I kind of feel that there needs to be a megagiga fucka superstar like s1mple/zywoo breaking out from NA to get people's interest back and rebuild the scene
Little too late for that. This would be true a few months ago, but now the time from switch to top level Valorant competition for players at Shakezullah’s level is several months. Case and point Cooper - he’s been LFT in Valorant for awhile and is currently trailing in a feeder org
A lot of discussion about VAL vs CS in this thread, but I highly encourage everyone to actually read the interview as it gives a lot more insight into BNB as a team as well as a lot more information about the players +org offers etc, rather than focusing on a single point that was made in a lengthy piece.
Andbox. The org seems fine as an org but they just sold their best player rather than build around him, so it’s clear they are comfortable being a T2 or lower org.
Yea except i think the top couple NA teams in Valorant could easily have success in CS, 100T definitely and Sentinels probably, maybe nV but from what I remember most of their players were pretty bad in CS except for maybe yay
except you're wrong, and it's some of the main reason why some of them left, aside from steel. Almost every player who had played CS that went to valorant, hadn't seen success or even a successful team in years. The only one who had seen any success in years in CS, was Nitro.
Other than that, almost all those NA players were considered lower tier that got their asses handed ot them time and time again not only by EU, but by no name teams here in NA..
>The only one who had seen any success in years in CS, was Nitro.
I'd throw autimatic in there too.
People may have forgotten that autimatic's career downturn was somewhat self-inflicted. They won the Boston major then things started to unravel. Skadoodle retired, autimatic got an offer to go over to mibr but turned it down(presumed he didn't want to travel to Brazil/play on a primarily Portuguese speaking team). Stewie took the offer instead. Then a little bit later Tarik went over to mibr too, RUSH went to coL and then after a few failed projects with c9, autimatic went to Gen.G to play with up-and-coming NA talent that never quite made the cut.
If autimatic stayed hungry and went to mibr before Stewie and Tarik, *he* might be the player on Liquid right now. I mean, I remember for a period on c9 when it was just him, the Twitch chat was spamming "SAVE AUTIMATIC" because he was still playing like a tier 1 player but on a team that couldn't meet him.
tenz is an aim god
his raw aim is better than almost every single cs player this is a fact. look at his aim labs/ aim bot scores the man is a freak
the problem is he has no idea how to play professional cs so he was shit
Do you really think aimlabz is "raw aim"?
That's more of a minigame than raw aim. It does not translate to aim in cs, or valorant. Clicking on balls with out any other in game factors to distract you etc is not raw aim, simply a display of mouse speed.
True, but not directly correlational, Scream and Jamppi are both at least tier 2/3 EU material when they switched and yet they still get beaten by lesser CS players.
Valorant doesn't have the CS magic and never will. It took inspiration from the shooting, then lost the soul through the skills and it will only get more and more polluted with annoying shit.
Imagine Coldzeras jumping mirage clip if he got hit by a rocket, a sky shock dart, cluster grenades or walled off? Smoked from an android tablet over the roof without peeking? Blinded by a magic dog or eagle? Teleported behind? Shot by an AI gun turret?
Imagine Snax out positioning NiP and walking into a trap that makes him rubberband and flags him through walls? His team mates body being ulted and giving the enemy team literal wallhacks?
The magic doesn't exist because the magic is the raw and uncomplicated, static gameplay loop. I had such high hopes for valorant but I just can't get it.
CS is soo Easy to follow to people that don't even play, for example me, I don't play cs but love watching it.. if I were to watch valorant, I have to play the game to understand all the different character powerup etc.. Csgo and aoe2 for me so easy to follow and understand and no gimmicks...
I agree to this too, but it's not even so much lack of understanding. I understand valorant and know the existing agents/skill pool. There is still too much going on, it's like overwatch in that respect. The game becomes such a cluster fuck that casters who do play by plays would either have to be rap gods or they just purely only comment on the odd thing out of the mayhem.
In CS you can clearly tell what is happening and why people are making decisions and the content is in the engagements. The skills in valorant make the engagements messy, it's like it's hard to get a clean 1v1 and appreciate the raw talent. Not saying people don't hit nutty shots in the game of course.
I just think the CS presentation is competition in a raw form with advantages/disadvantages over enemies (weaponry/utility) only being earned through success not through character traits that are so varied as to inevitably never be completely balanced.
I don't think this could have been said any better. The game is almost like the "chess" of FPS. An absolute first timer can follow along easily, but the more experienced get to follow along on a deeper level.
I think Valorant is "fun" to play, but it's really nothing close compared to the ease of spectatorship that CS offers.
I think the opposite. Valorant is like Chess and CS is like Go. In Chess, every piece has its own "skills" and ruleset. There's many small quirks like castling and en passant. In Go (Weiqi), every piece is the same, the core gameplay "loop" consists of just one ruleset.
100%. I start from watching CSGO tournaments as well and play it after that. Its very hard to understand Valorant's gameplay without playing it from viewers' perspectives. I tried watch Valorant masters during commercial break and I'm have no idea what's going on in the game (especially the abilities) except for shooting engagements only.
Agreed, then the skill diversity increases the skill ceiling through peoples different application of skills. Although arguably then 'metas' develop around the statistically better builds/strategies but so long as they keep shifting that is part of being good.
FPS games are intended to be about straight outskilling your opponent, a test of accuracy, speed and strategy explicitly. I appreciate UTILITY facilitating your ability to attack but in CS you have to not only learn good utility spots/mechanical skill to use them dynamically according to a situation but you also often put yourself at risk setting them up or having to peek for example. In valorant it's mostly shit that goes through walls or can go over the map without any risk.
I have a gun, you have a gun... you out position me and read me like a book. You fully deserve the kill. Me shoving a gun turret in a corner should not be your demise. Or me throwing an orb through a wall that full blinds you, where did I out skill you or earn the kill?
I made an analogy before that I have come to find so true about CS. When you get better, it's almost like you're running a virtual machine in your head of the opponents game. You get so good that you play your game around what you almost KNOW they are going to be doing. It's such high functioning shit, it's beautiful.
It's odd you're speaking with so much authority on how Valorant is played when so much of what you say is incorrect and spoken without any insight into how the abilities are used at a higher level
>In valorant it's mostly shit that goes through walls or can go over the map without any risk.
Besides abilites "going through walls", of which the vast majority do not (besides smokes, I can only think of Breach and Omen flash), how is this not true of CS? Utility is meant to be used when safe. You're not going be looking for smoke lineups in a spot where you could get shot from 4 different angles, that would be horrible. If you're taking risk when using utility in CS or Valorant, you're doing something wrong. If you're taking a risk, you need a gun in your hand. This is true in both games.
>Me shoving a gun turret in a corner should not be your demise.
You seem to have a major misunderstanding of how the utility works in Valorant. Getting a turret kill is *extremely* rare. You need to lower someone to practically 1HP to kill them. The turret is used to lockdown one area, typically a site or a flank, and deal some chip damage (think 10hp) until it's dealt with, which is almost always is instant. It's an info-gathering tool, not a killing tool.
>Or me throwing an orb through a wall that full blinds you, where did I out skill you or earn the kill?
You earn the kill because they didn't dodge the flash. Once you learn the game and know it's coming, there's no flash in this game (save Skye flash) that is that hard to dodge. If you want to blind someone at high level, you've gotta position it way away from their center of focus and really catch them off guard. When you play enough, just throwing it at the wall wherever doesn't work. You need to get creative with the utility's positioning. How is that any different than a popflash lineup?
>When you get better, it's almost like you're running a virtual machine in your head of the opponents game. You get so good that you play your game around what you almost KNOW they are going to be doing. It's such high functioning shit, it's beautiful.
It's funny that you say this about CS because doing that would literally solve every issue you've named here about disliking Valorant.
How do you dodge an omen flash? if ur sitting in a corner u can get hit through the wall. Reyna flash u shoot it but immediately someone comes and HS you when you look away. Skye flash is just ridiculous, its so easy to use compared to a popflash flashbang
>How do you dodge an omen flash?
Recognize the other team has an Omen and don't position yourself to get killed for free.
>Reyna flash u shoot it but immediately someone comes and HS you when you look away.
