Do you take competitive console FPS serously?

  • 66 results
  • 1
  • 2
Edited 4 months, 13 days ago

Poll: Do you take competitive console FPS serously? (46 votes)

Yes 9%
No 65%
To be honest, i'm surprised Bill Murrays still alive 26%

Hello my friends. I was on steam looking at this video and wondered if it was bias.

I will freely admit to being a snob. I view it as immorally wrong and when I see console people lined up with head sets and a control pad playing Call Of Duty while men shout things, I see it as a joke compared to something like Quake 3.

It is wrong to have this line of thinking? What are you personal thoughts on console FPS as a competitive sport in comparison to pc gaming titles such as Quake 3.

#1 Posted by santoron (7775 posts) -

I don't take any shooter seriously, PC or Console. It is pretty funny listening to people that do, and even better listening to Shooter snobs try and make their game/platform sound better than any other.

And TBH, I really am kind of surprised about Bill Murray. If 1/10th of the stories are true, his time in Chicago alone would've killed most men.

And that was when he was poor, and hadn't hit Hollywood...

#2 Posted by Shielder7 (5152 posts) -

@santoron said:

I don't take any shooter seriously, PC or Console.

This.

#3 Posted by Netret0120 (2207 posts) -

It's just a shooter. I don't care what title it has as long as I am having fun with it.

#4 Posted by Minishdriveby (10033 posts) -

I don't follow the e-sports scene. I don't find it very interesting to watch competitive matches, probably because I'm also not interested in competitive multiplayer games or modes.

#5 Edited by uninspiredcup (9006 posts) -

@Netret0120 said:

It's just a shooter. I don't care what title it has as long as I am having fun with it.

I don't like this opinion at all.

#6 Edited by BldgIrsh (2694 posts) -

Eh.. Whoever made the video sure did nitpick the clips... He used SnD for the cod's perspective which is supposed to be more tactile (If that's the term for cod.)

Anyways competitive shooter in general is meh, but it isn't as terrible as some people think.

#7 Posted by Cloud_imperium (3724 posts) -

No , I don't . Competitive shooters on PC are much more fun to watch/play imo . New Unreal Tournament is looking good , even in pre alpha the gameplay looks solid .

#8 Edited by uninspiredcup (9006 posts) -

Thinking about it, it's probably difficult for Call Of Duty as a competitive game due to the sheer volume and frequency the games released. Likewise the disconnected DLC of maps, weapons, perks and so on.

A game like Quake 3 (in the whimsical wonderful days ) you bought Quake 3. Possibly Team Arena expansion pack. That was that.

#9 Posted by BldgIrsh (2694 posts) -

@uninspiredcup: I used to enjoy watching competitive cod on twitch. So I do know some answers. Like they don't allow DLC in mlg/game battles because they want everyone to have access. (Main reason why the current DLC have random events that can kill people at anytime.) Aswell mostly everything is banned for perks/guns which is why I stopped watching it because it basically has turned into a SMG/sniper/shotty only game. Pros have already expressed their reason to play competitive and its due to the money and they do despise cod in general.

#10 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (13704 posts) -

Without Splitscreen.... Nope !

#11 Edited by mems_1224 (47284 posts) -

Consoles are where the real competitors are.

#12 Edited by Bigboi500 (30093 posts) -

Games (even competitive ones) are for having fun. If you're better than someone else at pressing buttons, have better reaction time, and are just generally better at games than others in a pretend play world, that's fine. Just don't take it too seriously because that would make you pretty pathetic in the real world.

#13 Posted by Heirren (17361 posts) -

Both the same. Both jokes as a competitive "sport".

#14 Edited by marinko123 (414 posts) -
@uninspiredcup said:

Thinking about it, it's probably difficult for Call Of Duty as a competitive game due to the sheer volume and frequency the games released. Likewise the disconnected DLC of maps, weapons, perks and so on.

A game like Quake 3 (in the whimsical wonderful days ) you bought Quake 3. Possibly Team Arena expansion pack. That was that.

1. They played SnD in those clips, which is supposed to be slow, other modes are pretty frantic. I bet you haven't even watched any proper cod tournament match.

2. Even if there were perks in cod dlcs, competitive cod is not played with dlc.

3. Ghosts is ass, BO2 was much more fun to play and watch, hopefully we'll be getting back to that soon.

I will freely admit to being a snob.

Then stop making shit threads.

