[RedSwirl]

When people talk about eSports these days it's usually StarCraft II, League of Legends, or a fighting game. I haven't heard of any shooters that have been considered truly tournament worthy recently.

Come to think of it, I haven't heard of any shooter really attaining the same status as a StarCraft or LoL since Counter-Strike 1.6. Is that really still it?

Team Fortress 2 might be the closest thing in terms of modern shooters, but from what I can see that game is in an unending state of flux. Every other shooter that comes out this gen seems to get replaced by a sequel in a year or two which keeps the developers and the community from nailing one down as the main game for tournaments with a specific, accepted rule set. MLG just promotes the latest Call of Duty game but how trustworthy is that really?

CS1.6 (which I haven't even played), is the last multiplayer shooter I can think of that nailed itself down to a specific code that everyone accepts for competition. Am I wrong? If not why is that?

[les papillons sexuels]

halo 3/reach. It's about as big competition wise as sc and lol.

mlg and all that, hell they even get coverage on espn.

[injurai]

I would say CS:GO is going to be the next big one, at least for the PC scene. Since that isn't out yet probably TF2.

[spk]

I would say CS:GO.

Most players seem to think otherwise judging from the beta, myself included

[Teknopathetic]

TF2 is a terrible competitive game. Not even mentioning the constant updates adding new wonky weapons, etc., it's just boring with the low player count in a competitive format. Wasn't designed for it and it shows.

There haven't been any good competitive FPSs released in...a long time.


"CS1.6 (which I haven't even played), is the last multiplayer shooter I can think of that nailed itself down to a specific code that everyone accepts for competition. Am I wrong? If not why is that?"

Quake Live (kinda sorta, I mean it's really just Q3A) and COD4 (which, in competitive play, was just a poor man's CS). But, you're not wrong. The major reason why is probably because all these modern shooters have too much bullshit. Countless perks of varying states of imbalance, weapon unlocks/kits, etc. Community gets torn over what should be allowed and what shouldn't be, how big team sizes should be (this becomes a significant problem in class based shooters), class limits, and so on.

It was easy for games like CS, Quake, UT, etc. to reach a generally accepted rule set because they didn't have all the fluff modern FPSs have.

[Perkel]

ut99'

There is no really any competition.

Still servers are full.

[chiablo]

Most players seem to think otherwise judging from the beta, myself included

I agree... there's something that just feels off with it that I can't quite put my finger on.

[injurai]

I think playing a vanilla 6v6 TF2 can be very competitive. Even CSS was a really great competitive game. CS:GO seems to be the same thing as 1.6 and Source to me.

[RedSwirl]

TF2 is a terrible competitive game. Not even mentioning the constant updates adding new wonky weapons, etc., it's just boring with the low player count in a competitive format. Wasn't designed for it and it shows. There haven't been any good competitive FPSs released in...a long time. "CS1.6 (which I haven't even played), is the last multiplayer shooter I can think of that nailed itself down to a specific code that everyone accepts for competition. Am I wrong? If not why is that?" Quake Live (kinda sorta, I mean it's really just Q3A) and COD4 (which, in competitive play, was just a poor man's CS). But, you're not wrong. The major reason why is probably because all these modern shooters have too much bullshit. Countless perks of varying states of imbalance, weapon unlocks/kits, etc. Community gets torn over what should be allowed and what shouldn't be, how big team sizes should be (this becomes a significant problem in class based shooters), class limits, and so on. It was easy for games like CS, Quake, UT, etc. to reach a generally accepted rule set because they didn't have all the fluff modern FPSs have.

So basically shooters in general have gotten too bloated for any real competition? I guess that's the advantages of genres like the RTS, MOBA, and fighter - the successful ones don't have to worry about emulating everybody else and bloating their mechanics in the process. There isn't really a shooter that isn't afraid to stay simple.

Just thinking about this reminds me of Splinter Cell multiplayer, which I think could've been a nice competitive game. Even in Chaos Theory it didn't get too complex but felt deep. Most importantly it was a unique kind of game which meant it wasn't beholden to all the shooter trends. Hopefully Ubisoft recognizes this potential when they bring it back in Blacklist.

[Danne-Danger]

Competitive Quake Wars was really fun to follow for a while, though it was only really covered in NA where it was a one sided battle and one clan ruled everything. Plus they could never agree on rulesets and all the back and forth with ProMods and what-not made it inaccessible. The size of the maps also required a pretty high player count (at least 5v5) which wasn't ideal for a game with a small player base, or clans wanting to run their own servers.