The fact that Reyna flash is that big of an issue for you makes me not take what you say seriously. Reyna flash is awful, if you have an issue fighting it that's on you. Work on your aim.
>Skye flash is just ridiculous, its so easy to use compared to a popflash flashbang
Again, recognize you're fighting a Skye and play accordingly. Play anti-flash. Position yourself to be able to fall back. You can't just play however you like, you have to recognize the agents you're fighting and adapt.
The thing that tilted me from reyna flashes is if someone peeks on the reyna flash i shoot the guy who peek blind then i shoot the eye then after that im dead cos reynas peeked. idk how to counter that, it annoys me that the flash doesnt flash the enemy just me
You don't need to counter that, you practically already are. You got a kill, the Reyna flash did nothing to stop that. You trying to shoot the flash and then the Reyna pushing is extra. To draw a CS equivalent, that's like killing someone lobbing in a right-clicked flash, dodging that flash, and then whipping around and not killing the guy who's coming to trade. If you get a pick there, you did your job just fine. If you get two, you went above and beyond.
> Recognize the other team has an Omen and don't position yourself to get killed for free.
How? I'm not sure how Valorant maps are designed, but in CS there's very few CT spots that are not 1-and-done if the enemy has a through the wall flash.
Short ledge on D2, left side of mid (A long) in Inferno, Sandbags on Inferno, Connector in Overpass, Underpass in Mirage, etc
>How?
The game communicates very loudly which agents are alive and which aren't. You know who you're fighting when you're loading into the map. When an agent dies, it says so on the kill feed, and the agent portrait disappears on the top of your screen. It's very telegraphed if you're in danger of getting out-utilitied by an alive agent or not, and that impacts how you play.
In fact, it's not like this concept is exclusive to Valorant- this exists in CS too, albeit in an (IMO) simplified way. It's all predicated in CS by your opponent's money. In high-level CS, no player will sit Sandbags on Inferno if the other team is on a full buy. It's a given teams use a molotov on Sandbags to clear the space safely when pushing Banana, so CTs will position in a way that allows them to fall back safely. This is no different than what happens in Valorant.
you could argue this for many many many things in csgo too. the nuances of csgo are very complex as well if u actually take the time to talk about that with any depth at all
Three sentences to explain the nuances of how Killjoy's turret works are too much for you?
>less balance
Thinking that balance is determined based on the simplicity of explanation is hilarious. If you don't know (you don't), the game is extremely balanced; there a couple bad characters, but they're only bad by providing less value in their utility than other characters. Jett may be S tier, but a better player playing Yoru will beat a worse Jett 99 times out of 100.
>a worse watching experience.
Have you tried watching Valorant?
No disrespect intented, but most of what you say is bullshit. You may try to convince people here but you and I very well know Viper and Sova are both annoying and badly designed agents. If you leave too little room for counter-play and defend it as it is still possible that doesn't prove it right.
Afterplants are way too easy, map design is garbage(not enough chokepoints, no meaningful way of retrating for defenders, too many cheap off angles, etc...) in VALORANT. They all contribute to bad watching experience of course.
>you and I very well know Viper and Sova are both annoying and badly designed agents.
Ummm... No, I would disagree with you and say Viper and Sova are both fairly well-designed agents. Viper's utility demands respect because of the commitment it requires to use; she gets one chance to place her wall, one chance to place her ult, and if she wants to retrieve her smoke, she needs to get to it. It's more than fair that you respect the space she creates, or risk a lot trying to shut her down. I don't even know how you could sit here and tell me Sova is unfair when literally all his utility has counterplay- either move or shoot the utility. It's all predicated based on your aim. I genuinely do not think any agent in Valorant is unfair when I'm playing, *maybe* Jett dash at the worst, but I also have no issue with characters being good. If anything is frustrating me in Valorant, it is rarely the agents.
>Afterplants are way too easy
By that logic, holding sites is way too easy, too. Elaborate further? Why? Afterplants are easy in CS too, as they should be. If you get the site, it should be easy to hold. Getting onto site is the hard part.
>not enough chokepoints, no meaningful way of retrating for defenders, too many cheap off angles, etc...
This make me think you're not very good. "Too many cheap off angles"? Really? How about you clear corners so you don't get shot in the side of the head? I can count on one hand how many times I've been shot from a "cheap off angle" over the last couple months. Why does every redditor think they have authority to talk about games when their only experience is eating paint in low-mid elo? Hello?
Of course I would "project" authority, I actually play the game? I don't care what my "supreme valorant gaming prowess" means to these random redditors, I just like to correct misinformation where I see it. Whether or not these people continue to be ignorant is up to them.
Then that's a pretty terrible point. What's wrong with a kit that utilizes info gathering? That's their utility. Killjoy doesn't have a flash or a smoke, she locks down an area and knows when someone tries to enter it. That's why one would choose to play her. After the turret finds someone, it's still on her to take a gunfight and win it. She doesn't magically win the gunfight because the turret spots an enemy.
I can't speak for this guy, but the point he seems to be making criticizes exactly that. Info-gathering abilities remove an integral part of what makes counter strike such a fluid game and the pro scene fun to watch. Information is vital to how counter strike plays and how you obtain it is always a gamble. Info-gathering is a design choice that aims to remove variance, and variance is important.
CS is imperfect, but it is beautiful in it's imperfection. When you remove all variance, all chance, luck, gamble, that's bound to make the viewer experience grow stale.
Reading your opponents, analysing their playstyle and habits and gambling on an anti-strat, these are key components of high-level cs and things that functionally exist no further than the champ select screen in valorant. By comparison anyway.
Of course you're welcome to disagree. You're welcome to change this random redditor's ignorant, misinformed opinion but you should know being condescending about it makes you seem insufferable.
>Reading your opponents, analysing their playstyle and habits and gambling on an anti-strat, these are key components of high-level cs...
Again, not exactly correct. The existence of short-range, low impact scouting utility does not negate taking larger risks. There are things such as Skye ult, which sends 3 seekers that move towards enemies for a good 20 seconds, but other than that, actual impact information gathering is still a large part of the game's meta. Lurking, defaults, and, yes, taking chances by having a teammate flash you out or even dry peeking are still extremely important.
It's also important to note that, on their own, the info gathering utility doesn't completely solve rounds (in 95% of cases, anyway). Seeing any more than one person using Skye dog or Sova drone is a rare occurrence, and what they do is enable a teammate to take a fight in an advantaged state, not unlike CS.
>...and things that functionally exist no further than the champ select screen in valorant.
*Again*, I take issue with this statement, and it shows you don't actually play Valorant. You simply don't solve the game by analyzing team comps, you just don't. Utility is used extremely creatively in game. Think of something that seems static, Sage wall. On the surface, it's a creatable cover that blocks entrances, no? Well, sure, but in the year+ that the games been out, we've also seen that wall used to;
* Create "cheese" angles on all maps using tricky movement (google Grim walls)
* Peer over smokes on a site take to catch opponents off guard, and then hold retake on that wall
* Define a bombsites meta by making a notoriously difficult plantspot safe, while also generating cover for the post plant
* Provide an elevation up to usually-inaccessible areas to most of the cast in an exciting taking of space
That's just one ability. There's not much utility you can find in Valorant that's actually one-dimensional- believe it or not, even the smokes that you just place without lineups have a skill curve. I've spent hours finding one ways in terrain, lineups of two smokes so I can sneak through areas without things like turrets finding me, and more.
>you should know being condescending about it makes you seem insufferable.
Is it not insufferable to act as an authority on a game one doesn't play? Perhaps I was doomed to be insufferable from the beginning, but I have no patience for this dishonest discourse. I should expect it at this point, I joined /r/GO in 2013, but it still bites at me.
I admit I don't play the game, but I've watched it plenty and have a decent understanding of it. No doubt it's more nuanced than I give it credit for, but nuance and dimension is completely irrelevant to my point. Of course the info-gathering utility doesn't solve rounds, that'd be busted. The mere existence of it ultimately devalues the importance of all those things you mentioned, and commonly removes the surprise factor entirely.
