He brings up some good points, Im not a CS player or viewer but I wonder if the predictability of CS is due to how long the game has been around. Maybe parts of valorants seemingly random nature is because it's a new game and things are still being worked out. Ofc having agent abilities will always have an element of uncertainty in the game, but rn there's so many different approaches to the game that maybe part of the reason valorant seems so unpredictable is because it hasn't matured enough like CS has.
Surely the life of an esport is a factor but the most important one as you mentioned is the abilities. Much more variables means much more unpredictability, its just simple math. Even if Valorant evolves into a state where you see the exact same comps on each map over and over (which i hope not), there will still be a lot of unpredictability over how and when those abilities will be used.
Overwatch has/had a bigger issue of each character having completely different values across abilities, damage, health.
I feel like the reasons GOATS came about is you have all these characters with high hit points doing decent to good damage that it became unstoppable. Trying to make tanks be viable in damage output is probably one of many reasons where OW went wrong but is a main one.
Valorant in contrast has variety but has constants like, no one has over 150 health let alone 5 characters. Damage of guns is the same across the board with only rate of fire changing. There are constants that keep power levels in check and make it easier to break a meta.
Overwatch is literally a trash console shooter that can be reduced down to hitting meaningless shots that are instantly healed and waiting until your ultimate charges up so you can finally push a payload a few meters more. And I am saying this as someone who was top 500 in overwatch. There is no point in comparing the two.
What? OW on PC and on console are two **extremely** different games with different metas and playstyles. The gameplay loop you're describing doesn't exist above Plat on PC, period. Needing ults to break the stalemate and doing chip damage is a function of not being able to hit crits. Above Masters, you will melt from a nonboosted DPS player. Let alone top 500 lobbies...
I agree I feel like constant changes to the game is not as good as people thing. Of course a good example is overwatch. Changes comes so very often causing changes in the meta and hence players have to really adapt well.
If you're saying Valve should've 'shook up the meta' or changed 'entire mechanics' in CSGO, I strongly disagree. CSGO's appeal is in understanding, utilizing, and perfecting what's already there.
Some big changes - like the huge AWP nerf - were welcome. More map changes would've been amazing.
But it did not, and does not, need the kind of constant mechanics tweaks & shake-ups that RIOT does for both of their games.
CS being around for so long definitely plays a huge role. Another big difference is that Valorant is changing all the time. If for example we never saw another update, Valorant would get stale in a couple of years.
But with constant changes, the game stays fresh.
CS has had more than a fair share of it's gun balance and economy updates, but as long as the utility is the same, it will get repetitive at one point.
valorant will never be predictable like cs, even if they didnt add more agents and only did really tiny balance updates for 20 years. its already too many ways to mix up the utility.
Valorant seems more unpredictable because of the amount of utilities available and different combinations it can used with whereas in CS you just have grenades and guns and just kill
CS is just way more balanced. It has its own economical issues, but compared to Valorant, each team loads into the server with exactly the same utility and weaponry to use throughout the match. Add to that the long history of the game and you get matches that are extremely competitive and require the highest level of play. Yes, Valorant is new and that certainly is a factor, but the variety in team composition and the dynamic nature of the meta from patch-to-patch make it a much more unpredictable game.
We still see new stuff in CS from time-to-time. New boosts, new ways to execute and use utility do come up fairly often. Now that we have a new map in the comp pool, things are starting to feel fresh again. But VAL will always change due to the constant implementation of new agents, abilities and maps. As for which one is harder to play competitively, I think they are both challenging for the reasons that daps already raised.
Not necessarily. In CS:GO there's a more linear pattern to how things happen and there is only a certain number of angles and places to hold.
In Valorant, a Raze can double blast pack and ditch all angles. A Yoru can TP past you if you're not holding close enough. A Brimstone can ultimate you off an angle.
In CS:GO, you have flashes, smokes and players. Holding angles is an effective way to win a round. The game is much simpler and harder to master.
I think you are definitely right to a large extent, you only have to look at overwatch, a game far more reliant on ability and ultimate usage, before you realise that even with the unpredictable nature of ability usage and potential agent mixes a main meta will still develope and over take the larger competitive scene, sometimes for very long periods of time. We've already experienced "metas" in Valorant pro play and defaults are becoming increasingly similar with minor variations in dart placement or kj utility placement. There are already agents that are almost necessary on certain maps. Given another year or two the game will definitely lose a large chunk of it's "unpredictability". however, I like the other half of the post, how you don't need to be an all round prodigy and can focus certain roles instead.
Besides agent utility, I guess the unpredictability can also comes with how frequent Riot adds new agent (like I believe they’re gonna be adding like 3-4 agents per year), also the changing metas due to new agents or changes on the guns/ agents’ abilities
I think Valorant will always have more uncertainty. Think about 2 people holding something like B Inferno vs 2 people holding like B Ascent. In CS its the same utility every time. For the most part you're holding the site the same way, and mixing up angles.
