clap clap

yeey.

The first thing I've heard the G7 actually do!

hahah so true

wasn't the g7 formed like 4 years ago?

g7 is the gaming illuminati - you never notice their presence, yet they control your life

cordless + laser = fail

MX1000

hey, they kicked other teams out before ;)

G7 did a lot

what does the G7 actually do? are they managing the managers that manage the teams?

that's my guess.

Basically they are the 'clan'-Illuminati trying to stop individual player sponsorships.

It HAS to be a conspiracy!

lol, why did you read this news post first? :(

G7 is just a turd that needs attention from the toilet some now and then. To bad we aren't able to flush the turd.

But talking about G7 is pointless, because it is a pointless organisation. The only thing they really love to do are showing some rankings (about themselfs) and showing off there Internet Penisl.

Pretty obvious. No point to host team without gaming divisions.

/* Everyone look at us! We're a serious group of organizations! */

//Replying to a C++ nerd :>
//sup Jon

/* */ are C style comments, // are C++ style comments and not ANSI compliant. Most compilers support them anyway unless you force ANSI compliance.

hoens you're an irritating troll.

The current ANSI C standard defines /* */ and // comments
Go check your copy of C99.

Chill out dude. You are all nerds.

No one uses C99, preferring C89 or C90. As a matter of fact the -ansi flag of gcc 4.3.3 (edit oops wrong version number) turns on C89 support, and not C99 support. Check your man pages, dog.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

You said "// are...not ANSI compliant" which is wrong. I responded to your comment about the standard. I never said a word about compilers.

You're right that C99 is rarely used. Many compilers don't support it fully. Last I remember VC only supports C90 and GCC still only has partial C99 support. So it makes sense that -ansi would load the newest standard which the compiler can fully support. To be honest, compilers like XL don't do silly things like assume ansi = c89. Intel's compiler defaults (on Linux) to use -std=c99 and the -ansi flag is there for only for gcc compatibility.

GCC is not the be-all and end-all of compilers. It's pretty good, really portable but hardly the only game in town.

Obviously mr anonymous. My point was that c99 is not widely used. If you give me that, then you might accept that by ansi compliant I am talking about the most widely used version of the standard (since we agree there's more than one). If you give me that then we can say that I'm definitely not talking about C99, instead about C89 or C90, in which case my comment actually does apply, regardless of which compiler is used.

Also I only brought up gcc to say that one of the most widely used C compilers doesn't use it as default, bringing further credence to my "C99 is not widely used" argument, not to say that it's the only compiler out there.

You were still trolling :D. When it comes to whats widely used, every modern C compiler I can think of supports "//" comments. Mentioning that they don't conform to the common but outdated standard is nitpicking. When it comes to standards compliance you either get to use the *current* standard or follow "widely used" paths.

For additional troll points: At no point did they talk about C. The only mention of languages was "C++". C-style comments are perfectly acceptable by many C++ style guides. Google, Mozilla, and Stroustrup himself don't discourage and use both styles of comments in writing C++ code. And C++'s standards all support "//" and "/* */" comments.

Calling ANSI c89 outdated when it's the most commonly used ansi standard is a bit disingenuous. You were correct to point out that // have since been added to the ansi standard, but that was my fault for being ambiguous. It just goes to show you how little I think of C99 :)

You're also correct that /* */ are in C++, however they're still called C style comments. Thus using // in an application that uses /* */ comments is not a good idea as you could become non-compliant as we have been talking about.

I guess it suffices to say that this only started because I did not specify ANSI C89, instead letting you infer the version I meant. Suffice it to say that when I say ANSI, I mean C89.

C89:
1) Doesn't cover many of the behaviors that *all* recent compilers allow
2) Allows things that compilers might throw warnings about (like assuming int when no type is given)
3) Has been replaced by a new standard meant to take it's place.
For those reasons, I think it's fair to call it outdated.

It's completely unfair to call me disingenuous. While it may be commonly referred to as "compliant" code, C89 doesn't cover lots of things that are allowed or expected in a modern C compiler, it's outdated from a compiler developer's perspective. Most compilers allow [a lot of] c99 features without warning, by default: gcc, vc, icc, llvm, xl. Technically, C89 isn't "current" and the industry has moved on to, by default, (largely) support the "current" standard, that makes it outdated from my point of view.