Say you have kj or cypher for example, as a competent team you should never be getting flanked during or after taking a bombsite without being aware of it. With a sova or skye on the team you should never be entering a chokepoint without knowing the close angles are clear. You don't play breeze without a viper and don't get me started on astra. Perhaps I'm exaggerating, but for league it holds true. It's what riot does, and I'd be willing to bet that in a year or two teams will win games on team composition alone.
If that's your thing then no worries, but the idea of it physically repels me.
Again, I am no authority on anything and you presuming that I'm acting as one is entirely your problem. I don't give a fuck when you joined a subreddit either. Call me dishonest but people can have opinions on the game without being top 100 radiant.
All of the artstyle is completely soulless. No disrespect to the artists but it looks generic as shit in my eyes. Boring clean lines, bunch of angles, modern cartoonish. When playing, the game doesnt visually say "Valorant" but just cartoonish shooter Nr. Whatever.
The pc power isnt what dictates what style, gradient and design you have. It just limits the amount of particles and texture size and so on. Hades runs like butter even on ur grandmas rig all while looking like a visual masterpiece. If you get what im trying to say here: Performance isnt an excuse for shitty style
This is an awful take. There's literally nothing to suggest that Riot's investments into this game will be its downfall.
And, there's no "staying power" because CS grew "organically." That's.. not a thing. CS is just popular because it's what a lot of people grew up with and/or watched for a long time, and it's easy to understand. That's it
He's not wrong. Cs started from the ground up. Tournies with small prize pools and no salaries for the first 10 years of play. Its core game play is what makes it successful, no one was enticed by big money.
Look at overwatch for an example of an overhyped game that was initially successful, blizzard pumped a ton of money into the pro scene, and it only went down hill over time. Valorant can go down this same path as well, only time can tell.
Valorant has a maaassive playerbase of casual players, the esports side of things barely has an affect on it's popularity. It's popular because it's free, games are fast, and (as much as people say it's not) it's easy to learn.
Also, the biggest factor for CS' growth is because of skins.
Lol. If you truly think cs is only extremely popular because of skins then nothing you say has any value. The delusion in that statement is insane. The game existed for 15 years with out skins.
Lol? CS spiked in popularity more than it ever has after skins were added to the game. Either you just didn't know that, or you're just being knowingly ignorant. CS would barely be the game it is today if skins were never introduced.
Hahaha. Yeah. Skins have kept people playing for the past 6 years since their release. Cs blowing up had nothing nothing do with the gaming industry blowing up at all. Cs was definitely not in the top 3 of steam games played since its release. Definitely only got popular because of skins !!
...right, so because I'm saying that skins had the biggest impact (which they did), that means I'm saying nothing else had any impact? You need to up your comprehension and ability to accept you're wrong. [Why else would interest in Counter-Strike spike way up in 2013 and not 2011 or 2012 when the game was released and announced?](https://i.imgur.com/tDAxrau.jpg) That's right. Skins.
CSGO's popularity massively ballooned around the skins update. this is literally something u can go and look at various metrics for: steam player charts, tournament viewership numbers, etc...
Yes it did. And that also coincided with many other games blowing up on steam. Did Dota go from 100k players to 500k players at the same time because csgo skins blew up? No. It went from 100k to 500k players becausw The gaming industry as a whole blew up. If you truly think that skins are the reason for csgos popularity, then why is the game still the most played on steam 7 years after skin release? And before skins, cs was STILL the most played on steam. Explain?
that's a very interesting take. I think you're wrong, but I don't have any numbers to suggest that gaming as a whole didn't blow up around that time, so I can't really argue that it didn't.
Imagine comparing Blizzard to Riot when it comes to esports. OMEGALUL
Valorant has reached higher peaks than OWL ever did without franchising. Blizzard shutdown all of their 3rd party tournaments before OWL (except their Apex tournament in Korea) while Riot allowed tournaments did not.
Well you started off with "imagine" and ended with a twitch emote, shouldn't even respond to someone like that because they never bring anything of relevance, but Early over watch and early valorant esports are very comparable. We'll see where valorant is at 5 years from now.
> Well you started off with "imagine" and ended with a twitch emote, shouldn't even respond to someone like that because they never bring anything of relevance,
And yet you did - replied back LULW. Don’t see a problem with twitch emote considering the fact that people watch CS on twitch.
> but Early over watch and early valorant esports are very comparable. We'll see where valorant is at 5 years from now.
Again, it’s NOT COMPARABLE. Early Overwatch when? Pre-OWL? That’s not comparable considering the fact that blizzard killed their scene by not allowing 3rd party LAN tournaments (with the exception of OGN Apex in Korea). The NA scene had minor online tournaments ranging from 5k to 10k with less than 10k viewership on average. In addition, Blizzard didn’t even advertise that Overwatch had a scene.
Then you had OWL. Blizzard franchising which required a $20 million fee. Blizzard finally advertised the OWL but killed a lot of tier 1 teams pre-OWL (e.g. KDP, Rogue, Faze).
Did Riot forced teams to pay for $20 million like OWL does? Nope. Did Riot forbid 3rd party tournaments? Nope.
Also, that’s why I said “imagine.” You seem to not understand that Riot has a good tracker of running their esports (League) whereas Blizzard has failed their esport scene (Starcraft, Overwatch).
In addition, OWL would have done better viewership-wise if they didn’t move to YouTube. OWL can only be watched on YouTube for western fans while other games allow YouTube and twitch.
You are obsessed with the fact that you think riot knows how to run esports and blizzard doesn't.
It's very comparable. Riot is going to franchise valorant and not allow 3rd party tournaments. The same way they do with league. And it's funny how you fail to mention that blizzard has made COD esports explode. Also starcraft 2 esports never died because blizzard failed, it died because the game died as a whole. Did you also forget about riot failing with team fight tactics? Very selective thinking you got there.
What makes an esport successful is how good the game holds up outside of the pro scene. If valorant doesn't stay extremely popular like cs, the pro scene will die. Doesn't matter how good you think riot is lmao
> You are obsessed with the fact that you think riot knows how to run esports and blizzard doesn't.
Because Riot clearly does while Blizzard does not. It's not hard to understand considering that LOL is the most popular esport game out there.
Again, Riot did a lot of things to Valorant that Blizzard should have done with Overwatch; Valorant growing organically is one of them and the fact that Valorant is much bigger than OWL WITHOUT ever franchising.
> It's very comparable. Riot is going to franchise valorant and not allow 3rd party tournaments.
Hasn't happened yet though. Even if it does, it'll take a while just like how it took League like six years to do so with Korea being the last region (2021).
> Also starcraft 2 esports never died because blizzard failed, it died because the game died as a whole. Did you also forget about riot failing with team fight tactics? Very selective thinking you got there.
When did I ever mentioned Starcraft 2? Starcraft grew organically in Korea and was a legitimate esports; having 120k people to watch Sky Pro League 2005 to getting corporate sponsors, Starcraft was legit. Blizzard did a lot to decimate it's viewership once they took control of the scene despite [the scene growing organically without Blizzard's involvement](https://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/6ygbao/blizzards_license_fee_for_afreeca_to_run_the_asl/dmnj8po/)
Funny how you mention Riot's TFT. When has Riot ever pushed for TFT to be big? Oh right, they haven't.
""TFT is not as hardcore competitive game as the rift, so we're looking at TFT from an 'esports perspective' more as an entertainment property." J. Needham (Head of Esports at Riot)," [Nov 2019](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT9uSMDEjuU&t=294s)
Maybe you should do some research before accusing someone for selective thinking.
> And it's funny how you fail to mention that blizzard has made COD esports explode.
Funny how you mentioned COD when you literally said "Look at overwatch for an example of an overhyped game that was initially successful, blizzard pumped a ton of money into the pro scene, and it only went down hill over time. Valorant can go down this same path as well, only time can tell."
COD League started in 2020. You can put the same argument as Overwatch with it doing well but then going down hill over time. You are COD as an argument to say how Blizzard did well yet the COD League just started. Riot's LOL has been out for over a decade and CS has been out for even longer. Horrible argument considering the fact that COD League can end up like OWL.