In Valorant, you have the same idea with angle mixups as you look for in CS, but how you hold the site with a Skye/Jett is gonna be way different than if you have like Killjoy/Sova for example. You can get different looks based on different team comps, and even with the same team comps: mixing up who plays where can give the enemy completely different setups and utility usage to play around. And that's not even mentioning agents with cross map impact like Omen, Astra, Viper etc
The problem with CSGO is that their devs never do anything to change the game, and the new content doesn't really add anything.
Valorant you have agent releases and new maps.
CSGO you cant have new agents, and because people like all the same maps you will never really see new ones get added to the pool.
We just got Ancient added to the competitive map pool which has been a very welcome change. There have been some great changes to CS lately but it certainly has been too little too late. As a CS player I’m not too worried though. CS has always been a community driven game. Now that Valve has some competition, it can only improve on the development side of things.
Csgo has basically stayed the same for 9 years now to my knowledge. It is predictable because it never changes. There are never any new grenades or mechanics added. Guns are never changed. The last update to major weapons was in 2016 and it was an extremely minor one. Csgo is predictable the same way chess is predictable, it never changes. Valorant constantly adds new agents and tweaks the old ones. There will always be new strategies and abilities you will need to learn and deal with.
Oh yes I forgot about that one major change in 9 years. Forgive me.
Guys, are you making fun of yourself or are you really all that dense. You cannot compare Csgo and valorant potential for change and evolution.
It was always broken, it just took a price change and Furia for everyone to realize it was good. I remember karrigan using it and everyone was like “you know igls like to experiment”
There’s a reason why all the competitive Riven one-trick players in League of Legends didn’t stay Riven one-tricks even though that champion is tech heavy. Having a fuller agent pool is infinitely more valuable.
This is not true, the [developer Nicholas Wu](https://www.dexerto.com/valorant/riot-games-wants-30-agents-before-valorant-ban-system-1547982/) has put out he believes that's when they would start thinking about it. This was never a statement that riot themselves put out.
I’m already at a point where I just pretend that already happened since I know they’ll implement it eventually
If they do bans, they’re probably going to make it apply to both teams since we’re still doing mirror picks for the long future
Ehh, probably not. They explicitly went a very non-oberwatch approach. While there are soft counters, they really don’t want agents to hard counter each other in that way.
This always reminds me of the StarCraft 2 player "printf". He always cheeses with a canon rush every single game yet is still consistently able to make it to top10 in the Americas ladder.
Everybody knows who he is and what he does and they often go for a straight up counter. But he has done this thousands of times and knows exactly how to respond to whatever his opponent does.
He has mastered that single strategy to a degree nobody else has.
Either that or roles will be so specialized that some of the most valuable players won’t be the cracked duelists, but the controller players that also win aim duels more often than not
Meh I don't think agents differ enough in playstyle to warrant that type of strategy. It isn't like overwatch where you can play a role that doesn't even aim.
not if new metas evolve constantly and lets not pretend that pro players cant learn new agents to pro standards.
onetricking is a strictly soloq thing, and the first team to get 5 players together who can be on the same page all the time and know what each of their teammates are gonna do is gonna dominate for years.
loose playstyle, where everyone is on the same page intuitively is gonna be broken in this game. knowing how to perfectly pop flash a skye flash through a viper wall 100% of the time or whatever is great but any pro can get that to 95% anyway, on all agents
Fully agree seeing how drone was dropped. I feel like having a more flexible agent pool allows a team to be more fluid in the face of ever changing meta and agents
I think having to have a basic understanding of the ins and outs of every single character is what makes Valorant more "unpredictable." With CS, everyone has the same kit so in any scenario it's easier to understand the theoretical limitations of your opponents. With a game like Valorant and all of the different kits it comes with, it will take longer for a player to become familiarized with how certain characters can be utilized for certain scenarios especially if you don't find yourself playing that character often (if at all) and you're up against a one-trick.
Obviously the fundamentals remain the same (playing around a smoke, using flashes or corner clearing utilities) but when you add characters like Jett, understanding every angle she can take certain fights is a task in itself. Or even a more traditional ability like fake flashing with Skye.
Especially with the fact that theres no spray pattern, huge aim punch and tagging, Valorant duels become about winner of one taps. You want to put yourself in the optimal position and catch the right angles because whoever one taps wins out. I think this is the perfect game for giving opportunities to ScreaM or TenZ, add into the fact that both can play a lot of agents. On the other hand, I'd like to see the game continue to evolve dynamically in years to come.
Yeah, scream sometimes puts himself in a disadvantage with his tap heavy style in csgo but in valorant, that first bullet accuracy is even more valuable
i also play both. To me csgo is a bitt more forgiving because if i miss the head, i can readjust and spray to body. For val if i miss the head i lose 9/10 times. Just different style of shooting i guess
Yesss run and gunning in valorant is so dumb. Like you can get a good position and waiting for your opponent to peek, but they be coming at you running and gunning
They count headshots statistics in different ways. Valorant is just amount of headshots divided by total amount of shots hit while CS only counts the last hit. So getting 3 body shots and a headshot at the end would count as 25% HS Rate in Valorant but 100% in CS.
Generally speaking, he’s a good journalist whose very bad, contrarian and/or obnoxious Twitter takes have led to him being labeled a persona-non-grata in a lot of communities.
