hell yeah, i wont bother to upgrade my pc to play fancy games any more. The pace is to great. lets hope consoles is the next big competition platform

same with me, one reason i believe consoles are the future.

its about time the game developers design their games for MY hardware, rather than their constantly increasing future hardware (no doubt fueled by the money graphics cards companies pump into them, notice the ati or nvidia logos in all major games).

FPS is not dying, it's a hugely successful genre and it's not slowing down.

However, Hardcore Quake type FPS gaming is and has been dying for many years. It's just painfully apparent now.
The genre has been done to death. People are getting bored. I'm getting bored. And let's be honest so are most of you.
The environments stay the same, the weapons are always the same.
The gameplay is the same.

It deserves to. The concept of of Quake has remained the same, and if you were NOT talking about q4/UT type of games then I DO NOT agree that the genre is dying. It's never been more popular, it just has a shorter shelf life now before peeps move on. Most of the peeps playing q4 on this site do so because they feel they have to.

I really doubt UT will change anything. yes it looks gorgeous, but that'll only get you so far.

So what is not dying? When using the TLA FPS i'm talking 'Fast Paced Shooter' rather than First Person...

I think the new fast games are in massive decline.

TLA = ?

three letter acronym?

Confirmed

So what? Esports need to have games that "stay the same" - just like real sports. Baseball hasn't fundamentally changed in more than 200 years. Pretty much the same goes for Football and other popular sports. Yet you don't hear people complaining about the sports being "done to death".

In fact, I would say that the constant changing of games is more of a disadvantage than benefit to esports. The best thing would be to take a game like Quake 3, that works in pretty much every aspect, and use it consistently as a competitive "standard" for the next 200+ years. Then we might actually see some progress in esports...

It's a fair point about things staying the same, BUT, as usual on this site so many people only see things out of their pro-gamer window.
In order for a something to become a sport it has to be embraced by the spectators.

There are NOT enough people playing q4/UT atm for it to be really worthwhile sponsors to be pumping serious (like CPL WT) money into it.
Not when they can get 100 times more players/coverage choosing something like CS.

So yes, things can stay the same, but only until they get enough of an audience behind it.
Quake will always be around no doubt, but I don't think it commands the respect it once did.
People like CPL and WCSVG whatever will go where the money is, simple as.
They don't have a clue or care where the most demanding skills are and neither do magazines like Time or whatever journals the CPL gang want to target,.

The truth is I don't believe the forseeable future is in 1v1 duel games.
However, I do believe when it all comes togetehr, the 1v1 will be the 100m sprint of the olympics.

"Not when they can get 100 times more players/coverage choosing something like CS."

Exactly. CS has been a consistent part of esports for the last many years and that is part of its success _as an esport_. If CPL and other big tournaments had simply stuck with Q3 instead of trashing it in its very prime, who knows how big Q3 would have been today as an esport and otherwise. The Q3 community, while small compared to CS, was still fairly major in its prime - and still growing. Pretty much all of the Q4 pro players would switch back to Q3 without hesitation if the big tournaments would simply do the same. Instead these pro players are "forced" to play a game that, in many aspects, is vastly inferior.

You see, Q3 has not been "done to death". Q3 , as an esport, was "done dead" by that very notion.

How can an esport discipline mature and grow when the discipline is constantly changed? With every major change (Q3 -> UT -> PK -> Q4) you lose a huge amount of supporters. The mainstream spectators that were perhaps slowly getting into a game now see that game trashed and replaced by a new game that is different and unfamiliar.

It took the "mainstream" MANY decades to "get into" games like baseball and football - games that had a consistent set of game mechanics. Now imagine how difficult it is to get into a discipline (-> FPS DM esports) that is in constant flux in regard to rules, maps, weapons, physics etc. etc.

What esports need is a standard that does not constantly change. For the FPS DM genre, Quake 3 would be the perfect standard IMO.

Another layer of the pie. Maybe doing anyway with the concept of maps entirely is a good idea - instead just having a single arena.

Games should 100% not be dumbed down in that sort of respect simply for spectator value.

