Competitive BC2

[Kylee!]

Re: Competitive BC2

Has anyone on this forum won a significant amount of money from a PC game tournament? :p

I've won $500 at a LAN tournament before... *shrug* I've never even invested half as much time into something as a "pro" gamer would do.

and Killerus, we haven't said a word about stats or skill level. I mean... I guess you must not like sports or anything, like if people in the Majors are good at baseball ... "oh bah humbug, look at that **** flaunting his skills and batting average all over the place. I just play this game for fuuuuuuuuuuuuuunn. Those guys in the Majors are all jerks. D:"

I think the features he talks about would add some serious depth to the game, even for public play.

[LunaTiK TunaLiK]

Re: Competitive BC2

Mod supports never going to happen, Why waste the time to make a Mod Tool to make mods if there not going to make money off it? There going to create a shop for u to buy extra stuff like new mods for servers and maps as well

While mod support might not ever happen for this game, mods only help make more money and keep players around.

Has anyone on this forum won a significant amount of money from a PC game tournament?

I have won an expensive gaming computer a lot of hardware and software and many cash prices. I haven't won 10,000 but growing up my parents were not very supportive of gaming competitions . In the end the fun I had just competing was worth the experience. I don't go to LAN or Gaming events any longer and most of my competitive play has been online tournaments, leagues and ladders for the most of the last 5 years with few exceptions.

[TGL|Badlizzard]

Re: Competitive BC2

I think a lot of this stuff should be what HC mode is.

I think a lot of that stuff should be in the game for all.
The medic revive protection and LMG hoards that move across maps are retarded.

I think we are spoiled by the good things that were in COD4 that were left out of BC2, for some odd reason I thought games would progress and learn the good things from each other and use them. (demo's, spectate, etc.) I know it is not COD4 and it is not BF2, but really not having those simple features is a step backwards in technology imo.

Some very good ideas in there, I hope that they all are implemented at some point.

[Lordsethonan]

Re: Competitive BC2

bla bla bla bla waaaaaah.

Anybody who hasn't yet realized BC2 is just a PC place holder til the eventual BF3; and a testbed for frostbite on PC; is just deluding himself about the life expectancy of BC2.
One of my favorite FPS recently, it did mostly everything right, a huge step up for DICE out of the box programming; yet I wouldn't want them wasting too much time on this instead of working on the next BF title. We are past that age of games lasting 3 hundred years.

IMO, fps games are nowhere near the required skill to be considered a "sport" to be played "competitively and professionaly". The games that are closer to that definition are RTS and fighting games; everything else is just too dependant on hardware and configuration advantages. IMO declaring a game requires "no skill" for one reason or another only shows you are not interested in trying to master it.
I agree some games have more depth than others; but regarding FPS's, unless they come up with a gun mock up like the ones they have in arcade machines with real recoil, you can't talk about "skill" in an FPS, it's all point and click.

Regarding the article, I agree some features are needed to get the game complete. But one thing I'll never agree on, is the necessity of mod tools.
In my opinion, if the modding community wants a new game so bad, and the released one doesn't please them; they should get together, license a graphic engine and program away. You should never expect modtools to be released for any particular game. Not as the main reason to grade a game anyways. Else you end up with boring stupid games like most of what iD has done, farcry and the like. It is not the developers duty to provide with such tools.

[Lordsethonan]

Re: Competitive BC2

Just to expan a bit more on my previous post:

I have a background on fighting games; even tough you are not required to play every single one of them, the community in general is more inclined to test new games out, with masters of previous games declaring their support or not, but seldomly deriding a newer game as requiring "no skill".
There is trash talk about easier ones, when it is obvious they are shallow, but even then strategies are developed and guides come out and what not; but also in general, people that refuse to enter the "competitive" scene in fighting games are labeled as not wanting to invest enough time, or being stuck in the past; since most of the time, previous mastery of a fighting game won't guarantee you will do better in a newer one.