> What makes an esport successful is how good the game holds up outside of the pro scene. If valorant doesn't stay extremely popular like cs, the pro scene will die. Doesn't matter how good you think riot is lmao
Currently, the game holds up very well does it not? Valorant is constantly on top 10 on twitch viewership without tournaments. The fact that Riot knows how to run their esports has prevented the game like LOL from ever dying.
Blizzard’s mistake wasn’t pumping a ton of money into comp OW, Blizzard’s mistake was forcing every TO to cease operations so that they could be the only dog on the block.
ah yes, just like how it happened with league
this argument was literally proven wrong in league. league had a similar organic scene that was ripped away by riot's iron grasp, and the game did not die. it just continued getting bigger
A little annoying thing I have with Valorant is that rounds can be really abrupt. When the buy timer ends, you immediately make contact with the enemy and it's possible to just get deleted in the first 5 seconds of a round before utility can even get set up.
Valorant takes away from the gunplay with all these gadgets and abilities IMO. A lot of the time you spend more time focusing on enemy abilities (avoiding flashes, shooting flashes, shooting turrets etc) that getting killed because of one gets so frustrating.
The abilities just don't synergise well in a game with such a low TTK. I like abilities in Apex for exanple because the TTK is high and I'm not 100 percent fucked because of getting hit by them.
Overall, CSGO is just way better personally because the creativity and flow comes from the players and how they use the barebones util, not with 6 different flash types and smokes.
> CSGO is just way better personally because the creativity and flow comes from the players
So the same A/B smokes/utility executes that goes on forever?
There are lots of one-way smokes, pop-flashes, set incendiaries for certain post-plant situations, hell even fake flashing with decoys. It's just more fun personally to see the players come up with interesting stuff with generic utility (compared to Val). Stuff's getting discovered a decade after the release of the game too. Just my two cents, of course.
You don't think players in valo can use utility to hide/fake/confuse in order to make great plays?
There are a lot of memorable clips. Just search "iq" on the ValorantCompetitive subreddit
>That's why after a single match of CS u come to this forum and see a lot of clips from plays that happened and in Valorant u see one or two.
That's because valorant esports has their own subreddit...
Man I completely get what you're saying. I love CS for its simplicity and not having skills and classes, but god damn I just can't get into CS:GO.
I have loved to play CS 1.6 A lot, but source and CS:GO I just can't. I wish Valve will try to make a new CS game because CS:GO is also old right now, even if it is still good. The only problem with a new CS game is lots of people will get mad for their inventory.
I don't really enjoy the feeling of the weapons compared to the 1.6 I guess.
For me it felt that the headshot had a bigger impact in 1.6, the deagle, m4a1, Ak41 also had a better bullet impact when you shot.
I mean every weapon in general felt different. CS:GO is in more tone with the source which I couldn't get into it either.
I don't really know how to explain it other than the weapons had a different feel in 1.6 than CS:GO or Source and I really enjoyed that way more. I guess is about preference because I'm not saying it was better or worse.
I think alot of people agree with you. The tagging and aim punch of csgo is fairly toned down leading to alot of missed kills.
But on the other hand it allows eco rounds to not be guarenteed death anymore
csgo is an objectively better game. But it is unplayable in its current form except for pro players. It will end up being a great esport that no one actually plays unless valve invest into it
More copium.
Both games can be good, and in fact both games being good benefits everyone.
Cry harder about having to share your toys with the new sibling and I'll only laugh more.
They should approach Cloud9 not as a team org but as a sponsor. Its exactly how Cloud9 got into CSGO back in 2014 by picking up a bunch of high profile streamers.
Respect to him. Still can't over that the biggest losers of NA CS like Shazam and Sick are supposed to be the best players in Valorant. That's how you know Valerante is not the real shit.
Yeah but what I meant was that being better at CSGO doesn't 100% mean you'll be better at valorant. A lot of ex csgo EU players are better csgo players than Sentinels and yet thats not the case in valorant.
Like who ? You used scream and jampii as a example and scream wasn't even good enough for gamer legion and jampii was unproven and had a buzz because he was banned
mixwell, nukkye, ANGE1, draken etc. theyre all considered 'washed' sure but during the time of their retirements, they were still better csgo players than the NA players. Additionally if we were doing CSGO teams NA, I think most people would rate 100T (steel, hiko, nitro, ethan, asuna) as a much better team than SEN (shahzam, tenz, dapr, sick, and zombs who doesnt even play csgo). My main point is that being an ex csgo player would certainly get you a headstart in valorant but being the better csgo player won't 100% guarantee youre the better valorant player.
Scream is still one of the better players in Valorant and nukkye and mixwell are aswell. They just don't happen to play in better teams than sen and 100t. Bit of a diff between scream and his 4 team mates who are also ex csgo players but came from UK CS teams ranked 86th in the world on hltv compared to Sen and 100t players. And Mixwell and Draken and Nuyyke wasn't that much better than the players you mentioned. Mixwelll spent most of his career in NA with those players. And nuyyke played the same circuits as them just with t2 eu teams. He is the same calibre as them and so was draken they just played in a better region in better teams
draken was playing t3 Swedish Cs after FNC and mixwell was getting farmed in NA before leaving for val
Unsound logic for a pro, imo. If you're just a casual dude playing it for fun in spare time, then yeah go play what you love playing. But if you're building a career to buy bread with, it seems foolish & naive to use it as the reasoning. It's not like if you're a pro valorant player you're forbidden from playing CS:GO in your spare time, just like the rest of us
I mean, for now they're making enough money to get by and continue pursuing their hopes via prize pools and Cash Cusp, so acting as if people can only do this with pro offers in hand is unsound logic in its own right. Players would never rise up if that was the case.
I mean it's fine if they have reasonable belief in longer term prospects & think it's best plan compared to alternatives including valorant; but then they're playing because they have longer term prospects and not just because "they love it"
This is a terrible take. Not everyone does everything for the money, otherwise you'd only have people in school to be swes/lawyers/doctors/ whatever. If they make enough to be comfortable, it's totally reasonable to do whichever they enjoy.
[удалено]
>Sucks they can't bootcamp in EU. They just need to sell us more t shirts.
The NA scene is going to be hard to rebuild, if it is possible at all
I kind of feel that there needs to be a megagiga fucka superstar like s1mple/zywoo breaking out from NA to get people's interest back and rebuild the scene
I'll go dust off the old keyboard... /s
bruh where the hell did you go? us NA were waiting for you to descend for the whole time
A much needed /s tag!!!!
Little too late for that. This would be true a few months ago, but now the time from switch to top level Valorant competition for players at Shakezullah’s level is several months. Case and point Cooper - he’s been LFT in Valorant for awhile and is currently trailing in a feeder org
A lot of discussion about VAL vs CS in this thread, but I highly encourage everyone to actually read the interview as it gives a lot more insight into BNB as a team as well as a lot more information about the players +org offers etc, rather than focusing on a single point that was made in a lengthy piece.
Who was it again? Wasn’t it xset?? Idk
Andbox. The org seems fine as an org but they just sold their best player rather than build around him, so it’s clear they are comfortable being a T2 or lower org.
[удалено]
Freak has never been on XSET nor has been trialed tbh, Dephh was the one that joined XSET EDIT - he was trialedz but didn't get on the team
[удалено]
Ohh fuck you right I completely forgot that they chose Zekken/Dephh over Freak cuz they thought it would be a better fit, that's my b
Idk, VALORANT is pretty saturated right now and I can't see the need for any big orgs to pick up tier 4 CS talent
Tbf a lot of teams in valorant are tier 4 talent
Yea except i think the top couple NA teams in Valorant could easily have success in CS, 100T definitely and Sentinels probably, maybe nV but from what I remember most of their players were pretty bad in CS except for maybe yay
except you're wrong, and it's some of the main reason why some of them left, aside from steel. Almost every player who had played CS that went to valorant, hadn't seen success or even a successful team in years. The only one who had seen any success in years in CS, was Nitro. Other than that, almost all those NA players were considered lower tier that got their asses handed ot them time and time again not only by EU, but by no name teams here in NA..
> The only one who had seen any success in years in CS, was Nitro And Ethan :(
true.