#15 Posted by uninspiredcup (9006 posts) -

@marinko123 said:
@uninspiredcup said:

Thinking about it, it's probably difficult for Call Of Duty as a competitive game due to the sheer volume and frequency the games released. Likewise the disconnected DLC of maps, weapons, perks and so on.

A game like Quake 3 (in the whimsical wonderful days ) you bought Quake 3. Possibly Team Arena expansion pack. That was that.

1. They played SnD in those clips, which is supposed to be slow, other modes are pretty frantic. I bet you haven't even watched any proper cod tournament match.

2. Even if there were perks in cod dlcs, competitive cod is not played with dlc.

3. Ghosts is ass, BO2 was much more fun to play and watch, hopefully we'll be getting back to that soon.

I will freely admit to being a snob.

Then stop making shit threads.

I respect your opinion my friend. It's very life enriching.

#16 Posted by parkurtommo (27248 posts) -

I enjoy playing them. But watching? Nah, never even crossed my mind to watch someone play CoD or BF. Unlike in the MOBA competitive scene, where you actually learn from the players and enrich your own playstyle (making the game more complex and rewarding).

There isn't enough complexity in these games for it to be "educational". And to me that is the only value of watching competitive games every once in a while.

Counterstrike is the only exception. Now that is an actually truly balanced and complex FPS, it requires dedication.

#17 Edited by marinko123 (414 posts) -
@uninspiredcup said:

I respect your opinion my friend. It's very life enriching.

Haha. I mean, it's obvious to me that you know next to nothing about competitive cod, why make such a biased thread then? You don't see me downtalking quake or cs:go because I happen to like competitive cod. BO2 competitive was excellent and very fun to watch, shame everyone's so judgemental about it.

#18 Edited by uninspiredcup (9006 posts) -

@marinko123 said:
@uninspiredcup said:

I respect your opinion my friend. It's very life enriching.

Haha. I mean, it's obvious to me that you know next to nothing about competitive cod

My friend, as a former professional Quake 3 player. To me, Call Of Duty is like watching children with hot-wheels pretend they are professional racers.

If you played Quake 3 as I did, your comprehension would be widened and a greater understanding would be achieved.

Very soon Quake Live will be relaunched on steam very soon, a prime opportunity to see a game designed for men.

#19 Posted by cainetao11 (17748 posts) -

I don't take any of this seriously. Not Quake, Counter Strike, COD, any of it. I think pulling some high horse card when its essentially the same thing :competing in a video game is taking it too seriously. Question: why is it the gamers that put down competitive COD are never winning tournaments at it? If its so not difficult, get in there and mop up and make some easy money.

#20 Posted by uninspiredcup (9006 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

:competing in a video game is taking it too seriously.

Twitter is a video game. The worlds most powerful leaders take part.

#21 Posted by cainetao11 (17748 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

@cainetao11 said:

:competing in a video game is taking it too seriously.

Twitter is a video game. The worlds most powerful leaders take part.

With the state of the world, is that supposed to put me in awe?

#22 Posted by intotheminx (703 posts) -

No lol. I'm burned out on MP fps games. UT does have my attention though. I also can't take someone playing a fps game with a controller seriously. Until you experience a M/K you can't understand how precise it is.

#23 Posted by Gue1 (10214 posts) -

If you don't take it seriously then your chances of having fun with it are slim to none. The point of a competitive mode it's being competitive, you want to win or at least challenge yourself because that's the only thing you can do.

#24 Edited by uninspiredcup (9006 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

@cainetao11 said:

:competing in a video game is taking it too seriously.

Twitter is a video game. The worlds most powerful leaders take part.

With the state of the world, is that supposed to put me in awe?

But the state of the world (partly due to technology) is better than it has ever been.

I dono if you are aware of like, the last 2000 or so years, might be a good idea to look it up.

#25 Posted by marinko123 (414 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

My friend, as a former professional Quake 3 player. To me, Call Of Duty is like watching children with hot-wheels pretend they are professional racers.

If you played Quake 3 as I did, your comprehension would be widened and a greater understanding would be achieved.

Very soon Quake Live will be relaunched on steam very soon, a prime opportunity to see a game designed for men.

Sooo, playing quake 3 makes you know everything about cod? Flawless logic mate. By your posts in this topic (especially because of vid in op) I can only judge that you've never seen any comp cod match and therefore I'm not sure how you're able to discuss anything about it, let alone spout such elitist drivel.

#26 Posted by cainetao11 (17748 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

@cainetao11 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

@cainetao11 said:

:competing in a video game is taking it too seriously.