In my opinion, the reasons for sticking with C89 standards are less because ANSI says so and more because the newest K&R was published to those standards. As for why gcc avoids c99 by default (a la icc)? I suspect because its too new for them. GNU loves old things, i.e. GNU Coding Guidelines are idiotic and they actually promote writing "pre-standard code" that doesn't work in C99 (i.e. K&R style function declarations).

While some (Google) frown on mixing comment styles in C++, others (like Mozilla) demand C-style comments in headers (since headers need to be C&C++ compliant) but promote the use of C++ comments in actual code. Oh and Stroustrup actually uses both left and right, he uses /* */ for blocks and "//" for end-of-line annotations.

Right we can talk about what is and is not allowed in current compiler versions, but I DID explicitly state ANSI. Therefore the conversation should be restricted to this subset of standards.

Right you can say that C99 SHOULD be adopted, and make arguments for that. You can also say that C89 SHOULD be replaced for the reasons you say. My point remains, however, that C89 is the prevalent industry standard, and thus what I meant by ANSI.

I would tend to agree with you about GNU. I don't agree with a lot of what they do, but they're the best open source option out there. They're also REALLY good at targeting cross platform code. That being said, I do prefer icc for anything real due to the free 30% speedup (even though, as has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere, 30, 50, 100% speedups aren't much).

That being said bringing Stroustroup into this isn't going to win you many points with me, as I don't really like C++ at all. Also as you pointed out, different people think differently about the whole "what convention do you want to use" question. At the end of the day though, the one thing we can agree on is that // comments are NOT C89 compliant, which was my original point.

You're such a fucking loser for desperately trying to win an argument you have already lost.
Newsflash, fuckface: both ISO/IEC 9899:1999 a.k.a. C99 and ISO/IEC 14882:1998 a.k.a. C++ are official ANSI standards, so your claim that "// [comments] are [...] not ANSI compliant" is obviously wrong.
Neither you nor GCC are authoritative instances, so it doesn't fucking matter what you cretin prefer or GCC enables. Compilers are meant to conform to certain standards, not vice versa.
You better shut your fuck up and stop wastin' mah minutes, bitch!

Uh, why so angry? I think I've already clarified that I meant C89 when I said ANSI compliant, seeing as it's the most widely adopted standard. You would have a point if C99 was widely supported, but well it isn't, so you don't. I also apologized for being ambiguous, but you so nicely skipped over that.

Anyway, hope you have a great day!

C99 is widely supported. ICC defaults to it. XL fully supports it. GCC supports almost all of it. Microsoft focuses on C++ so it's understandable they're neglecting their C compiler. You get to a question of defaults though...

God I suck late at night.... I meant widely adopted.

As for being widely supported, you'd think after 10 years people would finally have it figured out and it would be the default on all compilers. The fact that it isn't speaks volumes on people's acceptance of C99 as a standard... It's also interesting to note that using the ansi flag in icc brings it into conformance with gcc's -ansi, and doesn't default to C99*.

* This option enables language compatibility with the gcc option -ansi and provides the same level of ANSI standard conformance as that option. This option sets option fmath-errno. If you want strict ANSI conformance, use the -strict-ansi option.

Yes I think I said something to that regard 4 posts up.
"Intel's compiler defaults (on Linux) to use -std=c99 and the -ansi flag is there for only for gcc compatibility."

I think you it from the perspective of someone writing the code. I see it from the perspective of someone making the compiler. As for what settles for "outdated".

TBH we haven't even been arguing for about 8 posts. :)

Eh.. compilers are meant to conform to standards? I mean.. to some extent, yes... but it's often the compilers who develop the language and the spec that comes later. C and C++ had a pretty good chunk of time when they didn't follow a set "standard", everyone just used K&R's book as a standard for C but... that's questionable.

Right and it's not being supported, or at least where support is lacking there isn't much push back. The only reason that I can come up with for this to be the case is an overwhelming lack of interest in C99. If people really wanted C99 to be fully supported, you can bet that gcc would have supported it by now.

Man that post wasn't even a response to you!

ESR DELIVERS!

