever people are talking about. People will ask which Halo had the more competitive mechanics or what had the best competitive maps. At that point the value of the game has nothing to do with player base or popularity so yeah maybe player base can make a tournament more competitive, but if we had 256 teams for a Shadowrun tournament at launch the gameplay would have been just as shitty.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

What would you claim for 2015, though? In the future I agree it's looking promising for CoD.

 

And I'd disagree with bigger worldwide appeal, Smash easily is more popular internationally. CoD's main problem is that it's so NA dominated with EU being small, and Asia non existant.

2015 certainly wasnt great for COD for the game itself and the stream platform, neither of which exist now (Its why they have seen all the usual orgs come back, and a lot of new ones come in). Either way they still had weekly content that were notable. Smash's highs were higher, but COD had way more events that broke 50k ish as well as being more prominent during the week thanks to it being more accessible online content wise.

 

Completely disagree with COD being small in EU. Its not NA quality wise but the numbers are there for sure and big organisations in Europe such as ESL/Gfinity/EGL/ESWC are all investing in it over Smash.

 

Now it has an EU weekly league too, helping improve the competition and allows sponsors and orgs a safer investment.

 

If im in NA I'd invest in COD, if it was EU I'd probably be more likely to invest in COD.

Share this post


Link to post

2015 certainly wasnt great for COD for the game itself and the stream platform, neither of which exist now. Either way they still had weekly content that were notable. Smash's highs were higher, but COD had way more events that broke 50k ish as well as being more prominent during the week thanks to it being more accessible online content wise.

 

Completely disagree with COD being small in EU. Its not NA quality wise but the numbers are there for sure. Now it has an EU weekly league too, helping improve the competition and allows sponsors and orgs a safer investment. Call of Duty is a worldwide juggernaut.

The problem is Smash had a lot more tornys. Where as for every CoD event all top teams attended, and this is not the case for Smash. For compareable events, Smash outperformed viewership wise IMO. Apex was like 120k, EVO 200k, and TBH5 75k. I don't think CoD peaked over 75k in all of 2015 besides CoD Champs (165k + change). Regarding weekly content, it's not like Smash didn't have it, just nothing too organized like League Matches. But even then what is content if people aren't watching--MLG.tv numbers were really declining.

 

As far as EU, I agree they've come a ways like the Paris crowd is the best out of anywhere and Gotaga is popular, but their players still suck compared to NA like you said and the viewership isn't there without NA presence. Though I guess you could say the same for Smash. It's a world wide juggernaut for casual play but not competitively, where there are prominent Smash scenes all over, but perhaps I'm putting too much emphasis into talent. I will admit I am no expert of EU CoD.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

The problem is Smash had a lot more tornys. Where as for every CoD event all top teams attended, and this is not the case for Smash. For compareable events, Smash outperformed viewership wise IMO. Apex was like 120k, EVO 200k, and TBH5 75k. I don't think CoD peaked over 75k in all of 2015 besides CoD Champs (165k + change). Regarding weekly content, it's not like Smash didn't have it, just nothing too organized like League Matches. But even then what is content if people aren't watching--MLG.tv numbers were really declining.

 

As far as EU, I agree they've come a ways like the Paris crowd is the best out of anywhere and Gotaga is popular, but their players still suck compared to NA like you said and the viewership isn't there without NA presence. Though I guess you could say the same for Smash. It's a world wide juggernaut for casual play but not competitively, where there are prominent Smash scenes all over.

 

 

And all the points above is why COD is the bigger esport, and the potential to be much much bigger.

 

Yes, Smash has more tournies, but thats because its easier to run, and thats what the community was founded on, whereas COD was very much online because of the lack of LAN, so online tournies for COD are a huge thing, and now LAN participation is starting to pick up too. The playerbase of online players dwarfs smash. Yes its an unfair comparison, but that allows much more potentinal to convert the online warriors into regular participants in esports/lan events.

 

Yes, COD is becoming more structured, another reason why its the bigger esport.

 

Yes the competition isint as good as NA but they now have the tools to close the gap between them and EU (same applies to ANZ). Viewer ship for those events is still bigger than Smash EU events.

 

Yes, the casual audience is much more prominent than competitive in COD. But with a large player base and a much bigger  focus on competitive play, you then have a much higher chance to convert those into comp. players.