If it was to improve the game then yes but removing maps makes the game far less interesting to anyone in the know. Something like maps adds depth to the game and no matter how simple to get into you make a sport if it has no depth then you will soon lose players/spectators.

It's like saying get rid of the offside rule in soccer because a large percentage of non avid viewers don't really understand it.

I don't agree it's akin to removing the offside rule (although that needs to be made much clearer ;p). Part of the issue is that players create routines for maps and it becomes a case of who runs the optimal routine better. Having a gladiatorial styled combat arena where the only factor that matters is the skill used is kind of alluring, no?

I like the idea of making gaming a discipline which stands the test of time but currently - that doesn't look feasible.

*shrugs*

The only way you could get around the routines is making a map so simple and the game mechanics so uncomplex and watered down that it would just be test_bigbox RA.

When you start removing things simply for spectator value is when you begin to ruin the game/sport and effectivley "sell out". You soon lose your original fan base and the short lived attention from your new found fans goes soon too. It essentially becomes a brief fad.

The game mechanics don't have to be simplified. Let's take football. There are a myriad of things possible that a player can do with the ball and a confined space in which to do it. It isn't the space that is important - it's the skill used.

As for it being spectator friendly - I have to admit... I wasn't even thinking from their perspective.

The thing is if you only have one box map nobody will want to play let alone watch it :P

All you need is a five map pool of which each represents a different style of play then play best of three matches. Provided the game is good and the maps are of a high quality then you have a great base for competition without losing any of the key elements of the game/sport and at the same time setting a standard. People will play and people will watch, not because they are told to by some sponsor/cpl type organisation but because they want to.

The maps are integral in my opinion, you could think of them as different tracks in Formula 1. The emphasis is still on the skill but in a slightly changed environment.

That's most certainly the best way to do things, however difficult. You could have a rotation of map sets. 5 different maps every 6 months or whatever to avoid it becoming stale.

In fact you could have something like two-four seasons a year each with a different map rotation and have 3-6 tournaments per season or something.

Yeah of course none of this will ever happen as those who are in control are money making freaks who think only in the immediate :(

ESWC should get their sponsors and do a deal with id to make a new Quake MP only game ! :D

Your ideas make me foam at the mouth. Strawberry foam! :D

It all could happen too. We just need a commited company with lots of money, a close relationship with the community and long-term scope... this was id. ;\

Quake 4 Nations like Trackmania Nations ? would be great.

Quake Nations. It should not be linked with the piece of shit known as Q4 at all.

______Hi_____

As long as companies can make more money by:
1) making a game with some breaktrough-engine
2) release screenshots
3) hype it
4) sell gpu's
5) sponsor eswc/cpl/whatever to use their game

Well, we're not getting anywhere sunshine. And even though Quake 3 might be the game of games for many, cherrysweet girls, it's not an appealing choice in terms of marketing the coregame of future e-sports due to a shitload of reasons. Steep learning curve, outdated and the concept does not follow the pattern we're seeing the public demand these days. The concept is just not favorable in terms of MAKING MONEY even tough a standard that favors the breaindead is set. Time to wake up and realize that we're not living in a society were people are willing to give up money in order to not interfere with "what's good for the sport. As for the rest; medial criticism.

Now tell me you're not ________biased_______.

As long as companies can make more money by:
1) making a game with some breaktrough-engine
2) release screenshots
3) hype it
4) sell gpu's
5) sponsor eswc/cpl/whatever to use their game

This is not about game companies. This is about companies like the CPL who are trying to foster ESPORTS. Sponsorship money from a game company (this is a very rare phenomenon in the first place) is NOTHING compared to the revenue CPL can obtain by commercializing and mainstreaming a game into a "sport" (like Starcraft in Korea). I'm not saying this is an easy task, but it is, after all, the CPL's (and other similar organizations) primary goal.

And no, I'm not simply biased. I have very objective arguments as to why I think a game like Counter-Strike is inferior to Quake 3 as a potential mainstream sport. I could write an entire book about this very topic.