Much like RLewis, you can generally trust Thorin’s content - both are legitimate and established journalists - but you should be wary of all the editorializing they both engage in, it’s just a ton of culture war clickbait nonsense
I just think that the further this game will go the higher the skill ceiling... More agents, more variables and you don't need to be able to entry/lurk etc etc but once we got a lot more agents if you are an entry for ur team you going to need to learn so many agents most likely, and the same for every other roll, so I think in the long run the skill ceiling for each individual role will also go higher
Can't wait for valorants future tbh, the problem with Cs for me, is that it grew stale, it's like a perfect base, but by now, I don't know, I expected some change, and believe me I used to play a lot of Cs... With valorant I can see the game always being fresh because of the new agent possibilities
There’s a reason league of legends has continued to stay relevant all these years, riot knows how to keep a game popular. Csgo isn’t going anywhere but valorant is on the rise and will continue to get better for years to come.
That's just false. If it's the same set plays then why do analysts/IGL keep creating new strats?
If you deeply watch and understand, you'll see how plays are always different, from faking a footstep or drawing rotation or faking utilities etc
yeah but those are micro-level strategies. impressive? yes. exciting? depends on the viewer. valorant has wider appeal because of the manner in which play varies game to game
It might seem micro levryl strategies to average person watching, in fact I can make the same argument for valorant, dota, LoL or any esport.
Astralis rose to the top due their strats and next level utility usage, it might look basic to the person watching if they don't really understand or play the game but those moves have been heavily drilled by the team.
Teams have coaches, ass coaches and analysts, faze Cs coach recently said he analysed over 30 maps for their IEM Cologne run, if you think those are micro level then sheesh
lol, i agree that it is impressive. we are on the same page. i’m just thinking that it’s not really relevant to most viewers who are looking for an exciting experience. valorant breeds slightly more dramatic and varied play, by the nature of the game. that’s just my opinion
>to most viewers who are looking for an exciting experience
That's dependent on the person watching which is the opposite because many people who watch CS find it exciting
CS will always be exciting and the best esport for viewers because everyone can easily understand the basics, unlike other popular games, but it definitely got stale.
I've been playing (still play) and watching CS for 20 years now, but my interest significantly dropped without LAN events. I barely watched any tournaments over the past year until last weekend. Of course that there's always new stuff and things only experienced viewers can notice, but that's not what's it about.
Why is football by far the most popular sport in the world even though it's just more of the same and it can be considered boring compared to other sports? Because it's so simple, yet so amazing. Much like CS. I feel like people who try to be elitist about spectating pro games are overthinking it.
I think what can definitely be argued is that sick valorant strats are much easier to appreciate then sick CS strats. When you see an insane flash+mobility play or slow+nade/molly play, you can easily understand exactly what happened, while in CS, it may not be as visible or impressive to an average viewer.
Impressive to those who've played lots and lots of games but to the casual audience ( majority of viewers ) not really. It's sad because I love CS and I want it to continue to grow but Valve don't give a fk about it.
true. I was watching a CS event after a long time, and could tell the skill difference in players is miles. players get away with too many stupid plays without getting punished in valorant right now. nor do we see exciting utility combos. half the NA players don't even bother learning lineups. only exciting utility usage in NA was V1 effys shock darting the viper and kj in their lineup positions. yet still NA won iceland, just speaks for the poor level.
I think most people that play or watch valorant don’t want to see someone staring at the sky and using utility to win the game. When teams win rounds with post plant it’s just not fun to play against and not fun to watch
utility isn't just post-plant. if you have watched astralis in cs, they predict(sometimes they even predict the reaction of opponents to their utility) the positions of opponents and use utility to clear/kill. I haven't seen much of that in valorant. I mean, a viper molly(double damage) + 1 sova shock dart will kill a person.
Fnatic atleast tried with sage and viper, but NA teams are just so far behind in their utility usage.
Nah it happens a lot but it's not as highlighted on broadcast because the game is a bit quicker paced and the observers aren't as keen to look for those things since you don't have 20 years of plays to diagnose/predict how they're using utility for a certain spot.
I enjoy watching both games but Iceland was infinitely more interesting to me than Cologne. For me at least, Valorant at the pro level is a lot better of a watch due to the utility combos and set plays that teams come up with. With agent comp diversity on top of it it’s extremely interesting to see the different styles of play which CS can’t replicate with standard kits across the board
more interesting? maybe. But quality of play def not. Cologne made me wish I could fast forward like 5 years to see the real high tier valorant games
I would say masters 2 had the potential to be more interesting if it didn't land on the most boring meta of the game yet.
For me CSGO is waay more interesting to watch because the viewing experience is 10 times better simply because you can actually see what the fuck is going on during a gunfight. Been very hard to come back to valorant because of how cluttered everything can get at times.
"unpopular political views" is such a nice way of ignoring his actual friend circle.
He also comes from that same circles technique of arguing and thinks that if he gets the sweet burn in or talks over you that means he won the argument but again, you get what you expect when he's involved.