/**/ they are actually used in many languages ... and comments don't make programs, so who cares

Yeah but I think it's fair to C is the 'source' of most of it. Everyone else just copied from them to appeal to C programmers.

I think the only earlier languages that support /* block comments */ like that are B (unlikely direct source) and PL/I, which may have been a key component of say a 1980s Soviet Engineering curriculum but otherwise I'd say you guys found it from C or a language that tried to be LIKE C.

Man, did I help you start a shitstorm. Oh, my.

your penance is 1 dose of epic fail.

More like your penance.

// = Single-line comment
/* = Multi-line comment

When it comes to C++, you can't argue with this. Fail.

This reminds me of a scene from the movie Role Models, when Paul Rudd and McLovin get kicked out of the Lore Camp.

Only in this case, G7 is the lore camp, as for MYM... Well.. you just got kicked out of a Lore Camp.. its the end of your world.

that analogy doesn't really apply here, due to the fact that everyone involved is still supernerds...

you're a super nerd!

i do play a computer game competitively and attend tournaments for it.

same here, except i'm too broke to travel to events :|

hehe that was a fun movie

g7 = cancer

Well yeah, like who really cares what G7 does ;-) World wouldn't stop rotating just cuz these guys left it. Funny news tho, worth a laugh (@G7 ofc, not the news itself) ;)

holy shit, what we gonna do now?

It will end up in a reccession!

This is shocking news for the 7 cs clans... which are in G7


aaah they were bored of doing nothing so they brought down the number of members from 8 to 7, to match the name!

prestigious organisation


...what?

Prestigious organisation lol...

this sounds similar to "fascinating individual"

At least my brain does the same output

"to who ??"

:D

Kicking them out just proves what a bunch of amateurs they are anyway, I mean if they were a proper organisation wouldn't they just let them leave instead of kicking them out?

They likely forgot they were even in it.

I'm actually offended by the use of the word prestigious.

so are we, anonymous. thanks for the input.

I wonder what team they'll get to replace them. One of the south asian ones mayhap?

im curious who actually cares about this..

i almost did!

I'll replace them.

can i join you?

honestly, who gives a shit?

|^^^^^^^^^^^^|
|who gives a fuck-truck | '|""";.., ___.
|_..._...______===|= _|__|..., ] | ]
"(@ )'(@ )""""*|(@ )(@ )*****(@ )

'their prestigious organisation'

I lol'd.

Jesus christ I've never seen so many people against a gaming organization like this.

They're considered 'prestigious' because it's the top 7 gaming teams in the world (minus anything in Korea).

Do you expect BETTER? They forced MYM because that organization is dead (as a gaming team) so they had no choice.

I'd like to see some people here find 7 more prestigious than who's in the G7.

Is it even possilbe for you to breathe anymore with that cock stuffed so far down your throat?

top 7 gaming teams in the world prestigious only to cs fanboys who aren't aware that real fps gaming died around 2002

if i was ever on a team offered a spot in g7 i would laugh and tell them to fuck off

this type of news belongs on gotfag

my two cents

no offense to gillz

What a jealous comment. It truely tells how much it bothers you that CS became more succesful than your game. Deniying it as a good fps-game just makes u sound as bitter as a fat little german kid, red and faced raging like u got spawnraped.
:)

It must be possible to be critical towards the quality of a populist game, without being called a jealous motherfucker that just envies the crowd.

You know... 50 Cent can sell all them records he wants, its still regarded, by the majority of the people, even the hip hop elite, as bad quality work. Same with CS.

Its only they who dont care about quality, and just stay in it for the money or the fame that cares.

good analogy

i listen to real hip hop myself

mainly older 80s and 90s and current underground/independent artists

all the popular rappers making money right now are terrible and aren't even hip hop more like pop rap

just like all the fps games right now where players make money are terrible

:)

late 80s early 90s hip hop!! and a few current underground like you said

Why is CS so popular according to you, if it's such a poor quality title.

It caters for the non elite is why. Pretty much anyone can pick up cs and play it half decent if they can use a keyboard and mouse and arent completely inept.

To do well at a game like quake requires far more as it has a faster pace, items to time, movement techniques and reflexes.