<3

This is not about game companies. This is about companies like the CPL who are trying to foster ESPORTS. Sponsorship money from a game company (this is a very rare phenomenon in the first place) is NOTHING compared to the revenue CPL can obtain by commercializing and mainstreaming a game into a "sport" (like Starcraft in Korea). I'm not saying this is an easy task, but it is, after all, the CPL's (and other similar organizations) primary goal.

Uh-huh? Good work pointing out the obvious. Judging by your posts here you seem to lack basic knowledge which factors that actually do matter. You need to understand that the amount of money a company can profit from making it a sport TODAY is absolutely nothing compared to what profit they can make by following the above stated chaps. We're not even close to korea. There's a social and economical factor/climate that decides if the general public is going to accept it and make investments. You know the drill with investments in the western part of this world, don't you? Too risky. We're not there yet but finger's crossed.

And no, I'm not simply biased. I have very objective arguments as to why I think a game like Counter-Strike is inferior to Quake 3 as a potential mainstream sport. I could write an entire book about this very topic.

Oh my god, a book? Guess what?

................ _@@@__
......_____//____?___\______ _
- ---o--------CARE-POLICE------@ )
-----`-- ======+==== --


Now, go ahead and make an useful, constructive post, with some ideas on how to realize this sweet dream of yours in a profitable and financial secure way in the western part of this globe. Help me, yourself, the company i work for and my salary out. Go ahead, spotlights are on you mate.

I hate to break it but when you start comparing games of different kinds a mainstream fps-game/sport doesn't even get on the list even if it's a good game. The only positive part of this is that since fps-games don't even make it on the list for potential profitable games someone is going to pick it up sooner or later and make a couple of bucks but it's, most likely, never going to be a big hit.

"Uh-huh? Good work pointing out the obvious. Judging by your posts here you seem to lack basic knowledge which factors that actually do matter. You need to understand that the amount of money a company can profit from making it a sport TODAY is absolutely nothing compared to what profit they can make by following the above stated chaps."

Again, I'm not talking about game companies. I'm talking about esports organizations like CPL, ESWC - I've no idea why you brought game companies into the discussion. Are you suggesting CPL should...

1) make a game with some breaktrough-engine
2) release screenshots
3) hype it
4) sell gpu's

I mean what the fuck? CPL don't make games. They don't make game engines or sell gpu's. They are trying to foster ESPORTS.

"We're not even close to korea."

No shit? Congratulations for pointing out the obvious. I never said we were close to Korea. However, esports didn't just become mainstream from one day to the other in Korea. It is a PROGRESS. In my original post I was talking about the problem of esports organization constantly changing games for certain disciplines (and this has nothing to do with game companies - of course they should continue to make new games and innovate and make big bucks) and how this could possibly slow the _PROGRESS_ of esports becoming mainstream.

The fact, that you choose to bring game companies into the discussion the way you did just shows that you have completely missed the point of my original post. Game companies can still make and sell new games and new engines without esports organizations constantly picking new games for their disciplines. They are two different businesses. CS 1.6 is 7 years old and technologically inferior compared to new and more innovative games that game companies are pumping out. Yet that doesn't prevent CS from being the most popular esports game in the western world and the game is still being supported/sponsored by companies like NVIDIA and INTEL despite its age. Starcraft is also old and technologically in the stone age, but that doesn't prevent the game from being a hugely succesful esports game even today. The same way esports organizations have been faithful to these games and helped them grow as esports, the same way should they have been faithful to a game like Quake 3 instead of replacing it in its very prime by poor alternatives that had even less community backing (such as alien vs predator and painkiller).

Repeat after me: I don't take e-debates personal.

You crack me up.

Posted by anonymous...

How can an esport discipline mature and grow when the discipline is constantly changed? With every major change

I'm not really disagreeing with this in the long term. All I'm saying is ATM, the current parameters/gameplay of something like q3/q4 is not right becasue its not attracing people. THe servers are proof of this.

Perhaps when it gets so big that many people can make a living off it then fine. A standard can be set, but that's still a long way off IMO.
Until then it's numbers which really count abnd q3/q4 simply don't cut it.