Still, it had a shitload of potential and you didn't really have to tinker with it too much in order to make it competitive. Ban radar and flyers, that was it.

No shitty perks. No shitty unlocks. Skill based movement. Fast action. Perfect class balance. Extremely tactical and team oriented, some really great maps (though it never really got any new ones).

[Satchel]

It's going to be Halo 4

[Red UFO]

Halo probably.

[Silly.Mikey]

Most players seem to think otherwise judging from the beta, myself included

Ive ''enjoyed'' CS from time to time but ya, im not enjoying the beta of GO at all.

[RockmanWhore]

What about Tribes Ascend?

[Thoraxes]

Well since a lot of people are still playing it even today, CS 1.6.

[Vaporak]

Shooters got casual and console first design. It's really no accident that games designed first and foremost for a competitively inferior control scheme don't have a thriving esports scene.

[iNvid02]

cod4 with the pro mod

[vocab]

There isnt one. CSGO is not that game. Sorry guys The game is still too much like Source to be a good game.

[MTMBStudios]

Competitive shooters this gen?

(tumbleweed blows across the road)

[LTWheels]

What does the competitive community think about the prospects of Shootmania?

[Uriah]

CS 1.6

Hopefully Tribes rises to the challenge.

[stuart]

Quake Live in my opinion. I'm hoping for an Unreal Tournament 4 which revives the popularity of the series. I enjoyed UT3, but many fans of UT didn't move onto it.

[Teknopathetic]

"It's going to be Halo 4"

No Halo game's been worth playing competitively to this point, why would it change with Halo 4?


"What about Tribes Ascend?"

Suffers from some of the same problems I mentioned before. Also still missing some key competitive features (Demo recording most importantly. Why do none of these developers who want to make their FPS a competitive game work on demo recording? How oblivious can they be?), still some bickering over class limits/balance, game is questionably not really designed for the team sizes that the comp scene accepted (and there's some bickering over that as well).


"What does the competitive community think about the prospects of Shootmania?"

A lot of competitive Quake players seem to truly enjoy the game. However, there is the question of longevity. Will it get stale? How long can a game with only 3 weapons hold interest?

[impact]

Someone said TF2? haha that's cute

This gen is pretty pathetic for competitive shooters. I guess CoD4 is the best one if you don't count Quake Live. Hopefully one day a game can come close to the greatness of 1.6, though I doubt it's ever going to happen.

[twofold]

What about Tribes Ascend?

Tribes is fun to play but, I think, dull to watch. Same with Shootmania. I can't stand watching that game for longer than ten minutes.

Hopefully the new Painkiller delivers as a good multiplayer arena shooter. As much as I love Quake Live, I've been playing that game for over 10 years now. It'd be nice to play something new.

Rumour has it ESL will be picking up CS:GO for the next season of the IEM tournaments. If that happens, then a scene will no doubt pop up around the game.

"What does the competitive community think about the prospects of Shootmania?" A lot of competitive Quake players seem to truly enjoy the game. However, there is the question of longevity. Will it get stale? How long can a game with only 3 weapons hold interest?

According to 2gd (old school Quake caster/player), most of them are playing for the money and don't really enjoy the game too much. There was a big conversation about Shootmania during one of the most recent 'gd studio' podcasts. They were generally very negative about it.

[Slair]

TF2 6v6 with vanilla + original med weapons is pretty great. Tactics, teamwork and dm are crucial at the top of the competative scene. Really good to watch too, especially lan finals.

[Durante]

It's UT3, but people don't realize it.

[Syphon Filter]

None on consoles.

[Orayn]

A lot of competitive Quake players seem to truly enjoy the game. However, there is the question of longevity. Will it get stale? How long can a game with only 3 weapons hold interest?

If I'm not mistaken, weapons are one aspect of the game that can be customized. Seems like it would be trivial to duplicate those used in other popular shooters, or to develop new ones tailored to whatever gametype the competitive community favors.

It's UT3, but people don't realize it.

I wish people still played UT3. :(

[Syphon Filter]

If I'm not mistaken, weapons are one aspect of the game that can be customized. Seems like it would be trivial to duplicate those used in other popular shooters, or to develop new ones tailored to whatever gametype the competitive community favors. I wish people still played UT3. :(

UT3 was a disappointment.