That is why cs is popular, average joe can play, and most of the gaming world is average joe.

That's a good thing rather than a bad thing though. It should be easy to start playing a game.

yeah, but i think the argument here is about g7 being called the top teams in the world. they certainly have players who play elite games (quake or quake-style), but the majority of the players on each team play the "average joe" teams, thus making the teams "top" in an average-above average skill level market.

I would say that Starcraft is, by far, the most competitive computer game in the world.

and? i didn't realize competitive means most challenging with the top talent/skill. two really shitty teams could face each other in quake, and it would be extremely competitive as long as their skill levels were nearly the exact same.

good point, jubei. (tho, next time you should mention at least a couple other games similar to quake, so trolls on here don't think we're all quake elitists :])

slow and easy to grasp, low system requirements and it was originally a FREE mod on one of the most popular FPS titles ever produced: Half Life.

It was also one of the first, if not the first "semi realistic" tactical shooter. And you know... kids find it easier to relate to semi reality than to game play in shooters. People are lazy in that way, they dont always like to challenge the mind.

Im not saying CS is horrible, I even enjoy high level match ups and find some tactical issues to the game interesting. But doh.. its not really that good either. Its mediocre at best. And pretty much 90% of all shooters after CS have been copy cats that have made the whole tactical shooter scene look like a joke and developers looking like mindblocked creative challenged retards with no original thoughts left in their heads. If someone is putting yet another game with an AK47 i trust God to fucking repent on them motherfuckers.

Quake is constantly evolving, it lies in Quakes nature to evolve. It is the game of the elite shooter, it is the game of the samurai. It is the formula 1 of FPS shooters. And its never going to get popular because of that...

what happened in 2002 ?

also, isn't cs the biggest esport game (minus korean exceptions) since ages ?

"Real FPS Gaming' ?

Sorry, but CS is the best team based fps game we have right now, and it's going to stay in e-sports. It's spectator friendly, simple, but an amazing game.

This entire thread screams jealously.

if i was ever on a team offered a spot in g7 i would laugh and tell them to fuck off

Considering MYM players were getting 7K/month, I'm sure you wouldn't.

You know what, you're totally right. That $(€?)7,000 a month MYM players were earning is total proof of the success of MYM and the G7.

It's not like MYM has totally collapsed and been kicked out of the G7 and it's not like apart from boycotting a CPL event years too late all the G7 has done is kick MYM out.

CS is by no means "the best" of anything, who cares if it's big in eSports and if it's going to stay as a big part of eSports. All that means is it's part of a constantly faltering "industry" run by money grabbing exploiters and children.

Regardless of MYM salary, Carmac labeled the net worth of an 'e-sports player' at $1500/month, most people here wouldn't turn that down to compete in Quake.

And if CS isn't the best team based FPS game, then what is? Look at each genre. CS is the best 5v5 FPS game we have, Quake is the best 1v1 FPS game we have, SC is the best 1v1 RTS game we have, and so on.

Care to argue the game titles?

RTCW (and by extension ET) is the best team FPS.

damn straight

How are you coming to these conclusions that they are "the best"?

Those are certainly the most popular eSports titles in their respective game types, but that doesn't make them "the best". CS, while a neat idea has so many flaws in it that lower the skill ceiling and worsen the quality of the game it's ridiculous.

$1,500 a month is about £12,000 a year, it's nothing. You earn roughly more on minimum wage here in the UK.

Besides didn't carmac say they were worth $1,500 max, not $1,500 per month in income? (Like if you wanted to transfer that player they would be worth roughly $1,500)

Maybe I just didn't listen properly but I'm sure that's what he said, I thought his point was how can a player worth $1,500 be paid $7,000 a month.

Well exactly, that's why MYM went under. Why pay your players 7K a month when their only worth 1500 a month.

If CS has so many flaws in it which lowers it's skill ceiling (which I disagree with) then what would replace it? Source made the game easier, but prettier. The only game I could see replacing it (competitively) would be COD1 or COD2, but realistically, those would never last if 1.6 were to be suddenly outed from e-sports.

You need to learn to read properly, I was saying they weren't worth $1,500 per month. I don't really follow eSports and especially not MYM, maybe all those players were making $18,000 each for the company and were therefore worth $1,500 per month but I doubt it.