"Until then it's numbers which really count abnd q3/q4 simply don't cut it. "

You are missing the point. In Q3's prime there were enough players in the community to fill each CPL tournament a hundred times. Whether there are enough players to fill each tournament a hundred or a thousand times doesn't really matter for esports. CPL can only manage tournaments of a certain size and they are happy as long as their tournaments fill up with players. What is important to the CPL and other esports tournaments, more than the size of the player base, is the commercialization and mainstreaming of the sport. If you expect the mainstream to buy into this, you must offer them a standard, something consistent they can rely on and familiarize themselves with. And all these potential mainstream spectators will not care if the initial player base is small compared to other sports as long as the quality of the players and the game appeals to them. And exactly WHEN (if...) the game hits mainstream, when non-players are willing to pay to watch their favorite players on TV, then the interest will spread and the player base will explode as a resulft of spectators becoming players (cf. the poker craze).

Q3 DID cut it. Only problem was Q3 was CUT by tournament officials who decided that Q3 was "done to death" and it was "time for change". And in comes UT and PK with significantly smaller player bases. *sigh*

Why hasn't CS been cut?

CPL decided to cut CS 1.6 too for the same reason. Only the community protested and CPL decided to listen. One could argue that the reason why the CPL listened to the Counter-Strikers and not the Quakers was because the CS community was a lot bigger. However, one could also argue that they had learned from their previous mistake and decided to not act against the will of the majority this time.

The fact that the size of the player base is not that important to the CPL when choosing games can be seen in their decision to choose a small, unestablished game like Painkiller. Their goal is commercialization and mainstreaming. I don't think Painkiller was the right game, but I agree that the initial size of the player base is not very important as long as its size is somewhat respectable (like that of Q3).

Agreed. It shows these decisions are dynamic at least. Hope can prevail through unity (or something).

best thing is to destroy all computergames, cuz too many people waste their lives on these games

too many computer game haters waste their lives pasting anti-gaming posts on pro-gaming websites...

I like computers and games, but there IS a negative aspect to them which a lot of people abuse and get sucked in by.

That's not hate, just insight.

if you are an advocater of "destroying all computer games", then you classify as a "computer game hater" in my book. Nuff' said.

Duh, you draw far too many conclusions before you read what someone has said to bother explaining things to again.

I never said anything about destroying all computers or games, internet, I simply said I'm switched on enough to recognise that they can be a bad influence if they are abused and they often are.
*Real life example*
Drinking a few pints of beer a week or letting your hair down on a weekend is fine. Drinking 10 pints of beer a night everyday is not fine. Smoking a joint from time to time is fine, smoking a joint to get through the day is not fine.
Same goes for gaming/pc's internet. They can make you lazy and if your not careful rob you of your ambitions, just like any hobby.
I have definitely had my moments, but as long as you're aware then it's ok.

Unless the hobby becomes your future - which is what keeps some players playing.

ofc and I guess everyone can argue that, but I'm talking about those who use games/computers as an escape instead of entertainment.
I got into games as akid cuz they fascinated me far more than playing soccer and rugby, even though I was mad on sports and played for teams.
It's the same with anything.
Drink,cannabis in moderation if fine, in excess it causes problems.

Go and read some of the blogs of WOW players who've quit their jobs, dumped their wives just to play wow all day. It happens.
Some people have those sorts of personalities and computers like drugs/drink can be used to exploit that weakness.
I could and probably have been borderline guilty of that once or twice:)

Can't argue with that. I need to book an appointment with the optromotist because of my unmoderated habits.

Duh, you draw far too many conclusions before you read what someone has said to bother explaining things to again.

You are the one who is drawing conclusions pre-maturely here, kiddo...

I never said anything about destroying all computers or games, internet

FFS, i was talking about "cyronix" who said: "best thing is to destroy all computergames, cuz too many people waste their lives on these games ". I ask him indirectly what a "computer game hater" like him is doing on a pro-gaming website and then you suddenly join in with your "that's not hate, that's insight". In the context of my "conversation" with cyronix it appeared as if you protested my view of him as a hater, so I simply argued for my view.