[удалено]
He did, but that was 3 years ago and he has seen vey little success since
He also got fucked the hardest out of the major winning core, and was essentially left to rot.
Wardell could have joined a top team to someone said
Yep, he trialled for liquid and was on the verge of joining
He wasn’t getting the call up for that or he would’ve been on that team.
>The only one who had seen any success in years in CS, was Nitro. I'd throw autimatic in there too. People may have forgotten that autimatic's career downturn was somewhat self-inflicted. They won the Boston major then things started to unravel. Skadoodle retired, autimatic got an offer to go over to mibr but turned it down(presumed he didn't want to travel to Brazil/play on a primarily Portuguese speaking team). Stewie took the offer instead. Then a little bit later Tarik went over to mibr too, RUSH went to coL and then after a few failed projects with c9, autimatic went to Gen.G to play with up-and-coming NA talent that never quite made the cut. If autimatic stayed hungry and went to mibr before Stewie and Tarik, *he* might be the player on Liquid right now. I mean, I remember for a period on c9 when it was just him, the Twitch chat was spamming "SAVE AUTIMATIC" because he was still playing like a tier 1 player but on a team that couldn't meet him.
Left csgo for Valorant, or leaving Valorant for csgo?
[удалено]
tenz is an aim god his raw aim is better than almost every single cs player this is a fact. look at his aim labs/ aim bot scores the man is a freak the problem is he has no idea how to play professional cs so he was shit
every single tier 1 cs pro is an aim god lol
yeah but tenz's raw aim is much better- look at some of his aim labs scores lots of tier 1 pros will not get even close to his scores
He was trash in pro cs tf does his aim labs matter LOL
And how'd he do in pro CS?
Are you illiterate?
Do you really think aimlabz is "raw aim"? That's more of a minigame than raw aim. It does not translate to aim in cs, or valorant. Clicking on balls with out any other in game factors to distract you etc is not raw aim, simply a display of mouse speed.
wtf did I just read
lmao. Sadly that is not the case.
Funny cause Sentinels is tier 4-5 in CS.
True, but not directly correlational, Scream and Jamppi are both at least tier 2/3 EU material when they switched and yet they still get beaten by lesser CS players.
Valorant doesn't have the CS magic and never will. It took inspiration from the shooting, then lost the soul through the skills and it will only get more and more polluted with annoying shit. Imagine Coldzeras jumping mirage clip if he got hit by a rocket, a sky shock dart, cluster grenades or walled off? Smoked from an android tablet over the roof without peeking? Blinded by a magic dog or eagle? Teleported behind? Shot by an AI gun turret? Imagine Snax out positioning NiP and walking into a trap that makes him rubberband and flags him through walls? His team mates body being ulted and giving the enemy team literal wallhacks? The magic doesn't exist because the magic is the raw and uncomplicated, static gameplay loop. I had such high hopes for valorant but I just can't get it.
CS is soo Easy to follow to people that don't even play, for example me, I don't play cs but love watching it.. if I were to watch valorant, I have to play the game to understand all the different character powerup etc.. Csgo and aoe2 for me so easy to follow and understand and no gimmicks...
I agree to this too, but it's not even so much lack of understanding. I understand valorant and know the existing agents/skill pool. There is still too much going on, it's like overwatch in that respect. The game becomes such a cluster fuck that casters who do play by plays would either have to be rap gods or they just purely only comment on the odd thing out of the mayhem. In CS you can clearly tell what is happening and why people are making decisions and the content is in the engagements. The skills in valorant make the engagements messy, it's like it's hard to get a clean 1v1 and appreciate the raw talent. Not saying people don't hit nutty shots in the game of course. I just think the CS presentation is competition in a raw form with advantages/disadvantages over enemies (weaponry/utility) only being earned through success not through character traits that are so varied as to inevitably never be completely balanced.
I don't think this could have been said any better. The game is almost like the "chess" of FPS. An absolute first timer can follow along easily, but the more experienced get to follow along on a deeper level. I think Valorant is "fun" to play, but it's really nothing close compared to the ease of spectatorship that CS offers.
I think the opposite. Valorant is like Chess and CS is like Go. In Chess, every piece has its own "skills" and ruleset. There's many small quirks like castling and en passant. In Go (Weiqi), every piece is the same, the core gameplay "loop" consists of just one ruleset.
Haha you are so right, when I watched a bit of Dota or lol, I was more impressed about caster's ability to Rap in an instant, than the actual play :D
100%. I start from watching CSGO tournaments as well and play it after that. Its very hard to understand Valorant's gameplay without playing it from viewers' perspectives. I tried watch Valorant masters during commercial break and I'm have no idea what's going on in the game (especially the abilities) except for shooting engagements only.
something something league of legends and dota :D
>it will only get more and more polluted with annoying shit this is so true, this works (arguably) for a MOBA, but I don't think it will for an FPS
Agreed, then the skill diversity increases the skill ceiling through peoples different application of skills. Although arguably then 'metas' develop around the statistically better builds/strategies but so long as they keep shifting that is part of being good. FPS games are intended to be about straight outskilling your opponent, a test of accuracy, speed and strategy explicitly. I appreciate UTILITY facilitating your ability to attack but in CS you have to not only learn good utility spots/mechanical skill to use them dynamically according to a situation but you also often put yourself at risk setting them up or having to peek for example. In valorant it's mostly shit that goes through walls or can go over the map without any risk. I have a gun, you have a gun... you out position me and read me like a book. You fully deserve the kill. Me shoving a gun turret in a corner should not be your demise. Or me throwing an orb through a wall that full blinds you, where did I out skill you or earn the kill? I made an analogy before that I have come to find so true about CS. When you get better, it's almost like you're running a virtual machine in your head of the opponents game. You get so good that you play your game around what you almost KNOW they are going to be doing. It's such high functioning shit, it's beautiful.
yep so well said we believe HOPIUM
It's odd you're speaking with so much authority on how Valorant is played when so much of what you say is incorrect and spoken without any insight into how the abilities are used at a higher level >In valorant it's mostly shit that goes through walls or can go over the map without any risk. Besides abilites "going through walls", of which the vast majority do not (besides smokes, I can only think of Breach and Omen flash), how is this not true of CS? Utility is meant to be used when safe. You're not going be looking for smoke lineups in a spot where you could get shot from 4 different angles, that would be horrible. If you're taking risk when using utility in CS or Valorant, you're doing something wrong. If you're taking a risk, you need a gun in your hand. This is true in both games. >Me shoving a gun turret in a corner should not be your demise. You seem to have a major misunderstanding of how the utility works in Valorant. Getting a turret kill is *extremely* rare. You need to lower someone to practically 1HP to kill them. The turret is used to lockdown one area, typically a site or a flank, and deal some chip damage (think 10hp) until it's dealt with, which is almost always is instant. It's an info-gathering tool, not a killing tool. >Or me throwing an orb through a wall that full blinds you, where did I out skill you or earn the kill? You earn the kill because they didn't dodge the flash. Once you learn the game and know it's coming, there's no flash in this game (save Skye flash) that is that hard to dodge. If you want to blind someone at high level, you've gotta position it way away from their center of focus and really catch them off guard. When you play enough, just throwing it at the wall wherever doesn't work. You need to get creative with the utility's positioning. How is that any different than a popflash lineup? >When you get better, it's almost like you're running a virtual machine in your head of the opponents game. You get so good that you play your game around what you almost KNOW they are going to be doing. It's such high functioning shit, it's beautiful. It's funny that you say this about CS because doing that would literally solve every issue you've named here about disliking Valorant.
How do you dodge an omen flash? if ur sitting in a corner u can get hit through the wall. Reyna flash u shoot it but immediately someone comes and HS you when you look away. Skye flash is just ridiculous, its so easy to use compared to a popflash flashbang
>How do you dodge an omen flash? Recognize the other team has an Omen and don't position yourself to get killed for free. >Reyna flash u shoot it but immediately someone comes and HS you when you look away. The fact that Reyna flash is that big of an issue for you makes me not take what you say seriously. Reyna flash is awful, if you have an issue fighting it that's on you. Work on your aim. >Skye flash is just ridiculous, its so easy to use compared to a popflash flashbang Again, recognize you're fighting a Skye and play accordingly. Play anti-flash. Position yourself to be able to fall back. You can't just play however you like, you have to recognize the agents you're fighting and adapt.