Not that any of that has any relevance to the G7 which is still a joke of an organisation and the fact that MYM players were earning $7,000 per month or the net worth of an eSports player being $1,500 per month really doesn't change that fact.

You need to stop blindly supporting anything eSports related.

Why does anything have to replace CS? I was simply arguing CS isn't the best team based FPS. RTCW is a far superior team game to CS for example.

You need to stop blindly supporting anything eSports related.

INDEED!

If CS has so many flaws in it which lowers it's skill ceiling (which I disagree with) then what would replace it?

If you can't get to the skill ceiling in CS after playing Q3, something is wrong.

Also ET > CS

The different in physical aiming from CS to Quake is massively different. CS requires more precise, extremely accurate shots. You see a lot of players leaning into the monitor looking very closely, there's a reason for that. Quake requires more all around aim, but you're an idiot if you expect to go from Quake 3 to CS and think you're going to be amazing at aiming in a day. CS has recoil, somewhat predictive, and somewhat able to be controlled. CS is played on very very low sensitivity, whereas Quake is usually mid-high, with few exceptions.

I've told you before about the sensitivity thing, you're an idiot.

And I told you before, MOST CS players use an extremely low sensitivity, where about half, or most Quake players use a higher sensitivity (Compared to the CS'ers)

Go watch videos people took of teams at ESL or ESWC events, then go watch videos people took of Quake players at Quakecon or ESWC events. There's a big difference. Cypher, Cooller, Av3k, high sens. Fnatic, SK, MYM, low sens.

It's irrelevant what sensitivity they use.

Nothing is stopping any Quake player switching to CS with the sensitivity they currently use and aiming just as well (After adapting to the game).

You've got a real fixation on sensitivity values.

You don't get it. My point was that it's stupid to think you can go from Quake to CS and expect to well.

Of course you can given a reasonable amount of time to get used to the different mechanics that are in the game.

I agree with that, but that isn't justification for this.

http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1674867#pid1674867

perhaps we should take a poll, cuz my sensitivity in q3/ql is lower than 1, and i use middle windows sens w/ no accel in windows or in-game.

Know your hardware.

Sensitivity doesn't mean shit unless you know the DPI.

true. i use a death adder on max dpi, but you have to admit, regardless of that, my sensitivity is pretty low. my sensitivity has remained below 1 with no accel for years and with several different mice (microsoft optical, other razer mice, logitech).

The different in physical aiming from CS to Quake is massively different.

No, it isn't. Why do you people make this stuff up without even playing the game enough to know?

CS requires more precise, extremely accurate shots. You see a lot of players leaning into the monitor looking very closely, there's a reason for that.

No, try again. CS is not about aiming, it's about position. Aim is widely overrated by lesser players because they think that a better player is pulling off amazing accuracy, when really, he's positioned in a way where he doesn't have to track a moving target much and he has little chance of missing.

Quake requires more all around aim, but you're an idiot if you expect to go from Quake 3 to CS and think you're going to be amazing at aiming in a day.

Believe it or not, Q3 is played the EXACT same way that I just described to you about CS. The only difference is that Quake isn't limited by spray weapons, and thus, combat can be more dynamic at mid/long range with more lead for skill.

CS is played on very very low sensitivity, whereas Quake is usually mid-high, with few exceptions.

This is entirely preference. The only reason you see a pattern in EITHER community is because newer players emulate older players instead of simply picking what is most comfortable for them. The majority of Quake players have probably been around since QW/Doom when high sens was much more important, and the trend continued on. See: mouse2 for jump

No, it isn't. Why do you people make this stuff up without even playing the game enough to know?

Yes, it is. Look at the AWP, arguably comparable to the Railgun. With AWP, you can't expect to hit your target while moving, in the air, or jumping. You need to be somewhat still. The RG is the opposite, your shot will always hit regardless of position.

Look at controlling recoil, and being in a position that you're waiting for them to cross your crosshair. You need to be more attentive to that, and looking very closely. Go to a WSVG or CPL gallery, most Quake players lean back and play, they don't need to be super close. Now go look at ESL and ESWC events for CS. They're very close to the monitor. I don't make this shit up, I know it. There's also exception to every rule, so don't bother arguing that.