I never said you said anything about destroying all computer games.

Talk about missing the point completely...

No you said to the original poster.

"too many computer game haters waste their lives pasting anti-gaming posts on pro-gaming websites"..

I simply replied that he did have a point in a way, even if he blew it out of proportion. It was not an either or.

Then you said..
if you are an advocater of "destroying all computer games", then you classify as a "computer game hater" in my book. Nuff' said.

Being able to make a balanced an honest opinion that computers can be abused does not make me an advocate of anything, oteher than talking about the topic in hand. It could have gone the other way had it been said, because you could quite easily argue that computers do far more good than bad.
You mentioned that I classify as a "cimputer game hater" not me. Slightly wrong seeing as I choose to wrok with them as my career.

Anyway its not important and I have to be up at 7am :(

Then you said..
if you are an advocater of "destroying all computer games", then you classify as a "computer game hater" in my book. Nuff' said.

Yes, and what is wrong about that opinion/statement?

Being able to make a balanced an honest opinion that computers can be abused does not make me an advocate of anything

I never called you an advocator of anything. I was talking about cyronix, NOT YOU. Just because I write you in the sentence doesn't mean it directly refers to you (you notice the "if" at the beginning of the sentence?).

"If you are an advocator of..." == "If one is an advocator..."

That's not the same as saying...

"You are an advocator of..."

Whether or not computer games can have a harmful effect is an entirely different matter.... my point in the first place was simply that saying "best thing is to destroy all computergames" is stupid. AND I KNOW YOU DIDN'T SAY THAT.

Kinda funny actually... one big misunderstanding. I guess if I had written "one" instead of "you", you wouldn't have gotten the wrong idea. Oh well... =)

destory all sports, so many people waste their lives in them

the big difference in normal sports is that you meet people of your area
you can friendly talk to and could even become friend, and you could even find your love in them, in esports this is almost never the case,
everyone just bitching around and whining, maybe some chats,
but that's it ...

well, I was just doing a troll reply, saying anything is a waste of life is pointless, in the end nothing really matters, live whatever life you want to

Not sure if I'm in the minority but as a regular attendee of LANs and events (well, in the last year) I've met lots of people through gaming, I get to talk to the best players and personalities in the sport which you'd basically never get the oppurtunity to do in real sports

Fundamentaly it is not wrong that Fast FPS 1on1 games stay the same.. the problem imo is that they not stay the same.. and the next game is not going further where the last game stoped..

A good e-sport game should have all basic futures the preceding game had (for example Q4 lacked autodownloading, same or beter netcode, community tools like proxy's / GTV and such) and that is the reason why Fast FPS 1on1 games are dying... because it's imposible to get games going / new players move on because of this crappy programming / designing.

1 short sentence: A next game in a serie should for sure have all futures that the preceding game had + more and should NEVER be a downgrade...

i said the same near on 2 year ago. people took no notice tho.

so rts games are not the same? starcraft, warcraft ...

it's dead as we know it in the sense that it is not getting any bigger

RTCW2 will be the messiah, oh god please dont fuck it up.

i thought it was going to be console only?

Its being developed on the xbox 360, and then a PC port will be released. Kind of like the opposite of what happened with quake 4.

then it's hardly going to be any kind of messiah.

The WSVG - Blizzard partnership is simply Blizzard will have a large booth at WSVG events......

But it's set to build the popularity of the blizz games and also blizz will no doubt push it. WSVG aren't stupid they know the market in Korea is massive...

Competitions choose the games themselves not WSVG. Otherwise you would get WC3 at CPL which you don't.

Games are boring. Grow up.

If you don't have anything significant to say why don't you just fuck off.

What's insignificant about my comment?

i wont say it is but.. at a gaming site.. i don't get the joke :(

Quakers aren't the target audience anymore. Time to move on.

so you are a quaker, you don't like the games, or games in this case meaning hardcore fps and they suck for the general mass?

(yes, i'm very tired)

I was a quaker. I loved the games. I realised that to make money you have to appeal to the biggest target audience possible and we aren't that audience. FPS games in the last few years have gone steadily down a different path compared to what we like; both in terms of anti-realism (if there is such a thing) and the focus of graphics to lure players - which are components non-essential to Quake (and any good experience I might add ;p).