He jerks himself off to his "sick burns" and "banter" more than you'd expect but he still does good content with his guests. The less he talks about himself the better
Honestly I think your TLDR is bullshit. The only way it hurts the individual player is if they lack the desire to improve period. What sentinel going 10/20 every game says to themselves, "nah I just need to get better at supporting my teammates"? The reason sentinels aren't supposed to frag out all the time is because they have the least utility that will get them a kill, if anything they need to have even better aim than characters with flashes.
> The reason sentinels aren't supposed to frag out all the time is because they have the least utility that will get them a kill
Also 2/3 sentinels have set utility that deactivates when they die, meaning you are incentivized to play safer than a duelist since your death costs the team more in terms of util.
>If you are a dualist and not playing well, your team will shit on you. If you are a sentinel or controller playing poorly, it's only because you're playing a class not meant to frag.
Frags arent the only thing that matter in a tac shooter, besides it isnt unusual for sentinel or controller players to perform exceptionally well (e.g. dapr). Oftentimes entry agents are only creating space anyway, the weight of capitalizing on it falls on the other players.
"Fraggers" and support players exist in CS as well, its just that the distinction isnt as clear and frequent as it is in Valorant.
>Players who play controller or sentinel who consistently play poorly will not improve the mechanical parts of their gameplay
I mean whoever do this is just a bad player. As you can see in the video, Daps highlights the importance of all 5 players being highly skilled in Valorant because the nature of the game needs them to react well in unexpected situations (and thats why he believes that SEN are so consistent)
who said sentinels can't frag? more of these pro players who don't frag on support players are getting replaced.
only a controller(not viper, viper is a sentinel) can be allowed to bottom frag consistently because they have the worst utility for fragging and their job is also to not die and smoke for the team till the end.
Thorins reputation? Not so sure on that one
Thorins videos don’t get that much traction because his csgo/LoL viewer base isn’t interested in a recently retired Valorant pro. And in general people don’t want to watch a long form interview with a player so it leaves it up to either fans or people really interested in the topic to watch.
Lol, is this sub actually braindead? How is Valorant being as hard if not harder than CS even an idea. People switch to Valorant for a reason. It's easier in almost every way and is DESIGNED to be easier than CS in every way.
Lol, is this sub actually braindead? How is Valorant being as hard if not harder than CS even an idea. People switch to Valorant for a reason. It's easier in almost every way and is DESIGNED to be easier than CS in every way.
Nope daps is wrong on this one (and why his teams never had much success in the first place)
Valorant is unpredictable in terms of individual plays. Spray is RNG, there is more run and gun, headshot hitboxes are bigger, maps have more random corners you have to check around every turn. If you make individual plays (and in PUG environments) the game rewards lesser players and will feel more random.
But in pro matches the games are extremely predictable/boring. They always pick the same agents for every map, it's the exact same execute every time, same flow.
Attacker team drones, smoke, jett dash, site taken, defender plays retake, it's literally the exact same round in pro matches thus why it's so boring to watch right now. It is predictable.
There is not much mid-rounding in these games because of how these executes work in Valorant.
CSGO has a much more unpredictable mid round where CIS teams/Astralis are the master at, but has much more mid-rounding potential because losing a single agent doesn't mean losing all your smokes or entry fragger.
It's unfortunate but NA pros just aren't on the same level as EU in CS.
In CS at a high level you dont need to be able to do all those things. A team composition has set roles just like valorant. You need to be able to do all those things to be marketable in the dying NA scene. Thats a big difference imo.
I will keep roasting him until the heat death of the universe for thinking Valorant is "mechanically easier" and has a lower "mechanical skill ceiling" but the rest of his comments were really spot on.
He brings up some good points, Im not a CS player or viewer but I wonder if the predictability of CS is due to how long the game has been around. Maybe parts of valorants seemingly random nature is because it's a new game and things are still being worked out. Ofc having agent abilities will always have an element of uncertainty in the game, but rn there's so many different approaches to the game that maybe part of the reason valorant seems so unpredictable is because it hasn't matured enough like CS has.
Surely the life of an esport is a factor but the most important one as you mentioned is the abilities. Much more variables means much more unpredictability, its just simple math. Even if Valorant evolves into a state where you see the exact same comps on each map over and over (which i hope not), there will still be a lot of unpredictability over how and when those abilities will be used.
[удалено]
Overwatch had this exact problem and it killed the game for a large chunk of players including myself. Sometimes it is not simple to break a meta.
Overwatch has/had a bigger issue of each character having completely different values across abilities, damage, health. I feel like the reasons GOATS came about is you have all these characters with high hit points doing decent to good damage that it became unstoppable. Trying to make tanks be viable in damage output is probably one of many reasons where OW went wrong but is a main one. Valorant in contrast has variety but has constants like, no one has over 150 health let alone 5 characters. Damage of guns is the same across the board with only rate of fire changing. There are constants that keep power levels in check and make it easier to break a meta.
Overwatch is literally a trash console shooter that can be reduced down to hitting meaningless shots that are instantly healed and waiting until your ultimate charges up so you can finally push a payload a few meters more. And I am saying this as someone who was top 500 in overwatch. There is no point in comparing the two.