Yes, it is. Look at the AWP, arguably comparable to the Railgun. With AWP, you can't expect to hit your target while moving, in the air, or jumping. You need to be somewhat still. The RG is the opposite, your shot will always hit regardless of position.

Again, it's not about aiming at a target, it's about positioning yourself to already be aiming at the target. Also, learn about snapshots and how they work.

Look at controlling recoil, and being in a position that you're waiting for them to cross your crosshair. You need to be more attentive to that, and looking very closely.

If you think this is hard, you might want to switch to consoles.

Go to a WSVG or CPL gallery, most Quake players lean back and play, they don't need to be super close. Now go look at ESL and ESWC events for CS. They're very close to the monitor. I don't make this shit up, I know it. There's also exception to every rule, so don't bother arguing that.

800x600 has that effect.

CS players run at that res too, so good job on not making a point?

Look at controlling recoil, and being in a position that you're waiting for them to cross your crosshair. You need to be more attentive to that, and looking very closely.

Never said it was hard, so stop the shit talking.

CS players run at that res too, so good job on not making a point?

I was talking about CS players, mate.

Never said it was hard, so stop the shit talking.

You said "My point was that it's stupid to think you can go from Quake to CS and expect to well." In reality, if you were at all good at Q3, you could. This is obviously a personal problem.

And Quake players run at that res too, so, your point?

Also, it's not only arrogant, but stupid to assume you can go from Q3 to CS and expect to do very well. Sure, give it a few months of good practicing and playing, but don't expect to get the job done in a week. CS isn't flawed, it's just a completely different game compared to Q3.

There is too much stuff that simply isn't any good and therefore is just totally ignored which I consider a flaw in the design. The money system isn't exactly perfect and its usage is more of a choice of taking what they've got and making the best of it.

One could argue that the game would be better off without the money system at all.

The concept for the game is great with the one bomb and two bomb sites idea. But overall the game has quite a lot of flaws since it was never designed to be anything more than a game for messing about on public servers.

They tried removing the money, the closest thing they came to that was CGS ruleset for CS:S. Look at what happened there, destroyed the fucking game completely. Destroyed the pistol round, the lead the team would get after that, and destroyed any strategy concept for purchasing guns. If all the losing players could keep buying AWPs, the punishment for losing becomes minute.

I knew you'd say that.

You wouldn't just remove the buying and leave the entire game alone.

So what would you change?

I don't know, but that's not important.

It's not really a question of doing very well, but rather equally well.

i agree. plus'd.

every decent-great q3 player i've known or played against that has moved on to CS has dominated it and called it a joke compared to q3.

Back it up with names?

bugzer, northman, most of pm/stx, icelore (i could go on and on)

yeah some awesome cs-players right there

All of which have no real accomplishments proving their CS skill.

i don't imagine i'd want to play a game for a prolonged period of time that i thought was extremely easy and terrible to the other game i HAD been playing that was actually a challenge.

a couple of years ago I went to quake from cs. I played mostly ra3 and cpma ca and never had a problem with beating anyone I came across. Did I dominate q3?

ra3/ca. lawl.

exactly

any team mode in quake is better than cs.

Over bloated opinion.

the entire argument is opinions.

cs is a terrible game and rtcw was miles ahead of it so welcome aboard

best team based fps game right now? that's not saying much because there hasn't been a game worth playing seriously in years unless you want to waste your time playing inferior clones of older, better games

i would rather spectate paint drying on a wall then spec a cs game

and yes, i would tell the g7 to fuck off

i'll stick with my normal job not related to gaming so that way i'm not basing my life around a game only to be kicked out of a "prestigious organization" of cs lamers and lose my only source of income

i don't care if this "screams jealousy" you can assume whatever you want

7 prestigious people forming and organization doesnt necessaryly mean the organization will be prestigious as well.

Kinda like the G8 summit BANG POLITIC REFERENCE LEADING TO HUGE FLAMES

no flames :[

yeah, guess it slipped by the esr flame sensors.

Yes but who decides who the top 7 are?
Answer: THEY DO.
hence why the g7 is the laughing stock of esports. <--and that goes for any team that associates with them.