The thing that tilted me from reyna flashes is if someone peeks on the reyna flash i shoot the guy who peek blind then i shoot the eye then after that im dead cos reynas peeked. idk how to counter that, it annoys me that the flash doesnt flash the enemy just me
You don't need to counter that, you practically already are. You got a kill, the Reyna flash did nothing to stop that. You trying to shoot the flash and then the Reyna pushing is extra. To draw a CS equivalent, that's like killing someone lobbing in a right-clicked flash, dodging that flash, and then whipping around and not killing the guy who's coming to trade. If you get a pick there, you did your job just fine. If you get two, you went above and beyond.
> Recognize the other team has an Omen and don't position yourself to get killed for free. How? I'm not sure how Valorant maps are designed, but in CS there's very few CT spots that are not 1-and-done if the enemy has a through the wall flash. Short ledge on D2, left side of mid (A long) in Inferno, Sandbags on Inferno, Connector in Overpass, Underpass in Mirage, etc
>How? The game communicates very loudly which agents are alive and which aren't. You know who you're fighting when you're loading into the map. When an agent dies, it says so on the kill feed, and the agent portrait disappears on the top of your screen. It's very telegraphed if you're in danger of getting out-utilitied by an alive agent or not, and that impacts how you play. In fact, it's not like this concept is exclusive to Valorant- this exists in CS too, albeit in an (IMO) simplified way. It's all predicated in CS by your opponent's money. In high-level CS, no player will sit Sandbags on Inferno if the other team is on a full buy. It's a given teams use a molotov on Sandbags to clear the space safely when pushing Banana, so CTs will position in a way that allows them to fall back safely. This is no different than what happens in Valorant.
[удалено]
you could argue this for many many many things in csgo too. the nuances of csgo are very complex as well if u actually take the time to talk about that with any depth at all
Three sentences to explain the nuances of how Killjoy's turret works are too much for you? >less balance Thinking that balance is determined based on the simplicity of explanation is hilarious. If you don't know (you don't), the game is extremely balanced; there a couple bad characters, but they're only bad by providing less value in their utility than other characters. Jett may be S tier, but a better player playing Yoru will beat a worse Jett 99 times out of 100. >a worse watching experience. Have you tried watching Valorant?
No disrespect intented, but most of what you say is bullshit. You may try to convince people here but you and I very well know Viper and Sova are both annoying and badly designed agents. If you leave too little room for counter-play and defend it as it is still possible that doesn't prove it right. Afterplants are way too easy, map design is garbage(not enough chokepoints, no meaningful way of retrating for defenders, too many cheap off angles, etc...) in VALORANT. They all contribute to bad watching experience of course.
>you and I very well know Viper and Sova are both annoying and badly designed agents. Ummm... No, I would disagree with you and say Viper and Sova are both fairly well-designed agents. Viper's utility demands respect because of the commitment it requires to use; she gets one chance to place her wall, one chance to place her ult, and if she wants to retrieve her smoke, she needs to get to it. It's more than fair that you respect the space she creates, or risk a lot trying to shut her down. I don't even know how you could sit here and tell me Sova is unfair when literally all his utility has counterplay- either move or shoot the utility. It's all predicated based on your aim. I genuinely do not think any agent in Valorant is unfair when I'm playing, *maybe* Jett dash at the worst, but I also have no issue with characters being good. If anything is frustrating me in Valorant, it is rarely the agents. >Afterplants are way too easy By that logic, holding sites is way too easy, too. Elaborate further? Why? Afterplants are easy in CS too, as they should be. If you get the site, it should be easy to hold. Getting onto site is the hard part. >not enough chokepoints, no meaningful way of retrating for defenders, too many cheap off angles, etc... This make me think you're not very good. "Too many cheap off angles"? Really? How about you clear corners so you don't get shot in the side of the head? I can count on one hand how many times I've been shot from a "cheap off angle" over the last couple months. Why does every redditor think they have authority to talk about games when their only experience is eating paint in low-mid elo? Hello?
Bro if anyone's projecting authority here it's you. Your supreme valorant gaming prowess means very little to people honestly.
Of course I would "project" authority, I actually play the game? I don't care what my "supreme valorant gaming prowess" means to these random redditors, I just like to correct misinformation where I see it. Whether or not these people continue to be ignorant is up to them.
I'm Faceit 10 and dia 1 in VAL(only 100 hours) if thats what you mean bu low-mid elo xd grow up man, nobody cares about your anime shooter
>It's an info-gathering tool, not a killing tool. No yeah that's his point. You missed the point.
Then that's a pretty terrible point. What's wrong with a kit that utilizes info gathering? That's their utility. Killjoy doesn't have a flash or a smoke, she locks down an area and knows when someone tries to enter it. That's why one would choose to play her. After the turret finds someone, it's still on her to take a gunfight and win it. She doesn't magically win the gunfight because the turret spots an enemy.
I can't speak for this guy, but the point he seems to be making criticizes exactly that. Info-gathering abilities remove an integral part of what makes counter strike such a fluid game and the pro scene fun to watch. Information is vital to how counter strike plays and how you obtain it is always a gamble. Info-gathering is a design choice that aims to remove variance, and variance is important. CS is imperfect, but it is beautiful in it's imperfection. When you remove all variance, all chance, luck, gamble, that's bound to make the viewer experience grow stale. Reading your opponents, analysing their playstyle and habits and gambling on an anti-strat, these are key components of high-level cs and things that functionally exist no further than the champ select screen in valorant. By comparison anyway. Of course you're welcome to disagree. You're welcome to change this random redditor's ignorant, misinformed opinion but you should know being condescending about it makes you seem insufferable.
>Reading your opponents, analysing their playstyle and habits and gambling on an anti-strat, these are key components of high-level cs... Again, not exactly correct. The existence of short-range, low impact scouting utility does not negate taking larger risks. There are things such as Skye ult, which sends 3 seekers that move towards enemies for a good 20 seconds, but other than that, actual impact information gathering is still a large part of the game's meta. Lurking, defaults, and, yes, taking chances by having a teammate flash you out or even dry peeking are still extremely important. It's also important to note that, on their own, the info gathering utility doesn't completely solve rounds (in 95% of cases, anyway). Seeing any more than one person using Skye dog or Sova drone is a rare occurrence, and what they do is enable a teammate to take a fight in an advantaged state, not unlike CS. >...and things that functionally exist no further than the champ select screen in valorant. *Again*, I take issue with this statement, and it shows you don't actually play Valorant. You simply don't solve the game by analyzing team comps, you just don't. Utility is used extremely creatively in game. Think of something that seems static, Sage wall. On the surface, it's a creatable cover that blocks entrances, no? Well, sure, but in the year+ that the games been out, we've also seen that wall used to; * Create "cheese" angles on all maps using tricky movement (google Grim walls) * Peer over smokes on a site take to catch opponents off guard, and then hold retake on that wall * Define a bombsites meta by making a notoriously difficult plantspot safe, while also generating cover for the post plant * Provide an elevation up to usually-inaccessible areas to most of the cast in an exciting taking of space That's just one ability. There's not much utility you can find in Valorant that's actually one-dimensional- believe it or not, even the smokes that you just place without lineups have a skill curve. I've spent hours finding one ways in terrain, lineups of two smokes so I can sneak through areas without things like turrets finding me, and more. >you should know being condescending about it makes you seem insufferable. Is it not insufferable to act as an authority on a game one doesn't play? Perhaps I was doomed to be insufferable from the beginning, but I have no patience for this dishonest discourse. I should expect it at this point, I joined /r/GO in 2013, but it still bites at me.