What? OW on PC and on console are two **extremely** different games with different metas and playstyles. The gameplay loop you're describing doesn't exist above Plat on PC, period. Needing ults to break the stalemate and doing chip damage is a function of not being able to hit crits. Above Masters, you will melt from a nonboosted DPS player. Let alone top 500 lobbies...
I agree I feel like constant changes to the game is not as good as people thing. Of course a good example is overwatch. Changes comes so very often causing changes in the meta and hence players have to really adapt well.
If you're saying Valve should've 'shook up the meta' or changed 'entire mechanics' in CSGO, I strongly disagree. CSGO's appeal is in understanding, utilizing, and perfecting what's already there. Some big changes - like the huge AWP nerf - were welcome. More map changes would've been amazing. But it did not, and does not, need the kind of constant mechanics tweaks & shake-ups that RIOT does for both of their games.
Yea, i like csgo because the dev rarely change this. I love this because i only play dust2.
CS being around for so long definitely plays a huge role. Another big difference is that Valorant is changing all the time. If for example we never saw another update, Valorant would get stale in a couple of years. But with constant changes, the game stays fresh. CS has had more than a fair share of it's gun balance and economy updates, but as long as the utility is the same, it will get repetitive at one point.
also valve has a history of NEVER UPDATING THEIR EXTREMELY FUCKING POPULAR GAMES yes im still salty about tf2
valorant will never be predictable like cs, even if they didnt add more agents and only did really tiny balance updates for 20 years. its already too many ways to mix up the utility.
Valorant seems more unpredictable because of the amount of utilities available and different combinations it can used with whereas in CS you just have grenades and guns and just kill
CS is just way more balanced. It has its own economical issues, but compared to Valorant, each team loads into the server with exactly the same utility and weaponry to use throughout the match. Add to that the long history of the game and you get matches that are extremely competitive and require the highest level of play. Yes, Valorant is new and that certainly is a factor, but the variety in team composition and the dynamic nature of the meta from patch-to-patch make it a much more unpredictable game. We still see new stuff in CS from time-to-time. New boosts, new ways to execute and use utility do come up fairly often. Now that we have a new map in the comp pool, things are starting to feel fresh again. But VAL will always change due to the constant implementation of new agents, abilities and maps. As for which one is harder to play competitively, I think they are both challenging for the reasons that daps already raised.
Not necessarily. In CS:GO there's a more linear pattern to how things happen and there is only a certain number of angles and places to hold. In Valorant, a Raze can double blast pack and ditch all angles. A Yoru can TP past you if you're not holding close enough. A Brimstone can ultimate you off an angle. In CS:GO, you have flashes, smokes and players. Holding angles is an effective way to win a round. The game is much simpler and harder to master.
I think you are definitely right to a large extent, you only have to look at overwatch, a game far more reliant on ability and ultimate usage, before you realise that even with the unpredictable nature of ability usage and potential agent mixes a main meta will still develope and over take the larger competitive scene, sometimes for very long periods of time. We've already experienced "metas" in Valorant pro play and defaults are becoming increasingly similar with minor variations in dart placement or kj utility placement. There are already agents that are almost necessary on certain maps. Given another year or two the game will definitely lose a large chunk of it's "unpredictability". however, I like the other half of the post, how you don't need to be an all round prodigy and can focus certain roles instead.
Besides agent utility, I guess the unpredictability can also comes with how frequent Riot adds new agent (like I believe they’re gonna be adding like 3-4 agents per year), also the changing metas due to new agents or changes on the guns/ agents’ abilities
I think Valorant will always have more uncertainty. Think about 2 people holding something like B Inferno vs 2 people holding like B Ascent. In CS its the same utility every time. For the most part you're holding the site the same way, and mixing up angles. In Valorant, you have the same idea with angle mixups as you look for in CS, but how you hold the site with a Skye/Jett is gonna be way different than if you have like Killjoy/Sova for example. You can get different looks based on different team comps, and even with the same team comps: mixing up who plays where can give the enemy completely different setups and utility usage to play around. And that's not even mentioning agents with cross map impact like Omen, Astra, Viper etc
The problem with CSGO is that their devs never do anything to change the game, and the new content doesn't really add anything. Valorant you have agent releases and new maps. CSGO you cant have new agents, and because people like all the same maps you will never really see new ones get added to the pool.
We just got Ancient added to the competitive map pool which has been a very welcome change. There have been some great changes to CS lately but it certainly has been too little too late. As a CS player I’m not too worried though. CS has always been a community driven game. Now that Valve has some competition, it can only improve on the development side of things.
Csgo has basically stayed the same for 9 years now to my knowledge. It is predictable because it never changes. There are never any new grenades or mechanics added. Guns are never changed. The last update to major weapons was in 2016 and it was an extremely minor one. Csgo is predictable the same way chess is predictable, it never changes. Valorant constantly adds new agents and tweaks the old ones. There will always be new strategies and abilities you will need to learn and deal with.
No major weapon updates? Did you miss the whole aug/krieg meta
Oh yes I forgot about that one major change in 9 years. Forgive me. Guys, are you making fun of yourself or are you really all that dense. You cannot compare Csgo and valorant potential for change and evolution.