[darkpaladinmfc]

halo 3/reach. It's about as big competition wise as sc and lol. mlg and all that, hell they even get coverage on espn.

Please tell me 'sc' stands for Splinter Cell and 'lol' stands for 'laugh out loud'. Really though, no shooters this gen have been very good for competition, but CS 1.6 and Quake 3/Live are so good any ways.

[vocab]

Hopefully the new Painkiller delivers as a good multiplayer arena shooter. As much as I love Quake Live, I've been playing that game for over 10 years now. It'd be nice to play something new. .

I just don't see it happening. The original Painkiller pushed hard for it to be in the competitive scene. It's truly a great game with a lot of real depth, but the netcode was just plain shit. It's original community was small as hell, and some how had a CPL world tour dedicated to it. Once the world tour was over, it kind of just fell off the face of the planet due to Quake 4 (Which is no where near as good, and almost killed the Quake 3 community). Painkillers reputation has been in the shitter ever since Overdose came out.


This "Remake" is just not gonna work if the developers of the rehashes keep making the same mistakes.

[Teknopathetic]

"UT3 was a disappointment."

Besides the buggy netcode (random duds when hitting with rockets, flak, etc.), the game itself was very good. The problem was lackluster server control options, no demo recording, shitty server browser, and various other menu related things. That and apparently the UT community was too poor to upgrade from their Pentium 4 machines, I saw a lot of them complaining about performance.


"According to 2gd (old school Quake caster/player), most of them are playing for the money and don't really enjoy the game too much. There was a big conversation about Shootmania during one of the most recent 'gd studio' podcasts. They were generally very negative about it."

Oh yeah? I recall Fazz saying on the gd studio when trying to "sell" it to 2gd that he felt it was a lot of fun. I guess it's only him.

[//B1G]

When you set up matches right in KZ2 I think it's the best competitive shooter out this gen by far. There are some balance issues by default but once you negate those with custom settings the mechanics are perfect. Kills take actual skill and effort instead of a quicker trigger finger or Killstreak Power-up BoosterPack Ultra Death.

[impact]

When you set up matches right in KZ2 I think it's the best competitive shooter out this gen by far. There are some balance issues by default but once you negate those with custom settings the mechanics are perfect. Kills take actual skill and effort instead of a quicker trigger finger or Killstreak Power-up BoosterPack Ultra Death.

I'm not sure how a game with laggy controls can be the best competitive shooter this gen

[twofold]

"According to 2gd (old school Quake caster/player), most of them are playing for the money and don't really enjoy the game too much. There was a big conversation about Shootmania during one of the most recent 'gd studio' podcasts. They were generally very negative about it." Oh yeah? I recall Fazz saying on the gd studio when trying to "sell" it to 2gd that he felt it was a lot of fun. I guess it's only him.

Oh, hmm. I could be remembering wrong. I just remember that the general opinion of the game was negative and that 2gd remarked that a few of the players only took part in the recent French tournament because "it's nice to travel".

I just don't see it happening. The original Painkiller pushed hard for it to be in the competitive scene. It's truly a great game with a lot of real depth, but the netcode was just plain shit. It's original community was small as hell, and some how had a CPL world tour dedicated to it. Once the world tour was over, it kind of just fell off the face of the planet due to Quake 4 (Which is no where near as good, and almost killed the Quake 3 community). Painkillers reputation has been in the shitter ever since Overdose came out. This "Remake" is just not gonna work if the developers of the rehashes keep making the same mistakes.

Yeah, you're probably right.. But you gotta have some hope, right?

Hah, I still remember that CPL world tour. Fatality vs Voo in the finals. It was broadcasted on MTV, if I remember correctly. Funny stuff.

[Seance]

Halo3. Perhaps halo 4 ,only time will tell.

[impact]

Hah, I still remember that CPL world tour. Fatality vs Voo in the finals. It was broadcasted on MTV, if I remember correctly. Funny stuff.