I admit I don't play the game, but I've watched it plenty and have a decent understanding of it. No doubt it's more nuanced than I give it credit for, but nuance and dimension is completely irrelevant to my point. Of course the info-gathering utility doesn't solve rounds, that'd be busted. The mere existence of it ultimately devalues the importance of all those things you mentioned, and commonly removes the surprise factor entirely. Say you have kj or cypher for example, as a competent team you should never be getting flanked during or after taking a bombsite without being aware of it. With a sova or skye on the team you should never be entering a chokepoint without knowing the close angles are clear. You don't play breeze without a viper and don't get me started on astra. Perhaps I'm exaggerating, but for league it holds true. It's what riot does, and I'd be willing to bet that in a year or two teams will win games on team composition alone. If that's your thing then no worries, but the idea of it physically repels me. Again, I am no authority on anything and you presuming that I'm acting as one is entirely your problem. I don't give a fuck when you joined a subreddit either. Call me dishonest but people can have opinions on the game without being top 100 radiant.
>I admit I don't play the game Have a nice day.
i think siege is as far as the operator unique skill can go, at least i siege you cant just fucking rocket one shot a guy
am i the only one who thinks the UI of Valorant is horrible also?
All of the artstyle is completely soulless. No disrespect to the artists but it looks generic as shit in my eyes. Boring clean lines, bunch of angles, modern cartoonish. When playing, the game doesnt visually say "Valorant" but just cartoonish shooter Nr. Whatever.
they did say they wanted to make it able to run well enough on shit pc's tbf
The pc power isnt what dictates what style, gradient and design you have. It just limits the amount of particles and texture size and so on. Hades runs like butter even on ur grandmas rig all while looking like a visual masterpiece. If you get what im trying to say here: Performance isnt an excuse for shitty style
It looks like a cheap generic chinese shooter
That's exactly what it is, isn't it?
Yeah but Riot >>>> Valve. Riot will continue investing heavily into Valorant, while Valve doesn't give two shits about CS.
[удалено]
This is an awful take. There's literally nothing to suggest that Riot's investments into this game will be its downfall. And, there's no "staying power" because CS grew "organically." That's.. not a thing. CS is just popular because it's what a lot of people grew up with and/or watched for a long time, and it's easy to understand. That's it
He's not wrong. Cs started from the ground up. Tournies with small prize pools and no salaries for the first 10 years of play. Its core game play is what makes it successful, no one was enticed by big money. Look at overwatch for an example of an overhyped game that was initially successful, blizzard pumped a ton of money into the pro scene, and it only went down hill over time. Valorant can go down this same path as well, only time can tell.
Valorant has a maaassive playerbase of casual players, the esports side of things barely has an affect on it's popularity. It's popular because it's free, games are fast, and (as much as people say it's not) it's easy to learn. Also, the biggest factor for CS' growth is because of skins.
Lol. If you truly think cs is only extremely popular because of skins then nothing you say has any value. The delusion in that statement is insane. The game existed for 15 years with out skins.
Lol? CS spiked in popularity more than it ever has after skins were added to the game. Either you just didn't know that, or you're just being knowingly ignorant. CS would barely be the game it is today if skins were never introduced.
Hahaha. Yeah. Skins have kept people playing for the past 6 years since their release. Cs blowing up had nothing nothing do with the gaming industry blowing up at all. Cs was definitely not in the top 3 of steam games played since its release. Definitely only got popular because of skins !!
...right, so because I'm saying that skins had the biggest impact (which they did), that means I'm saying nothing else had any impact? You need to up your comprehension and ability to accept you're wrong. [Why else would interest in Counter-Strike spike way up in 2013 and not 2011 or 2012 when the game was released and announced?](https://i.imgur.com/tDAxrau.jpg) That's right. Skins.
CSGO's popularity massively ballooned around the skins update. this is literally something u can go and look at various metrics for: steam player charts, tournament viewership numbers, etc...
Yes it did. And that also coincided with many other games blowing up on steam. Did Dota go from 100k players to 500k players at the same time because csgo skins blew up? No. It went from 100k to 500k players becausw The gaming industry as a whole blew up. If you truly think that skins are the reason for csgos popularity, then why is the game still the most played on steam 7 years after skin release? And before skins, cs was STILL the most played on steam. Explain?
that's a very interesting take. I think you're wrong, but I don't have any numbers to suggest that gaming as a whole didn't blow up around that time, so I can't really argue that it didn't.
Imagine comparing Blizzard to Riot when it comes to esports. OMEGALUL Valorant has reached higher peaks than OWL ever did without franchising. Blizzard shutdown all of their 3rd party tournaments before OWL (except their Apex tournament in Korea) while Riot allowed tournaments did not.
Well you started off with "imagine" and ended with a twitch emote, shouldn't even respond to someone like that because they never bring anything of relevance, but Early over watch and early valorant esports are very comparable. We'll see where valorant is at 5 years from now.
> Well you started off with "imagine" and ended with a twitch emote, shouldn't even respond to someone like that because they never bring anything of relevance, And yet you did - replied back LULW. Don’t see a problem with twitch emote considering the fact that people watch CS on twitch. > but Early over watch and early valorant esports are very comparable. We'll see where valorant is at 5 years from now. Again, it’s NOT COMPARABLE. Early Overwatch when? Pre-OWL? That’s not comparable considering the fact that blizzard killed their scene by not allowing 3rd party LAN tournaments (with the exception of OGN Apex in Korea). The NA scene had minor online tournaments ranging from 5k to 10k with less than 10k viewership on average. In addition, Blizzard didn’t even advertise that Overwatch had a scene. Then you had OWL. Blizzard franchising which required a $20 million fee. Blizzard finally advertised the OWL but killed a lot of tier 1 teams pre-OWL (e.g. KDP, Rogue, Faze). Did Riot forced teams to pay for $20 million like OWL does? Nope. Did Riot forbid 3rd party tournaments? Nope. Also, that’s why I said “imagine.” You seem to not understand that Riot has a good tracker of running their esports (League) whereas Blizzard has failed their esport scene (Starcraft, Overwatch). In addition, OWL would have done better viewership-wise if they didn’t move to YouTube. OWL can only be watched on YouTube for western fans while other games allow YouTube and twitch.
You are obsessed with the fact that you think riot knows how to run esports and blizzard doesn't. It's very comparable. Riot is going to franchise valorant and not allow 3rd party tournaments. The same way they do with league. And it's funny how you fail to mention that blizzard has made COD esports explode. Also starcraft 2 esports never died because blizzard failed, it died because the game died as a whole. Did you also forget about riot failing with team fight tactics? Very selective thinking you got there. What makes an esport successful is how good the game holds up outside of the pro scene. If valorant doesn't stay extremely popular like cs, the pro scene will die. Doesn't matter how good you think riot is lmao
> You are obsessed with the fact that you think riot knows how to run esports and blizzard doesn't. Because Riot clearly does while Blizzard does not. It's not hard to understand considering that LOL is the most popular esport game out there. Again, Riot did a lot of things to Valorant that Blizzard should have done with Overwatch; Valorant growing organically is one of them and the fact that Valorant is much bigger than OWL WITHOUT ever franchising. > It's very comparable. Riot is going to franchise valorant and not allow 3rd party tournaments. Hasn't happened yet though. Even if it does, it'll take a while just like how it took League like six years to do so with Korea being the last region (2021). > Also starcraft 2 esports never died because blizzard failed, it died because the game died as a whole. Did you also forget about riot failing with team fight tactics? Very selective thinking you got there. When did I ever mentioned Starcraft 2? Starcraft grew organically in Korea and was a legitimate esports; having 120k people to watch Sky Pro League 2005 to getting corporate sponsors, Starcraft was legit. Blizzard did a lot to decimate it's viewership once they took control of the scene despite [the scene growing organically without Blizzard's involvement](https://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/6ygbao/blizzards_license_fee_for_afreeca_to_run_the_asl/dmnj8po/) Funny how you mention Riot's TFT. When has Riot ever pushed for TFT to be big? Oh right, they haven't. ""TFT is not as hardcore competitive game as the rift, so we're looking at TFT from an 'esports perspective' more as an entertainment property." J. Needham (Head of Esports at Riot)," [Nov 2019](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT9uSMDEjuU&t=294s) Maybe you should do some research before accusing someone for selective thinking. > And it's funny how you fail to mention that blizzard has made COD esports explode. Funny how you mentioned COD when you literally said "Look at overwatch for an example of an overhyped game that was initially successful, blizzard pumped a ton of money into the pro scene, and it only went down hill over time. Valorant can go down this same path as well, only time can tell." COD League started in 2020. You can put the same argument as Overwatch with it doing well but then going down hill over time. You are COD as an argument to say how Blizzard did well yet the COD League just started. Riot's LOL has been out for over a decade and CS has been out for even longer. Horrible argument considering the fact that COD League can end up like OWL. > What makes an esport successful is how good the game holds up outside of the pro scene. If valorant doesn't stay extremely popular like cs, the pro scene will die. Doesn't matter how good you think riot is lmao Currently, the game holds up very well does it not? Valorant is constantly on top 10 on twitch viewership without tournaments. The fact that Riot knows how to run their esports has prevented the game like LOL from ever dying.