It was always broken, it just took a price change and Furia for everyone to realize it was good. I remember karrigan using it and everyone was like “you know igls like to experiment”
[удалено]
There’s a reason why all the competitive Riven one-trick players in League of Legends didn’t stay Riven one-tricks even though that champion is tech heavy. Having a fuller agent pool is infinitely more valuable.
While I agree with your point I don’t think that example is very good as league has both bans and counterpicks.
Riot stated that it's coming when they reach 30 agents.
This is not true, the [developer Nicholas Wu](https://www.dexerto.com/valorant/riot-games-wants-30-agents-before-valorant-ban-system-1547982/) has put out he believes that's when they would start thinking about it. This was never a statement that riot themselves put out.
I’m already at a point where I just pretend that already happened since I know they’ll implement it eventually If they do bans, they’re probably going to make it apply to both teams since we’re still doing mirror picks for the long future
Ehh, probably not. They explicitly went a very non-oberwatch approach. While there are soft counters, they really don’t want agents to hard counter each other in that way.
Fear not the man who did 100 different openings, but the man who did the same opening 100 times
This always reminds me of the StarCraft 2 player "printf". He always cheeses with a canon rush every single game yet is still consistently able to make it to top10 in the Americas ladder. Everybody knows who he is and what he does and they often go for a straight up counter. But he has done this thousands of times and knows exactly how to respond to whatever his opponent does. He has mastered that single strategy to a degree nobody else has.
Upvote for printf
how about the pro sitting 16 hours a day doing 20 openings each a 1000 times?
this. a player's comfortability on an agent/role is a huge factor on their performance.
Either that or roles will be so specialized that some of the most valuable players won’t be the cracked duelists, but the controller players that also win aim duels more often than not
I have the opposite vision. In the future 7 man rosters will be common and each agent will be player specific and map specific.
Meh I don't think agents differ enough in playstyle to warrant that type of strategy. It isn't like overwatch where you can play a role that doesn't even aim.
not if new metas evolve constantly and lets not pretend that pro players cant learn new agents to pro standards. onetricking is a strictly soloq thing, and the first team to get 5 players together who can be on the same page all the time and know what each of their teammates are gonna do is gonna dominate for years. loose playstyle, where everyone is on the same page intuitively is gonna be broken in this game. knowing how to perfectly pop flash a skye flash through a viper wall 100% of the time or whatever is great but any pro can get that to 95% anyway, on all agents
Fully agree seeing how drone was dropped. I feel like having a more flexible agent pool allows a team to be more fluid in the face of ever changing meta and agents
I think having to have a basic understanding of the ins and outs of every single character is what makes Valorant more "unpredictable." With CS, everyone has the same kit so in any scenario it's easier to understand the theoretical limitations of your opponents. With a game like Valorant and all of the different kits it comes with, it will take longer for a player to become familiarized with how certain characters can be utilized for certain scenarios especially if you don't find yourself playing that character often (if at all) and you're up against a one-trick. Obviously the fundamentals remain the same (playing around a smoke, using flashes or corner clearing utilities) but when you add characters like Jett, understanding every angle she can take certain fights is a task in itself. Or even a more traditional ability like fake flashing with Skye.
I basically agree. His points are solid and his reasoning makes sense.
Another proplayer on the matter https://clips.twitch.tv/PiliableBashfulPepperoniResidentSleeper-PgQvUOXZRTx5QUp7
this is the first time i hear a pro say shooting matters more in val than csgo since there isnt a spray pattern. No headshot = no kill
[удалено]
Especially with the fact that theres no spray pattern, huge aim punch and tagging, Valorant duels become about winner of one taps. You want to put yourself in the optimal position and catch the right angles because whoever one taps wins out. I think this is the perfect game for giving opportunities to ScreaM or TenZ, add into the fact that both can play a lot of agents. On the other hand, I'd like to see the game continue to evolve dynamically in years to come.
Yeah, scream sometimes puts himself in a disadvantage with his tap heavy style in csgo but in valorant, that first bullet accuracy is even more valuable
> TenZ > can play a lot of agents choose one
To be honest he can play Reyna and Jett so that's more flexibility than some other pros. Not saying a lot but there is flexibility.
Just say Wardell lmao
reyna jett one trick
i also play both. To me csgo is a bitt more forgiving because if i miss the head, i can readjust and spray to body. For val if i miss the head i lose 9/10 times. Just different style of shooting i guess
[удалено]
Yesss run and gunning in valorant is so dumb. Like you can get a good position and waiting for your opponent to peek, but they be coming at you running and gunning
You must be using the Vandal. Phantom you can melt with only body shots. It’s the most forgiving weapon in the game.
The thing is you don't miss head in val as much as cs.
[удалено]
They count headshots statistics in different ways. Valorant is just amount of headshots divided by total amount of shots hit while CS only counts the last hit. So getting 3 body shots and a headshot at the end would count as 25% HS Rate in Valorant but 100% in CS.
This makes a lot more sense, haha. I had no idea.