RIP CPL

2004 with EYEBALLERS vs. NoA was the best tournament I've ever seen

[Silly.Mikey]

When people talk about eSports these days it's usually StarCraft II, League of Legends, or a fighting game. I haven't heard of any shooters that have been considered truly tournament worthy recently. Come to think of it, I haven't heard of any shooter really attaining the same status as a StarCraft or LoL since Counter-Strike 1.6. Is that really still it? Team Fortress 2 might be the closest thing in terms of modern shooters, but from what I can see that game is in an unending state of flux. Every other shooter that comes out this gen seems to get replaced by a sequel in a year or two which keeps the developers and the community from nailing one down as the main game for tournaments with a specific, accepted rule set. MLG just promotes the latest Call of Duty game but how trustworthy is that really? CS1.6 (which I haven't even played), is the last multiplayer shooter I can think of that nailed itself down to a specific code that everyone accepts for competition. Am I wrong? If not why is that?

Reach was the most recent shooter that i was following at MLG but it doesnt seem to be there anymore. Im positive Halo4 will be there when it launches.

[AkuMifune]

None on consoles.

Bad Company 2. Still probably the most balanced/fun/teamwork required but one-good-man-can-change-the-tide shooter.

Eff I want to play it now.

[Icefire1424]

Rainbow Six Vegas 2.

Really competitive, think the gameplay is balanced enough that there's not really a distinct advantage in terms of perks or weapons. More tactical than most other shooters this gen.

I would agree with U3 on the "twitch" side of gameplay.

[JaseC]

Many players seem to think otherwise judging from the beta, myself included

Fixed.

Personally, as one who prefers 1.6 to Source, I much prefer it to the latter and can see it eventually becoming comparable if not better than the former. (CS has always been this divisive, though.)

[zephervack]

RIP CPL 2004 with EYEBALLERS vs. NoA was the best tournament I've ever seen

What happened to CPL, I just checked the Wiki entry page and it doesnt say anywhere that it died.

[Danne-Danger]

Rainbow Six Vegas 2. Really competitive, think the gameplay is balanced enough that there's not really a distinct advantage in terms of perks or weapons. More tactical than most other shooters this gen.

Doesn't that use like, third person cover AND aiming?

[disappeared]

CS 1.6 or Halo. Both are great for what they do best.

[CountAntonius]

CS GO. Not cause its as good as 1.6 but it's the only one really made for competition. All the people listing older games (Quake Live/1.6) those games won't push hardware nor pull in the sponsorship money. Shootmania looks interesting but I doubt it will have traction. As for other game s TF2, Tribes Ascend and the like they are fantastic games but the f2p model and the tons of updates for TF2 just kinda break the games competitively.

[LeBrick James]

I'm not sure how a game with laggy controls can be the best competitive shooter this gen

Everyone deals with the same controls.

[vocab]

What happened to CPL, I just checked the Wiki entry page and it doesnt say anywhere that it died.

The owner basically sold out, and replaced every game at CPL except CS and partnered with Monilith and Sierra to promote FEAR, and World in Conflict. Let me remind you Quake 3 was scheduled to have a world tour and replaced with those two games. It was one of the worst CPL world tours, and it was the final nail in the coffin. Also, after that world tour the Owner pretty much didnt give the payouts, and pretty much burned a lot of bridges with the players.


So not only did CPL shit on the people who supported them, there wasn't anything worth playing but CS and Quake 4.

Also, once CPL kind of died, the owner sold it to some saudi company. It was supposed to to have like CS, Hon, and some other games but it never happened. Also, when CPL died, CAL was still going strong. Even though CAL was corrupt as hell, (that's a whole other story) it still had big CS seasons simply because anti cheat clients were the best thing to ever happen to Competitive play. Saudi company basically shut down CAL mid season to redesign it, but like CPL, it never relaunched and died. Pretty much responsible for killing CS in the US (CGS and valve are the reasons too).

Everyone deals with the same controls.

Doesn't mean it's acceptable. It's like playing some bootleg port of a fighting game where there's 8 frames of lag.

"UT3 was a disappointment." Besides the buggy netcode (random duds when hitting with rockets, flak, etc.), the game itself was very good. The problem was lackluster server control options, no demo recording, shitty server browser, and various other menu related things. That and apparently the UT community was too poor to upgrade from their Pentium 4 machines, I saw a lot of them complaining about performance.

My 6800 GT ran that game like ass! I remember hating the server browser, and there was definitely something wrong with the netcode when I played the initial MP demo.

[Jawmuncher]

Halo 2

I don't even care still stands as one of the best and most fun competitive games ever.
(So long as you aren't trying to lame it up with MLG play)

[Franklinator]

This gen, I guess Halo Reach (I never played 3 online). A really frustrating game at times, but it has bred some great moments. Although I think MLG recently dropped it, haha.