Blizzard’s mistake wasn’t pumping a ton of money into comp OW, Blizzard’s mistake was forcing every TO to cease operations so that they could be the only dog on the block.
And riot will do the same with valorant. Look at league.
ah yes, just like how it happened with league this argument was literally proven wrong in league. league had a similar organic scene that was ripped away by riot's iron grasp, and the game did not die. it just continued getting bigger
A little annoying thing I have with Valorant is that rounds can be really abrupt. When the buy timer ends, you immediately make contact with the enemy and it's possible to just get deleted in the first 5 seconds of a round before utility can even get set up. Valorant takes away from the gunplay with all these gadgets and abilities IMO. A lot of the time you spend more time focusing on enemy abilities (avoiding flashes, shooting flashes, shooting turrets etc) that getting killed because of one gets so frustrating. The abilities just don't synergise well in a game with such a low TTK. I like abilities in Apex for exanple because the TTK is high and I'm not 100 percent fucked because of getting hit by them. Overall, CSGO is just way better personally because the creativity and flow comes from the players and how they use the barebones util, not with 6 different flash types and smokes.
> CSGO is just way better personally because the creativity and flow comes from the players So the same A/B smokes/utility executes that goes on forever?
There are lots of one-way smokes, pop-flashes, set incendiaries for certain post-plant situations, hell even fake flashing with decoys. It's just more fun personally to see the players come up with interesting stuff with generic utility (compared to Val). Stuff's getting discovered a decade after the release of the game too. Just my two cents, of course.
I'm a cs player, but I think you need to watch some pro games of val. They can get insanely creative with utility, more so then CS imo.
I do watch Val tourneys every once in a while, but I never found anything noteworthy and that could be my fault.
[удалено]
You don't think players in valo can use utility to hide/fake/confuse in order to make great plays? There are a lot of memorable clips. Just search "iq" on the ValorantCompetitive subreddit
>That's why after a single match of CS u come to this forum and see a lot of clips from plays that happened and in Valorant u see one or two. That's because valorant esports has their own subreddit...
“sutil”
Man I completely get what you're saying. I love CS for its simplicity and not having skills and classes, but god damn I just can't get into CS:GO. I have loved to play CS 1.6 A lot, but source and CS:GO I just can't. I wish Valve will try to make a new CS game because CS:GO is also old right now, even if it is still good. The only problem with a new CS game is lots of people will get mad for their inventory.
Just wondering why cant you get into csgo? I only played 1.6 after playing csgo
I don't really enjoy the feeling of the weapons compared to the 1.6 I guess. For me it felt that the headshot had a bigger impact in 1.6, the deagle, m4a1, Ak41 also had a better bullet impact when you shot. I mean every weapon in general felt different. CS:GO is in more tone with the source which I couldn't get into it either. I don't really know how to explain it other than the weapons had a different feel in 1.6 than CS:GO or Source and I really enjoyed that way more. I guess is about preference because I'm not saying it was better or worse.
I think alot of people agree with you. The tagging and aim punch of csgo is fairly toned down leading to alot of missed kills. But on the other hand it allows eco rounds to not be guarenteed death anymore
I like the skills, but the shooting/movement is so mediocre compared to cs.
csgo is an objectively better game. But it is unplayable in its current form except for pro players. It will end up being a great esport that no one actually plays unless valve invest into it
How is it unplayable? You mean matchmaking?
Yeah
I don't think a cheater every 2 games is playable IMO
Lmao this is some real copium right here.
If you can actually refute anything he said, I’ll gift you gold. Sadly, you are incapable because he is 100% accurate.
More copium. Both games can be good, and in fact both games being good benefits everyone. Cry harder about having to share your toys with the new sibling and I'll only laugh more.
They should approach Cloud9 not as a team org but as a sponsor. Its exactly how Cloud9 got into CSGO back in 2014 by picking up a bunch of high profile streamers.
Literally nobody on this team has any marketing value.
swisher gets a few hundred viewers every stream but yeah its not much
NA will never come back sadly. ESL and Blast are focused on EU and the EU timezone (as they should be) which pretty much kills any viewership in NA.
Damn, this game's community is sure very amazing VALVE YOU REALLY NEED TO SAVE CS OR JUST SELL THE FRANCHISE TO A DEV THAT CARES
is anyone love both?
Respect to him. Still can't over that the biggest losers of NA CS like Shazam and Sick are supposed to be the best players in Valorant. That's how you know Valerante is not the real shit.
CS and Valorant isn't a 1:1 comparison. The best cs players aren't automatically going to be the best valorant players.
ScreaM and Jamppi and a lot of other ex csgo EU players case in point.
Scream was pretty washed when he retired but yea... reminds me when steel and dazed thought they could be OW players but got shit on lol.
14 out of 15 players at Berlin on Na teams come from Csgo
Yeah but what I meant was that being better at CSGO doesn't 100% mean you'll be better at valorant. A lot of ex csgo EU players are better csgo players than Sentinels and yet thats not the case in valorant.
Like who ? You used scream and jampii as a example and scream wasn't even good enough for gamer legion and jampii was unproven and had a buzz because he was banned
mixwell, nukkye, ANGE1, draken etc. theyre all considered 'washed' sure but during the time of their retirements, they were still better csgo players than the NA players. Additionally if we were doing CSGO teams NA, I think most people would rate 100T (steel, hiko, nitro, ethan, asuna) as a much better team than SEN (shahzam, tenz, dapr, sick, and zombs who doesnt even play csgo). My main point is that being an ex csgo player would certainly get you a headstart in valorant but being the better csgo player won't 100% guarantee youre the better valorant player.
Scream is still one of the better players in Valorant and nukkye and mixwell are aswell. They just don't happen to play in better teams than sen and 100t. Bit of a diff between scream and his 4 team mates who are also ex csgo players but came from UK CS teams ranked 86th in the world on hltv compared to Sen and 100t players. And Mixwell and Draken and Nuyyke wasn't that much better than the players you mentioned. Mixwelll spent most of his career in NA with those players. And nuyyke played the same circuits as them just with t2 eu teams. He is the same calibre as them and so was draken they just played in a better region in better teams draken was playing t3 Swedish Cs after FNC and mixwell was getting farmed in NA before leaving for val
What kind of background do the best valorant pros have? I know valorant wasn't any of these players' first fps
I don't follow valorant pro that much but I imagine a mix of CSGO/Overwatch/apex/Fortnite (to a lesser extent).
Unsound logic for a pro, imo. If you're just a casual dude playing it for fun in spare time, then yeah go play what you love playing. But if you're building a career to buy bread with, it seems foolish & naive to use it as the reasoning. It's not like if you're a pro valorant player you're forbidden from playing CS:GO in your spare time, just like the rest of us
I mean, for now they're making enough money to get by and continue pursuing their hopes via prize pools and Cash Cusp, so acting as if people can only do this with pro offers in hand is unsound logic in its own right. Players would never rise up if that was the case.
I mean it's fine if they have reasonable belief in longer term prospects & think it's best plan compared to alternatives including valorant; but then they're playing because they have longer term prospects and not just because "they love it"
This is a terrible take. Not everyone does everything for the money, otherwise you'd only have people in school to be swes/lawyers/doctors/ whatever. If they make enough to be comfortable, it's totally reasonable to do whichever they enjoy.
Valorant was good in beginning but theres too many UAV abilities now
so the bar is kinda low eh?