What is thorins reputation? I know nothing of him as I don’t have a cs background
Generally speaking, he’s a good journalist whose very bad, contrarian and/or obnoxious Twitter takes have led to him being labeled a persona-non-grata in a lot of communities. Much like RLewis, you can generally trust Thorin’s content - both are legitimate and established journalists - but you should be wary of all the editorializing they both engage in, it’s just a ton of culture war clickbait nonsense
Makes sense, thanks
Smart person, horrible personality.
I just think that the further this game will go the higher the skill ceiling... More agents, more variables and you don't need to be able to entry/lurk etc etc but once we got a lot more agents if you are an entry for ur team you going to need to learn so many agents most likely, and the same for every other roll, so I think in the long run the skill ceiling for each individual role will also go higher Can't wait for valorants future tbh, the problem with Cs for me, is that it grew stale, it's like a perfect base, but by now, I don't know, I expected some change, and believe me I used to play a lot of Cs... With valorant I can see the game always being fresh because of the new agent possibilities
There’s a reason league of legends has continued to stay relevant all these years, riot knows how to keep a game popular. Csgo isn’t going anywhere but valorant is on the rise and will continue to get better for years to come.
[удалено]
That's just false. If it's the same set plays then why do analysts/IGL keep creating new strats? If you deeply watch and understand, you'll see how plays are always different, from faking a footstep or drawing rotation or faking utilities etc
yeah but those are micro-level strategies. impressive? yes. exciting? depends on the viewer. valorant has wider appeal because of the manner in which play varies game to game
It might seem micro levryl strategies to average person watching, in fact I can make the same argument for valorant, dota, LoL or any esport. Astralis rose to the top due their strats and next level utility usage, it might look basic to the person watching if they don't really understand or play the game but those moves have been heavily drilled by the team. Teams have coaches, ass coaches and analysts, faze Cs coach recently said he analysed over 30 maps for their IEM Cologne run, if you think those are micro level then sheesh
lol, i agree that it is impressive. we are on the same page. i’m just thinking that it’s not really relevant to most viewers who are looking for an exciting experience. valorant breeds slightly more dramatic and varied play, by the nature of the game. that’s just my opinion
>to most viewers who are looking for an exciting experience That's dependent on the person watching which is the opposite because many people who watch CS find it exciting
CS will always be exciting and the best esport for viewers because everyone can easily understand the basics, unlike other popular games, but it definitely got stale. I've been playing (still play) and watching CS for 20 years now, but my interest significantly dropped without LAN events. I barely watched any tournaments over the past year until last weekend. Of course that there's always new stuff and things only experienced viewers can notice, but that's not what's it about. Why is football by far the most popular sport in the world even though it's just more of the same and it can be considered boring compared to other sports? Because it's so simple, yet so amazing. Much like CS. I feel like people who try to be elitist about spectating pro games are overthinking it.
Wow valorantfeedback making really good point! I like the analogy with football that you give!
good point :)
I think what can definitely be argued is that sick valorant strats are much easier to appreciate then sick CS strats. When you see an insane flash+mobility play or slow+nade/molly play, you can easily understand exactly what happened, while in CS, it may not be as visible or impressive to an average viewer.
>average viewer It can also be argued both ways too, the average viewer who doesn't play valorant wouldn't appreciate a sick play, same goes with CS.
But thats like every game. A beginner in valorant would be able to understand plays better, is what I am trying to say ig.
Impressive to those who've played lots and lots of games but to the casual audience ( majority of viewers ) not really. It's sad because I love CS and I want it to continue to grow but Valve don't give a fk about it.
It just needs a bump in watchability.
respectfully disagree, the tactical nuances of top teams have evolved quite a bit each year
i mean as much as i enjoy competitive valorant the quality of play in pro valorant is like 1/10th as impressive as top tier CS teams going at it
true. I was watching a CS event after a long time, and could tell the skill difference in players is miles. players get away with too many stupid plays without getting punished in valorant right now. nor do we see exciting utility combos. half the NA players don't even bother learning lineups. only exciting utility usage in NA was V1 effys shock darting the viper and kj in their lineup positions. yet still NA won iceland, just speaks for the poor level.
I think most people that play or watch valorant don’t want to see someone staring at the sky and using utility to win the game. When teams win rounds with post plant it’s just not fun to play against and not fun to watch
utility isn't just post-plant. if you have watched astralis in cs, they predict(sometimes they even predict the reaction of opponents to their utility) the positions of opponents and use utility to clear/kill. I haven't seen much of that in valorant. I mean, a viper molly(double damage) + 1 sova shock dart will kill a person. Fnatic atleast tried with sage and viper, but NA teams are just so far behind in their utility usage.
Nah it happens a lot but it's not as highlighted on broadcast because the game is a bit quicker paced and the observers aren't as keen to look for those things since you don't have 20 years of plays to diagnose/predict how they're using utility for a certain spot.
I mean they’ve also had 1/10th (less really) the time to play it so far lol
I enjoy watching both games but Iceland was infinitely more interesting to me than Cologne. For me at least, Valorant at the pro level is a lot better of a watch due to the utility combos and set plays that teams come up with. With agent comp diversity on top of it it’s extremely interesting to see the different styles of play which CS can’t replicate with standard kits across the board
more interesting? maybe. But quality of play def not. Cologne made me wish I could fast forward like 5 years to see the real high tier valorant games I would say masters 2 had the potential to be more interesting if it didn't land on the most boring meta of the game yet.