Fighting game enthusiasts are more likely to adapt and switch tactics; one of the most famous players in the Street Fighter 2 community is a Ryu master; when SF3:3rd strike reached tournament play, he abandoned Ryu and chose to master Ken, since Ryu was not "good enough" against top tier opponents and characters. He could have easily said: "I don't like the game" and instead chose to learn and master a different character. then he moved on to SFIV and continued to generally own people, even tough he no longer plays "competitively".

And the point is, the fighting game scene is very different compared to FPS and RTS because the players keep moving forward and only return to past games as recreation; when over here we are still discussing Counterstrike as the pinnacle of FPS "skill" and a paradoxical discurse of "learn to adapt and evolve" that has "but in games ten years old" implicit in it.

[LunaTiK TunaLiK]

Re: Competitive BC2

I think a lot of that stuff should be in the game for all.
The medic revive protection and LMG hoards that move across maps are retarded.

I think we are spoiled by the good things that were in COD4 that were left out of BC2, for some odd reason I thought games would progress and learn the good things from each other and use them. (demo's, spectate, etc.) I know it is not COD4 and it is not BF2, but really not having those simple features is a step backwards in technology imo.

Some very good ideas in there, I hope that they all are implemented at some point.

I do not disagree the article hits on topics that would be good for any BC2 gamer. I'm just saying that they should include a mode that caters to competitive play.

IMO, fps games are nowhere near the required skill to be considered a "sport" to be played "competitively and professionaly". The games that are closer to that definition are RTS and fighting games; everything else is just too dependant on hardware and configuration advantages. IMO declaring a game requires "no skill" for one reason or another only shows you are not interested in trying to master it.
I agree some games have more depth than others; but regarding FPS's, unless they come up with a gun mock up like the ones they have in arcade machines with real recoil, you can't talk about "skill" in an FPS, it's all point and click.

This is the biggest nonsense I think I've ever had the misfortune to read, IMO.

[iQue]

Re: Competitive BC2

Has anyone on this forum won a significant amount of money from a PC game tournament? :p

I've come last at a CS lan. Twice. :awes

[jake_]

Re: Competitive BC2

I don't mean to disrespect competitive gaming; I think it definitely has a large place in the gaming community and shouldn't be frowned upon as they do take some skill to be good at, but I don't think that video games in general require much skill relative to other sports and activities. They all have an extremely low learning curve, compared to say learning to play the piano or fencing.

---------- Post added at 03:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:03 PM ----------

I've won $500 at a LAN tournament before... *shrug* I've never even invested half as much time into something as a "pro" gamer would do.

Nice! I'm impressed. :wee:

[Kylee!]

Re: Competitive BC2

And the point is, the fighting game scene is very different compared to FPS and RTS because the players keep moving forward and only return to past games as recreation; when over here we are still discussing Counterstrike as the pinnacle of FPS "skill" and a paradoxical discourse of "learn to adapt and evolve" that has "but in games ten years old" implicit in it.

Well I would totally agree with you, except for the fact that there hasn't been any FPS games with much depth made in ten years that are good enough for competition. With the exception of CoD4 and maybe some others that I don't really think are important.

[Kylee!]

Re: Competitive BC2

I don't mean to disrespect competitive gaming; I think it definitely has a large place in the gaming community and shouldn't be frowned upon as they do take some skill to be good at, but I don't think that video games in general require much skill relative to other sports and activities. They all have an extremely low learning curve, compared to say learning to play the piano or fencing.

It depends, like I'll go back to CS again because its what I'm familiar with... but those guys that were "professionals" (not so much now, more back in 1.6's heyday) they practiced more than runners would train for a marathon. I mean you are playing... a video game... and the money they got paid was certainly proportionate to their situation. 100,000 was the highest prize pot I could remember, thats split between 5 players, and of course you had to be the best of the best of the best and require a bit of luck. While our lowliest line man or utility infielder will get paid 600,000 a year...

It evens out I think, and I mean... come on guys... who the hell wouldn't want to be able to play video games, and get paid for it. Granted I would like to preserve my social status as a human being - but shoot I think it would be pretty awesome for a period.

[LunaTiK TunaLiK]

Re: Competitive BC2

Sports and activities do not need to require a huge learning curve compared to piano. Furthermore, there is no learning curve for talent and ability. You think sprinting has a huge learning curve?