 

The most important thing is that Call of Duty and its developer is actively making the right steps to becoming an esport. Nintendo doesnt seem to care too much, and a good chunk of the FGC is quite hesitant to the esports movement and prefer its grassroots community. Its just a lot more lucrative to invest in Call of Duty, and as more sponsors come in, the scene will grow further.

 

If I gave you a wedge of cash/let you start an org, do you go COD or Smash?

Share this post


Link to post

And all the points above is why COD is the bigger esport, and the potential to be much much bigger.

 

Yes, Smash has more tournies, but thats because its easier to run, and thats what the community was founded on, whereas COD was very much online because of the lack of LAN, so online tournies for COD are a huge thing, and now LAN participation is starting to pick up too. The playerbase of online players dwarfs smash. Yes its an unfair comparison, but that allows much more potentinal to convert the online warriors into regular participants in esports/lan events.

 

Yes, COD is becoming more structured, another reason why its the bigger esport.

 

Yes the competition isint as good as NA but they now have the tools to close the gap between them and EU (same applies to ANZ). Viewer ship for those events is still bigger than Smash EU events.

 

Yes, the casual audience is much more prominent than competitive in COD. But with a large player base and a much bigger  focus on competitive play, you then have a much higher chance to convert those into comp. players.

 

The most important thing is that Call of Duty and its developer is actively making the right steps to becoming an esport. Nintendo doesnt seem to care too much, and a good chunk of the FGC is quite hesitant to the esports movement and prefer its grassroots community. Its just a lot more lucrative to invest in Call of Duty, and as more sponsors come in, the scene will grow further.

 

If I gave you a wedge of cash/let you start an org, do you go COD or Smash?

I agree it's probably more promising for CoD in the future (rapidly approaching), but my debate was under what is currently bigger and the way I did so was looking back at the year of 2015 (impossible to compare in real time), and seeing how the 2 compared. When CoD's bigger, I'll admit it but in my opinion right now it is not, simply because the viewership is not there, the amount of aspiring competitive players is a fraction of that compared to Smash, and while it is structured with more money Smash still has more members invested in the competitive scene, effectively making it a bigger esport. I don't think the monetary gain of investing in CoD over Smash validates it being bigger, just a better investment. 

Share this post


Link to post

I agree it's probably more promising for CoD in the future (rapidly approaching), but my debate was under what is currently bigger and the way I did so was looking back at the year of 2015 (impossible to compare in real time), and seeing how the 2 compared. When CoD's bigger, I'll admit it but in my opinion right now it is not, simply because the viewership is not there, the amount of aspiring competitive players is a fraction of that compared to Smash, and while it is structured with more money Smash still has more members invested in the competitive scene, effectively making it a bigger esport. I don't think the monetary gain of investing in CoD over Smash validates it being bigger, just a better investment. 

If people are investing then the scene will grow. People are investing for a reason. If Smash was the bigger esport, 

 

I dont get where the aspiring competitive player number is coming from. Yes Smash has many in person competitiors, COD has much much more online based. Not even close, and prominent in much more regions. Hell, Smash has way more in person competitors than LoL/Dota/CS etc.

 

Yes, there are a lot of people invested in Smash in the comp scene, but that doesnt make it bigger. And I think you are looking at NA only, as demonstrated by the belief that COD is small in EU.

 

I would say the viewership is already bigger. Smash has your big peaks, but COD has pro streams, online tournies, multiple LAN events in multiple regions most weekends, to me its not even close.

 

Activision has an esports department. That structure alone makes it the biggest esport right now, and in the future.

Share this post


Link to post

If people are investing then the scene will grow. People are investing for a reason. If Smash was the bigger esport, 

 

I dont get where the aspiring competitive player number is coming from. Yes Smash has many in person competitiors, COD has much much more online based. Not even close, and prominent in much more regions. Hell, Smash has way more in person competitors than LoL/Dota/CS etc.

 

Yes, there are a lot of people invested in Smash in the comp scene, but that doesnt make it bigger. And I think you are looking at NA only, as demonstrated by the belief that COD is small in EU.

 

I would say the viewership is already bigger. Smash has your big peaks, but COD has pro streams, online tournies, multiple LAN events in multiple regions most weekends, to me its not even close.

 

Activision has an esports department. That structure alone makes it the biggest esport right now, and in the future.