Twitter is a video game. The worlds most powerful leaders take part.

With the state of the world, is that supposed to put me in awe?

But the state of the world (partly due to technology) is better than it has ever been.

I dono if you are aware of like, the last 2000 or so years, might be a good idea to look it up.

Sure, will do. We're basically fumbling around trying not to exterminate each other. Great, enlightened state the species is in.

#27 Posted by uninspiredcup (9006 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

@cainetao11 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

@cainetao11 said:

:competing in a video game is taking it too seriously.

Twitter is a video game. The worlds most powerful leaders take part.

With the state of the world, is that supposed to put me in awe?

But the state of the world (partly due to technology) is better than it has ever been.

I dono if you are aware of like, the last 2000 or so years, might be a good idea to look it up.

Sure, will do. We're basically fumbling around trying not to exterminate each other. Great, enlightened state the species is in.

My friend, this is a overly simplstic and I would argue it's simply self indulgent ignorance. You are that use to the luxury's naturally provided, they are taken for granted. Tis the case with most people.

Even 100 years ago, if you had a cut and an infection, in most cases, that would be it. You're fucked. Dead.

Now (due to systems in place specifically due to social enlightenment) in the majority of places in the world, it is a humans right, regardless of who they are and what they have done to receive medical treatment. As you read this, hundreds of thousands of life are being saved.

But, oh oh oh oh ohweee, the world is bad. Gotta read the Catcher and the rye... oh oh oh weeeeeeee


Load of shite.

.

#28 Posted by uninspiredcup (9006 posts) -

@marinko123 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

My friend, as a former professional Quake 3 player. To me, Call Of Duty is like watching children with hot-wheels pretend they are professional racers.

If you played Quake 3 as I did, your comprehension would be widened and a greater understanding would be achieved.

Very soon Quake Live will be relaunched on steam very soon, a prime opportunity to see a game designed for men.

Sooo, playing quake 3 makes you know everything about cod? Flawless logic mate. By your posts in this topic (especially because of vid in op) I can only judge that you've never seen any comp cod match and therefore I'm not sure how you're able to discuss anything about it, let alone spout such elitist drivel.

Oh, my friend, I most certainly have. In fact, the one I did see was very memorable.

#29 Posted by Bigboi500 (30093 posts) -
@uninspiredcup said:

But, oh oh oh oh ohweee, the world is bad. Gotta read the Catcher and the rye... oh oh oh weeeeeeee

Well, the world is full of phonies like yourself. ;)

#30 Edited by cainetao11 (17748 posts) -

@uninspiredcup: wow talk about overly simplistic view. "oh the world is great because some of the population can go to a dr"

Mine is one extreme yours is the other. Doctors aren't saving the millions being killed in Gaza, africa, or the middle east in general.

#31 Posted by ShepardCommandr (2746 posts) -

I don't play MP

#32 Posted by Telekill (4714 posts) -

I found early last gen that I'm far more competitive (in a bad way) than I had originally thought. I was playing in a Resistance FoM tournament and had won a few rounds. I reached a competitor that was just kicking my ass and I ended up chucking the PS3 controller pretty hard. The controller's analog sticks were completely broken. $50 penalty fee for raging. It was then that I realized I couldn't do that shit anymore and stopped playing most online competitive games. Luckily, the industry made it easy for me by making tons of trash FPS games that I wouldn't enjoy anyway.

#33 Posted by Kinthalis (5322 posts) -

No, and I don't like playing wiht people who do. I play multi-player purely for fun, and if it's good multiplayer, even losing is fun.

Playing with people that take the game seriously is usually a total drag because they'll get upset if anyone does something "wrong", and they go all quiet if we start losing. It's just not fun.

Now, not everyone who plays the game seriously does this. I have a few friends who take it very seriously are involved in competitions and stuff, BUT when they are playing with friends they let all of that go and just relax and have fun. But they are the exception.

#34 Edited by uninspiredcup (9006 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@uninspiredcup:

Mine is one extreme yours is the other. Doctors aren't saving the millions being killed in Gaza, africa, or the middle east in general.

No, mine is grounded and logical, yours is complete and utter horse shit.

For example... We use to think we where the center of the universe and the Sun Revolved around us.... In recent times, we use to think of black holes as simple theory, because you obviously can't see a black hole. Now we have seen the center of our own galaxy and a black hole in action by the effects is has.

That my friend is sound, logically grounded example of enlightenment.