It's easy to learn an FPS game but it's still very difficult to master. If you think differently you obviously haven't mastered it or played against a group of people who have.

Edit-
Just a coincidence that Kylee used running as an example also.

[jake_]

Re: Competitive BC2

Sports and activities do not need to require a huge learning curve compared to piano. Furthermore, there is no learning curve for talent and ability. You think sprinting has a huge learning curve?

I didn't say every sport nor did I compare sports and music to each other. I compared video games to each of them. In no way does that fact that being a pianist or professional athlete takes much more skill than being professional gamer imply that athleticism is more difficult than music. Running still takes training and effort put into it, no one is born being a perfect runner (yes, some people are more predisposed to being good runners, I know this because I am, but that doesn't mean that they still don't have to train).

You've run my point completely off topic because you could think of one sport that doesn't have a high learning curve in comparison to piano (which I don't disagree with and is completely irrelevant). This is why I hate arguments on forums sometimes. You're going to respond to this post and argue with me some more, further distancing us from the point that I originally made.

If you really think all sports and activities have a lesser learning curve in comparison to playing the piano, apparently you've never played chess or studied fencing, which is essentially chess with a foil (and to be honest, sport fencing looks just like a game of reflexes compared to classical fencing). :p

---------- Post added at 05:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:30 PM ----------

It depends, like I'll go back to CS again because its what I'm familiar with... but those guys that were "professionals" (not so much now, more back in 1.6's heyday) they practiced more than runners would train for a marathon. I mean you are playing... a video game... and the money they got paid was certainly proportionate to their situation. 100,000 was the highest prize pot I could remember, thats split between 5 players, and of course you had to be the best of the best of the best and require a bit of luck. While our lowliest line man or utility infielder will get paid 600,000 a year...

It evens out I think, and I mean... come on guys... who the hell wouldn't want to be able to play video games, and get paid for it. Granted I would like to preserve my social status as a human being - but shoot I think it would be pretty awesome for a period.

Good point about the pay differences and I can't say I wouldn't want to make money playing video games. :p

The point I was trying to get at with my observation (or so I think... I didn't really make it at all obvious, did I?) is that I don't think competitive gaming will ever catch up to the sort of popularity that athletic sports as a whole have as spectator sports, at least as video games stand are today, although I wouldn't rule it out in the future.

Competitive sports primarily evolved out of Panhellenic games in Ancient Greece (the original Olympics and the like) which in turn came from funeral games, which were essentially competitive martial exercises (racing, boxing, jousting, mock duels, etc), so it's all really militarily based. So FPS games really could become popular as a spectator sport, I just don't think current games such as the BF and CoD franchises fit the bill, since, like I said, I don't the learning curve is nearly high as it is for many sports or, say, music.

:)

edit: Sorry to take this thread so off-topic, I was just posting my musing after reading that article and things somehow got out of hand. :weo:

[LunaTiK TunaLiK]

Re: Competitive BC2

but I don't think that video games in general require much skill relative to other sports and activities

My point is that it doesn't need to, although I do think you are wrong. For one, you have substituted the word general with competitive. Second, I don't think you understand what skill is or how is it determined.

You then go to insinuate that I said all sports and activities have a lesser learning curve than piano. I mean, really? How does "Do not have to" translate to "all" must? I didn't run anything off topic and in fact that is exactly what you are doing. You made point and now you've morphed it into something completely different and practically putting words in other peoples posts that were not there.

You also insinuate that I was saying running doesn't require training. Will you come back to earth please?

I used piano because you used piano and it wouldn't have made a difference if it was fencing, sprinting, or blowing snot bubbles. FPS gaming and what ever skill level you think someone needs to be able to compete has nothing to do with anything you've attempted to compared it to.

This entire skill level argument is pointless. When learning curve , experience curve and physical training mean the same thing please finish your argument. When skill, ability and talent all mean the same thing, then please finish your argument.

Until someone tells me other wise skill is how well you do something. If you are better at FPS games than someone else is you are more skilled. You can't compare someones skill at FPS games to an entirely different sport or activity. If you think someone can easily become as skilled as the next you are very much mistaken.