Its not like there is some official committee with no ties to these teams that makes the choice of who the current top 7 teams are based on fair and legitimate criteria.

However it is nice having so called professional organizations like the g7 around, it reminds us of how low people like sam mathews, alex garfield, bds etc will stoop to try and make something of themselves in a fledgling industry that is headed no where fast. These bottom feeders that mooch off the talent of ignorant naive teenagers and money from sponsors only exist for one reason. To remind morons that buy into their crap of how low on the food chain they really are.

are there other teams you would suggest are as important/large/"prestigious"?

The point here is that these teams really aren't worth squat at this point in time. Any corporation looking to run its own team could very easily buy players from any of these teams to make a dominant squad in any game.

And as for a lowly salary of $1500 a month for a player (sad)? ... Yes, this just irradiates prestige..

Lets be honest, anyone here with an above average job can make $1500 a month in their sleep. And these guys are supposed to be profesionals.

There is no prestige to be had in esports right now, and anybody attempting to boost their image by making claims of being "prestigious" or "the best" are no better than Angel Munoz himself promoting the illusion into the minds of young naive gamers that the industry is on the rise and esports are going somewhere!

So to answer your question: "are there other teams you would suggest are as important/large/"prestigious"?

Answer:
You're trying to compare a mom and pop shop with walmart or costco when you use "teams" and "important" or "prestigious" in the same sentence.
No esports team to date holds any actual value to anyone that knows anything esports at this point in time. It's an industry built on lies and fakers, and morons like you just eat this shit for breakfast.

Wakeup Kid.

wow. you're the naive one. why are you even on here then if you believe it all to be lies? i know i personally don't enjoy partaking in something that's all lies.

I enjoy playing quake like everyone else on this website. The difference between you and me is that I know when to draw the line. Whereas you seem to believe that the sky is the limit, tbh you don't have to go much further to hit the glass ceiling.

draw what line? you seem to be swaying pretty easily from the original argument that the teams IN g7 are the largest, most influential, and most widespread in esports.

No esports team to date holds any actual value to anyone that knows anything esports at this point in time. It's an industry built on lies and fakers, and morons like you just eat this shit for breakfast.

Perhaps you should do some further studies before coming to such conclusions.

How about:
Air Force ACE
CJ ENTUS
eSTRO
Woongjin Stars
KTF MagicNs
Hwaseung Oz
MBCGame HERO
OnGameNet SPARKYZ
Samsung KHAN
SK Telecom T1
STX SouL
WeMade FO

I can give you an example of the salaries in two of the teams.

Name, Total income, Yearly salary.
SK1T
iloveoov - $450,000 - $155,000
Kingdom - $300,000 - $100,000
GoRush - $300,000 - $100,000

KTF
Reach - $400,000 - $140,000
YellOw - $330,000 - $110,000
Nal_rA - $330,000 - $110,000

lol, and where did these figures arise from? Also where are the majority of these teams and players based out of? The answer of course is Asia which completely negates your point.

This is a Euro/NA site and I'm talking specifically about Euro/NA gaming, teams that have cs and cod and wc3 and quake teams. Please tell me what the monthly salaries of these players are.

Of course, you can always change your standpoint afterwards. But what you said "No esports team to date holds any actual value to anyone" is simply not true.

Since its obvious that there are plenty of esport teams that are doing really well.

Business is important, but you don't want to be a sell-out cunt.

G7, it's so political seeming. Have to be careful with politics. Look at Obama... caught up. Can barely move. If he wasn't president, he could tell everyone to suck an elephant's asshole.

i don't get it.

WHO get kicked out of WHAT??

suggestion: change this to minor cs news

MYM was hardly famous for its CS team.

if i was any of the G7 teams I'd do exactly what they're doing. Make an organisation to prolong my own interests and fob it off as some kind of international powerhouse.

"Due to the troubles MYM has had recently"

....such as?

such as them being taken over by the venture cuntpitalists

don't hate on venture capitalists.

Well I am all for the underground grassroots e-sports and hate anything that has to do with the polished idiotic fake pro-gaming fad.

then maybe you should stick to games no one plays.

CGS my ass

Dignitas?

how the fuck did this get so many comments

We love to hate G7.