It can be the bigger eSport and yet be seen as not as profitable. 

 

Not sure how you could claim CoD, competitively, is more prominent internationally. Melee has active scenes all over the world, where as in CoD there are literally 2--NA and EU, with AU being barely worth noting. I'm getting the aspiring competitive players numbers just from being invested in both scenes. In Melee, there are lists of active players in each state that are in the hundreds. It is much harder to conclude the number of aspiring competitive CoD players due to them mostly being online, but I think an educated analysis leads to them not even being close.

 

As far as this EU discussion goes, NA takes the cake in both scenes so not sure what the point is here. Even if EU CoD is bigger than EU Smash, Smash still has scenes in Japan, Brazil, etc. 

 

You're going to have to cite some sources of 2015 CoD viewership to convince me otherwise here. I already cited some for Smash, and it's not like they don't have streams, online tournies (not prominent) and LAN events (Smash has a lot more of these in more regions--definitely shouldn't be a point in favor of CoD). In 2015 AW the top pros only had a couple thousand views on MLG.TV, comparable to some top Smashers would get on a good day.

 

This is fine and dandy and will certainly help contribute to growth but it's not the biggest esport (or bigger than Smash) right now as a result. A non dev support game can be a bigger eSport; why would dev support make it inherently bigger? Certainly it will help but it's not an auto win. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

It can be the bigger eSport and yet be seen as not as profitable. 

 

Not sure how you could claim CoD, competitively, is more prominent internationally. Melee has active scenes all over the world, where as in CoD there are literally 2--NA and EU, with AU being barely worth noting. I'm getting the aspiring competitive players numbers just from being invested in both scenes. In Melee, there are lists of active players in each state that are in the hundreds. It is much harder to conclude the number of aspiring competitive CoD players due to them mostly being online, but I think an educated analysis leads to them not even being close.

 

As far as this EU discussion goes, NA takes the cake in both scenes so not sure what the point is here. Even if EU CoD is bigger than EU Smash, Smash still has scenes in Japan, Brazil, etc. 

 

You're going to have to cite some sources of 2015 CoD viewership to convince me otherwise here. I already cited some for Smash, and it's not like they don't have streams, online tournies (not prominent) and LAN events (Smash has a lot more of these in more regions--definitely shouldn't be a point in favor of CoD). In 2015 AW the top pros only had a couple thousand views on MLG.TV, comparable to some top Smashers would get on a good day.

 

This is fine and dandy and will certainly help contribute to growth but it's not the biggest esport (or bigger than Smash) right now as a result. A non dev support game can be a bigger eSport; why would dev support make it inherently bigger? Certainly it will help but it's not an auto win. 

I think you are starting confuse active communities and esports.

 

Question - which is the biggest "esport". Call of Duty, no question. Its the game and company making active strides to do so, has much more structure, more constant views on Twitch/MLG (pro streams, online events, online tournaments, lan tournaments, the cod world league).

 

Their esports department is now installed into Activision, the cogs are turning and the game has already starting to progress at a very fast rate. You are vastly underrating what a team of profefssional, who's job is to literally do esports, will do for the game.

 

In 2016 you will have the world league/cup have 25 weeks of content at least. Throw in events from organisations (much more exposure than your local Smash events outside of the big 3/4/5) such as MLG/ESL/UMG/EGL/Gfinity/ESWC, and suddenly COD is looking very profitable for sponsors to come in. Big orgs come in, they invest into promoting these teams and brands, which snowballs into viewership across multiple platforms). 

 

What does Nintendo do to help? Nothing.

 

You cant just say "they have active scenes all over the world" then think thats your point made. I already called you out for saying Call of Duty was tiny in EU esports wise, dont need to do it again. In japan they dont play Melee, and esports in general is not really a thing embedded into Japanese culture (though League of Legends is starting to make some big moves with the younger generation there). 

 

Its an odd comparison to make because you can argue that Smash doesnt want to be an esport anyways. Theres not a huge room for it to grow since orgs are keen to invest into it as much because they get a lot less back. That puts it on the burden of the TO's themselves, and they will be more interested in keeping their local community happy rather than brand out into the more corporate based nature of esports (which is why you see Smash fans kinda oppose MLG  a lot) Yes, some Smash events get huge numbers, but those are small peaks over the year. 