Anytime you want to play a game of blitz chess or a regular game then please let me know.

There are many sports that don't have a huge learning curve like baseball, football, soccer, tennis, basketball, and list goes on. Don't even try to bring up physical training that has nothing to do with learning curve.

[Lordsethonan]

Re: Competitive BC2

Well I'd argue that since there isn't a standarized way of measuring "skill" (and this is the reason I quote the word skill when used in videogame context) in a videogame, aside from scoring wich by itself is subjective; there is no way to objectively start a competition. Much of the "skill" involved in FPS comes from configuring your PC just right.

To me, aside from balanced gameplay; a level configuration of detail, connectivety speed, and graphics is a must before even considering the whole thing as a playing field in wich a real competition can take place. Unless the PC specifications can be regulated, it's just pointless.

Just as one example; I give you a match result for a football game: 27-24 . what does it tell you? one team won. What if I tell you the team with 27 points scored 9 field goals, vs one field goal and 3 touchdowns from the other team; what team was more "skilled"? FPS for the general public are just incoprehensible; it's all very subjective, you have to be in the know of how the thing works to even begin to appreciate a good player from a tactical cheater.
At least in real sports you can see a player has better physical shape than the opponents, or is better prepared. You can tell a good guitarist from a mediocre one right away even without knowing how to read music. Hell, even billiard needs more "skill" than videogames.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm a gamer, but I can realize why the whole competitive stuff is just a pipe dream; so I fail to see a reason why it should be supported by default from a developer, or be a reason to deride any game. that is, unless they start running steroid and drugs tests for gamers ina league so at least there is a modest chance of people raging over a gaming scandal; and the whole world turns into Korea and start televising the tourneys and sponsoring guys left and right.

I'ts a past time, not serious business. Watching two guys knock the hell out of each other is entertaining; listening to dueling guitars is interesting, watching two guys outfrag each other is... kinda sad really.

[Kylee!]

Re: Competitive BC2

Well I'd argue that since there isn't a standarized way of measuring "skill" (and this is the reason I quote the word skill when used in videogame context) in a videogame, aside from scoring wich by itself is subjective; there is no way to objectively start a competition. Much of the "skill" involved in FPS comes from configuring your PC just right.

To me, aside from balanced gameplay; a level configuration of detail, connectivety speed, and graphics is a must before even considering the whole thing as a playing field in wich a real competition can take place. Unless the PC specifications can be regulated, it's just pointless.

Just as one example; I give you a match result for a football game: 27-24 . what does it tell you? one team won. What if I tell you the team with 27 points scored 9 field goals, vs one field goal and 3 touchdowns from the other team; what team was more "skilled"? FPS for the general public are just incoprehensible; it's all very subjective, you have to be in the know of how the thing works to even begin to appreciate a good player from a tactical cheater.
At least in real sports you can see a player has better physical shape than the opponents, or is better prepared. You can tell a good guitarist from a mediocre one right away even without knowing how to read music. Hell, even billiard needs more "skill" than videogames.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm a gamer, but I can realize why the whole competitive stuff is just a pipe dream; so I fail to see a reason why it should be supported by default from a developer, or be a reason to deride any game. that is, unless they start running steroid and drugs tests for gamers ina league so at least there is a modest chance of people raging over a gaming scandal; and the whole world turns into Korea and start televising the tourneys and sponsoring guys left and right.

I'ts a past time, not serious business. Watching two guys knock the hell out of each other is entertaining; listening to dueling guitars is interesting, watching two guys outfrag each other is... kinda sad really.

That whole arguement is seriously flawed... So you're saying someones skill is subjectively based off their hardware? Thats your problem if you can't run the game smoothly... If you play football and you've got a broken leg you're obviously not gonna do well.

I don't mean to be "that guy" and bring up your stats, but my rank is the same as yours, yet I've played almost half the amount of time you have. Not only that but K/D.. etc. etc. Meaning you probably don't have much experience or understanding on the topic. Not calling you out on that, simply observing the fact that... if you have been on a competitive level before, then it would show. It almost always does.