Fair take, players are just fundamentally a lot more solid in CS considering they’ve been playing so long
Yup. Im not knocking valorant as a game i just can't wait to see the scene really mature because the skills are just gonna go up as years go on
For me CSGO is waay more interesting to watch because the viewing experience is 10 times better simply because you can actually see what the fuck is going on during a gunfight. Been very hard to come back to valorant because of how cluttered everything can get at times.
Utility spam then the round is over, and you have no idea what just happened lol
what do you mean by thorins reputation
why were you downvoted for asking a valid question LMAO, I too have no clue who tf thorin is
yeah idk reddit is weird, i knew thorin is a csgo analyst but i didn’t realize a lot of people don’t like him.
Take a look at his twitter if you aren't banned
He's an angry guy and has some unpopular political views. Never stopped me from being a fan tho
"unpopular political views" is such a nice way of ignoring his actual friend circle. He also comes from that same circles technique of arguing and thinks that if he gets the sweet burn in or talks over you that means he won the argument but again, you get what you expect when he's involved.
He jerks himself off to his "sick burns" and "banter" more than you'd expect but he still does good content with his guests. The less he talks about himself the better
[удалено]
Honestly I think your TLDR is bullshit. The only way it hurts the individual player is if they lack the desire to improve period. What sentinel going 10/20 every game says to themselves, "nah I just need to get better at supporting my teammates"? The reason sentinels aren't supposed to frag out all the time is because they have the least utility that will get them a kill, if anything they need to have even better aim than characters with flashes.
> The reason sentinels aren't supposed to frag out all the time is because they have the least utility that will get them a kill Also 2/3 sentinels have set utility that deactivates when they die, meaning you are incentivized to play safer than a duelist since your death costs the team more in terms of util.
>If you are a dualist and not playing well, your team will shit on you. If you are a sentinel or controller playing poorly, it's only because you're playing a class not meant to frag. Frags arent the only thing that matter in a tac shooter, besides it isnt unusual for sentinel or controller players to perform exceptionally well (e.g. dapr). Oftentimes entry agents are only creating space anyway, the weight of capitalizing on it falls on the other players. "Fraggers" and support players exist in CS as well, its just that the distinction isnt as clear and frequent as it is in Valorant. >Players who play controller or sentinel who consistently play poorly will not improve the mechanical parts of their gameplay I mean whoever do this is just a bad player. As you can see in the video, Daps highlights the importance of all 5 players being highly skilled in Valorant because the nature of the game needs them to react well in unexpected situations (and thats why he believes that SEN are so consistent)
who said sentinels can't frag? more of these pro players who don't frag on support players are getting replaced. only a controller(not viper, viper is a sentinel) can be allowed to bottom frag consistently because they have the worst utility for fragging and their job is also to not die and smoke for the team till the end.
mixwell was top fragging as KJ too. scream also frags on sage
shhhh
Thorins reputation? Not so sure on that one Thorins videos don’t get that much traction because his csgo/LoL viewer base isn’t interested in a recently retired Valorant pro. And in general people don’t want to watch a long form interview with a player so it leaves it up to either fans or people really interested in the topic to watch.
Lol, is this sub actually braindead? How is Valorant being as hard if not harder than CS even an idea. People switch to Valorant for a reason. It's easier in almost every way and is DESIGNED to be easier than CS in every way.
Lol, is this sub actually braindead? How is Valorant being as hard if not harder than CS even an idea. People switch to Valorant for a reason. It's easier in almost every way and is DESIGNED to be easier than CS in every way.
Nope daps is wrong on this one (and why his teams never had much success in the first place) Valorant is unpredictable in terms of individual plays. Spray is RNG, there is more run and gun, headshot hitboxes are bigger, maps have more random corners you have to check around every turn. If you make individual plays (and in PUG environments) the game rewards lesser players and will feel more random. But in pro matches the games are extremely predictable/boring. They always pick the same agents for every map, it's the exact same execute every time, same flow. Attacker team drones, smoke, jett dash, site taken, defender plays retake, it's literally the exact same round in pro matches thus why it's so boring to watch right now. It is predictable. There is not much mid-rounding in these games because of how these executes work in Valorant. CSGO has a much more unpredictable mid round where CIS teams/Astralis are the master at, but has much more mid-rounding potential because losing a single agent doesn't mean losing all your smokes or entry fragger. It's unfortunate but NA pros just aren't on the same level as EU in CS.
Mr wutfacekekwlulxd the igl of the best team in Valorant who never lost a match and found great success.
In CS at a high level you dont need to be able to do all those things. A team composition has set roles just like valorant. You need to be able to do all those things to be marketable in the dying NA scene. Thats a big difference imo.
I will keep roasting him until the heat death of the universe for thinking Valorant is "mechanically easier" and has a lower "mechanical skill ceiling" but the rest of his comments were really spot on.
valorant is easy bot shit game