 

Because of the future potential of COD, that by proxy, means the bigger esport NOW is Call of Duty. Id have COD/LoL/Dota/SC/CS/Hearthstone all above Smash (and Smash had bigger peak audience than three of those in 2015). Hell, Smash prob isint the biggest fighting game if you keep referring to player participation.

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

SF4 definitely trumps Smash worldwide. You have good players in China, Japan (the big hotspot for Fighters considering they have arcades), U.S., Canada, Brazil iirc, The Gulf, Scotland, etc

 

Evo SF4 also beat Melee and Smash 4 (though if you add both the games Smash probably wins but that's an unfair comparison) in competitors.

 

Smash is a cool series, I respect it even though I quit, but I would have to say it loses to CoD esports wise (ergh). However, tournament wise attendance/competitors, smash beats it easy like most FGs

Share this post


Link to post

I think you are starting confuse active communities and esports.

 

Question - which is the biggest "esport". Call of Duty, no question. Its the game and company making active strides to do so, has much more structure, more constant views on Twitch/MLG (pro streams, online events, online tournaments, lan tournaments, the cod world league).

 

Their esports department is now installed into Activision, the cogs are turning and the game has already starting to progress at a very fast rate. You are vastly underrating what a team of profefssional, who's job is to literally do esports, will do for the game.

 

In 2016 you will have the world league/cup have 25 weeks of content at least. Throw in events from organisations (much more exposure than your local Smash events outside of the big 3/4/5) such as MLG/ESL/UMG/EGL/Gfinity/ESWC, and suddenly COD is looking very profitable for sponsors to come in. Big orgs come in, they invest into promoting these teams and brands, which snowballs into viewership across multiple platforms). 

 

What does Nintendo do to help? Nothing.

 

You cant just say "they have active scenes all over the world" then think thats your point made. I already called you out for saying Call of Duty was tiny in EU esports wise, dont need to do it again. In japan they dont play Melee, and esports in general is not really a thing embedded into Japanese culture (though League of Legends is starting to make some big moves with the younger generation there). 

 

Its an odd comparison to make because you can argue that Smash doesnt want to be an esport anyways. Theres not a huge room for it to grow since orgs are keen to invest into it as much because they get a lot less back. That puts it on the burden of the TO's themselves, and they will be more interested in keeping their local community happy rather than brand out into the more corporate based nature of esports (which is why you see Smash fans kinda oppose MLG  a lot) Yes, some Smash events get huge numbers, but those are small peaks over the year. 

 

Because of the future potential of COD, that by proxy, means the bigger esport NOW is Call of Duty. Id have COD/LoL/Dota/SC/CS/Hearthstone all above Smash (and Smash had bigger peak audience than three of those in 2015). Hell, Smash prob isint the biggest fighting game if you keep referring to player participation.

 

 

 

 

We may just have to agree to disagree... we're running circles here.

 

You claim "there's much more structure" I say I agree, but it's not enough to warrant it bigger. You claim "there's more constant viewers" I claim 2015 AW peaked at 75k views at events while Smash was at or over 100k several times, and Smash has everything you listed except the CoD World League. The peaks of Smash were definitely bigger as you said, but it's silly to compare a CoD National to a non Smash national, which is why I brought up the peaks--in CoD, there aren't regular LANs that have 2 top teams go, where as there are often Smash events with only 2 top players in attendance or less.

 

I already gave my point on Activision's involvement: it will certainly help but the premise under debate has been right now, not speculating into the future which one will be bigger. 

 

You're right, Nintendo doesn't do jack shit besides meaninglessly sponsoring a few tournaments. If they would be more involved, of course the scene would be bigger, but their lack of involvement doesn't mean it's a smaller eSport inherently. 

 

Me saying there's active Melee scenes all over the world was the response to your claim that competitive CoD has a bigger International presence (it doesn't). Once again, EU relevance? I may have underestimated their scene in CoD but it's still NA dominated, what is your point? Also, they most definitely play Smash in Japan, I'm not an expert on Melee but AMSA has gotten top 8 in the U.S. before from Japan and specifically in Smash 64 Japan's the strongest region. It may not be the largest Melee scene, but it's certainly larger than the 0 comp CoD scene there. 