So faced with the options of either waiting (more likely hoping) that a developer will take our interests to heart; or give up and try other things - I'll try other things.

Games are boring today. You can't escape this fact (unless you fail to see the evolution of titles and the point at which that evolution stopped (possibly because Q3 sapped the creative steam dry)).

Still, keep burning the touch and ignore how your own talents within gaming fit into the general scheme of things. Not my problem.

/rant

;]

"Games are boring today. You can't escape this fact"

Just because you personally find games boring today, doesn't mean it's a fact.

Your arrogant "know-all" attitude is disgusting.

It's a fact. I am disgusted by your disgust.

http://www.touslessmileys.com/smileys/Images/img_013.gif

Haha ;p

What i was trying to emphazise in my question was that you think that they somehow "left" us..

It don't think they did .. I think we are just staying behind.

You might say things were better before.. And you may use the logic that games nowadays cost more to make and need in general always appeal to the biggest masses to make sure that they don't waste their 3545454354 on making a new game that only the "few" like. While this is true to some extent, i think it fails to take into consideration the increase in overall skill and ammount of makers in the video game industry; to illustrate this better i think it's fair to look at the film industry: Now I would say that there are still good movies coming out every year; although they rarly make HUGE a ammount of money on them, they still do decent and they keep coming at an ever increasing rate even if the shit movies are proportionally much more numerous. If you do not agree on this last part then i see a problem, if you agree with it you need to point out to me what makes it different.

How does their increase in skill benefit us today? What is the evidence of this? How jam packed was Q4 with competition level features?

You were critizising new games in general, that's why i'm drawing the line over to movies, because i think it's basically the same thing, do you not agree?

I guess it's the same. Looking at Hollywood specifically of course.

Well, there are still, if not more, good movies beeing made in the world.

I don't think the correlation can be made. I'll take your example of movies with mathematical or scientific subject matter: there aren't many of those because there of the lack of people who will pay to view it; which makes the movies more difficult to fund without something to attract it to a wider audience (in a games case graphics or simplification).

Isn't that a correlation? I fail to see the difference.. I don't think i'm exactly sure what you are trying to say...

Actually... I said the correlation couldn't be made and then went and made it anyway. Ignore! ;D

hehe, yee..

But don't you think that the only reason not more games are aimed at "us" is because we are stuck in the past? There are still games made for the minority, it's just that the hardcore gamers that are left in this community are too few to even be called a minority.

Stuck in the past, yes.

i would ask if there is some hidden irony there, but the you could just say "no." and fuck me over :P

Heh ;p

There's no reason to say stuck in the past is a totally bad situation.

Playing football, bbl.

hf

+ !! so correct

The fact that 'games are boring' which has nothing to do with the topic coupled with 'grow up' which is also not applicable, your entire statement is just nothing besides insulting.

Nice try.

Competition can be always fun!

Competition is practically the only reason that these things survive long enough to be considered seriously and therefore: debated.

I tend to believe that people assume an activitylevel when they talk about "deadgames" that never existed in reality but only in ones mind. Back then it was all better, etc etc

like dostojevski said in one of his novels,
at least they believe they were happy once!

Revival solution: Once Q4 1.1 is released everyone at ESR start playing it!

maybe q4 will turn into something as fun as previous games so we dont need retarded cpl or wsvg to enjoy it.

Magically turn into, yes.. it's a nice thought :D

Too late.

"The scope for 'global' starcraft and wc3 and the fan base is probably bigger with more $$"

not really

Anything to back that up there? I wouldn't consider it to be 'that' big in europe but i know a lot of quakers and other fps players enjoy WC3 and if they enjoy it i would summise they wouldn't be adversed to watching it. Couple this with the far east where gaming has grown into something which is 'popular' and you have a reasonble starting audience.