 

I'm not confusing what an eSport is/player participation, I'm just putting a lot of weight on player participation. What makes an eSport bigger to me, is mostly the community, not how many orgs are involved or how much money there is to be made--you act is if you need corporate involvement to be an eSport--no, any competitive video game is an eSport--the claim "Smash doesn't want to be an eSport" doesn't even make sense to me--as long as it's being played competitively, it is. If there are more people playing one game competitively than another, I think it is most likely a bigger eSport, and that is the case with Smash. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

We may just have to agree to disagree... we're running circles here.

 

Pretty much apart, i'l call this my last post on the matter. One last point il challenge

 

I'm not confusing what an eSport is/player participation, I'm just putting a lot of weight on player participation. What makes an eSport bigger to me, is mostly the community, not how many orgs are involved or how much money there is to be made--you act is if you need corporate involvement to be an eSport--no, any competitive video game is an eSport--the claim "Smash doesn't want to be an eSport" doesn't even make sense to me--as long as it's being played competitively, it is. If there are more people playing one game competitively than another, I think it is most likely a bigger eSport, and that is the case with Smash. 

Counting online players in that too? What others esports would you say Smash is bigger than then if this is your main measuring stick?

Share this post


Link to post

Anyone have rainbow 6 siege? How is it?

The game is missing a lot of content just like most games do these days and the prize tag is a bit high considering how little content there is, but the free DLC might make up for it. Player customization is severely lacking especially compared to the Vegas games, bad servers like really bad with high ping and disconnects.

Most of the stuff from the start is locked behind a progress system, want to play ranked then you need to reach lv 20, want to unlock your first Operator then play the game for a bit.

However the game ain't that bad imo, you basically need a team of players who are in to communicating and all that to get the most from the game.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I claim 2015 AW peaked at 75k views at events while Smash was at or over 100k several times.

I don't even play/follow CoD but I know Champs, X-Games and MLG World Finals all hit 100k+ on twitch. CoD had a decent year it is just their community likes to moan so it looks like they're getting shit on all the time.

 

Also of course Smash is going to have a perceived active 'in-person' player base because that's predominantly how the game is played.

Share this post


Link to post

Rocket league is finally coming for the Xbox One, sadly it doesn't look like the Xbox One version will have crossplay.

The Xbox One version of Rocket League includes:

 

- Exclusive Battle-Cars: 16 Cars + 2 Xbox One Exclusives (the Halo "HogSticker," an alternate version of the Warthog, and the Gears of War "Armadillo")

 

- Garage Customization items: More than 400 different pieces, including Paint Types, Wheels, Rocket Trails, Antennas, and Toppers

 

- Maps: DFH Stadium, Beckwith Park, Mannfield, Urban Station, Utopia Coliseum, Wasteland (with multiple variants of most of those maps)

 

- Multiplayer: 4-Player Splitscreen, 8-Player Online, Ranked and Unranked Play, Special Mutator-Themed playlist(s), Private Match support (with named rooms and optional passwords)

 

- Game Modes: Exhibition 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4, Unfair Mode (1v2, 1v3, 1v4), Offline Season Mode

More Features: Replay Viewer, Customizable controls, "Mutator" game-variant options (Ball Type, Ball Speed, Boost Strength, Max Score, Match Length, etc., etc.)

 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Rocket league is finally coming for the Xbox One, sadly it doesn't look like the Xbox One version will have crossplay.

 

 

 

Dat Halo Warthog and GoW Armadillo tho

Share this post


Link to post

I don't even play/follow CoD but I know Champs, X-Games and MLG World Finals all hit 100k+ on twitch. CoD had a decent year it is just their community likes to moan so it looks like they're getting shit on all the time.

 

Also of course Smash is going to have a perceived active 'in-person' player base because that's predominantly how the game is played.

None of those events were even streamed on Twitch. But Champs hit 167k plus change, X-Games 100k, can't find World Finals.

 

And it's not just perceived, there's more competitive players overall.

Share this post


Link to post

I play Smash basically every weekend with friends and man, it makes me sometimes wish gaming had never gone online. Multiplayer used to mean how many people I could fit on a box, not if I could go on the internet and get called a "fucking queer ******" haha

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Eh I met a lot of good people through online gaming so I don't mind it. Some annoying people sure, but I never really cared that much.

 

In-person events/locals are the best though, I agree. FG locals are the best thing to me in gaming considering every week you're in a packed room full of nerds who totally understand competitive video games on a level equal to you.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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