WC3 has been going strong since it's been released. RTS seems the way forward :[

wc3 has a ladder to keep competitive players motivated, daily tournaments, multiple game modes for casual rpg co-op players, 4v4 players to hardcore 1v1 players, is continously patched to stay bug-free and balanced by blizzard themselves not having to rely on 3rd party mod makers who joe schmoe has no clue about, and has autodownload so everyone can play with each other

... also they didnt try to re-invent starcraft with better graphics, and instead created an entirely new game even if its the same genre (heroes?! gaining levels?! 90 food cap?! wow innovation whowouldathunkit?)

I think what'll happen is FPS games will continue to get outdated and replaced by their graphical update counterparts, all the while introducing new bugs that will be patched endlessly until the new version comes out (much like what has happened with CS, UT, Quake, etc). One day, however, the graphical peak will be reached. There will be no more gains to be made in graphics. At this point, the game (UT2012 or Quake 6 or whatever) will be then improved, as Quake 7 or Unreal Tournament 2014 would not be able to be marketed on graphical improvements, and those current games will be polished and polished until they become extremely well made games. If you think about it, the only reason Q3 is so good (mods, patches, etc) is because it was not replaced for so long.

Once this plateau game is found, then esports will REALLY take off, because the game will stay the same, and it will be an amazing game. e-sports is in beta phase, its got a ways to go. Until that point is reached, e-sports will just flounder and look for footing. Do you think gaming in Korea would be big if they replaced SC every year?

Exactly. Also the point I have been trying to make in this thread.

This journal was very enlightend for me on a sidenote. Since ages I wondered if "dieing" is spelled correctly. Now I know it´s not, thx 215.

it's hardcore to be hardcore.

With the spread of broadband connections online gaming is only going to grow, and that includes FPS's.

The reason there's no spectator interest in FPS 1 v 1 is because of the way it's presented - if you don't play the game and don't know the maps then speccing from the players pov is just mass confusion, especially when they keep switching from one player to the other.

For it to work spectators need to be able to see an overall view of the game, much like in a football match sometimes they close in a player other times they pan out to show the entire field - we need the same.

Spectating needs to be done from the thrird person view, if people could follow what was going on then they couldn't help but be interested - it'd be like watching a boxing match.

Also imho FPS game have become TOO complicated rather than not progresing enough - my ideal game would be QW speed with just a few weapons RL / SG / RL / LG / and some MG like starting weapon. The rest are just fluff and either slow the game down (GL) or turn it into a lame spamfest (NG).

The RG would be toned down a bit and the maps would be open and easy to spectate.

If I was an eccentric millionaire I'd employ someone like the XBM guys and get the game made and released for free so it could be used in tourneys all over and played by everyone.

FPS could have a huge spectator sport future if it was handled the right way.

You want simple then you ask for a game which is fast and has by that you probably mean with bunnyhop/aircontrol etc which is by no means simple to a spectator.

Tiered armours? Where did he talk about that?

Er dosn't matter misread.

Aha i read the before the edit :>

edit: read that*

I never mentioned bunny hopping or air control, just the game speed.

Anyhow, the subtleties of bunny hopping and aircontrol would be important to the players but not even *noticed* by your average spectator so I don't see it as an issue.

FPS isnt dying, DEATHMATCH is Both UT(vehicles) and quake(see quake wars) are moving away from deathmatch :(

WoW did it...

FINAL STATEMENT!

game makers (sadly, even id with them taking Carmack off the design side of things) care about quantity of game sales, instead of quality of product.

the only thing thats gonna revive fps gaming is for fps games to be made for fps gamers.

they need to stop with all the gimmicks to get peoples attention, and stick with what has already been proven to work for each company.

kinda "if it aint broke, dont fix it" type of thing.

id: arcade gameplay with fast movment, and balanced weapons (and either Carmack is involved or dont make it!).

Epic: graphics, flack cannons and shock combos.

UT2k7 will make ut'ers happy and keep a few quakers busy till q5 if q4 completely dies

heres hoping/waiting on quake 5 with Carmack being involved in the design..if he isnt im not even going to bother looking at the box let alone buying it.

you seem to forget that e-sports=connection+pc specs+config+skill

ah whatever