And saying "oh oh wars, oh oh wars oweeee the wars, peoples hurts.. oh the Wars". Wars are actually also a sign of progress. Without mistakes ans stumbles, you do not learn. Nor do you progress. At no point did I claim we have reached the end of the road however to say we haven't become better is just bullshit.

A very prevalent theory exists on how humanity will progress, eventually reaching a "civilization level" rather than countries. You can watch this Asian man with grey hair explain and suit will explain.

#35 Posted by LegatoSkyheart (25611 posts) -

PC is where it's at for Competitive gaming.......unless it's fighting games. Consoles are okay for Fighting games.

#36 Edited by cainetao11 (17748 posts) -

@uninspiredcup: ok I don't know why your bringing space telescopic pictures into this. Look, its no secret here you are far from grounded. You come across as pretty egotistical and that is the opposite of grounded. And no where did I say we NEVER advanced, did I? You get uppity but are guilty of the same. That's grounded?

Did you serve? Where and when? Don't talk to me about wars or the wounded if you haven't. You're full of safe at home, first world, opinionated bullshit. Nothing grounded about that.

#37 Posted by Aljosa23 (25132 posts) -

I had fun with competitive Gears of War back in the day, especially with a full party of 4-5 people. Good times. Other than that, I don't take any kind of multiplayer shooter seriously.

#38 Edited by uninspiredcup (9006 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@uninspiredcup: ok I don't know why your bringing space telescopic pictures into this. at.

My friend, the Q man from startrek explains for your mind to comprehend.

Truly an intellectual show for intellectuals. New modern startrek for dummys.

#39 Posted by Netret0120 (2207 posts) -

@uninspiredcup:

You don't have to agree with it:-) I think anyone who takes it seriously other than people who get paid to play needs to evaluate what is important in their lives.

#40 Posted by marinko123 (414 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

Oh, my friend, I most certainly have. In fact, the one I did see was very memorable.

So you base the whole judgement of the game on an outtake of some of the players trash talking? Did you watch the world cup? In some matches fights almost broke out because of fouls/bad ref decisions etc., people get killed over football... gonna disregard football as well? Didn't some LoL or dota players get a lifetime ban because of racist and toxic behavior? Ahhhh shame that you now have to disregard two of the biggest games on your precious PC.

Besides, you're still clueless about the gameplay in competitive cod and you still haven't watched a real good and exciting match.

#41 Posted by Maddie_Larkin (6565 posts) -

So we are talking about the skill involved? or simply if the game Works in a competetive setting?

If it is about skill, then most console FPS games are out per default. Hitboxes the size of houses and aim assist is outright horrible, and usually a way to make an fps Work on a controller to begin with. This will not change until controlers become more then lowest common "Works so so" with all genres.

However there are a few that Works, and from the skill level involved I would say that Halo stands around the peak.

If we talk a game that Works in a turnament setting, then near all games could Work. CoD would be a prime example since it is fairly popular, and Thus has a potential huge target demographics.

If the question was if I accept competetive FPS games on conesole at all? Sure, I mean there have been competetive pong, so if a bunch of people came together for a competetive match, then I would acknowlage that just as much as I would PC FPS tournament.

#42 Posted by cainetao11 (17748 posts) -

@uninspiredcup: Truly an intellectual show for intellectuals. New modern startrek for dummy

I don't watch television, I read. See, most people who frequently state something, as you have with the intellectual stuff, are trying to prove something. Question is to whom?

#43 Posted by speedfreak48t5p (8207 posts) -

Can't take your threads seriously, that's for sure.

#44 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (7496 posts) -

I don't take any FPS seriously.

#45 Edited by Malta_1980 (11404 posts) -

i take my life, my family, my work & my friends seriously... I play games for fun on PC, consoles & handhelds !!!

#46 Posted by clone01 (24843 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

@Netret0120 said:

It's just a shooter. I don't care what title it has as long as I am having fun with it.

I don't like this opinion at all.

Well, no one here likes you very much, so that seems pretty fair.

#47 Posted by L0ngshot (85 posts) -

Don't think there is even a comparison between Quake/CS and console shooters if you're talking about e-sports.

#48 Posted by clone01 (24843 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@uninspiredcup: ok I don't know why your bringing space telescopic pictures into this. Look, its no secret here you are far from grounded. You come across as pretty egotistical and that is the opposite of grounded. And no where did I say we NEVER advanced, did I? You get uppity but are guilty of the same. That's grounded?

Did you serve? Where and when? Don't talk to me about wars or the wounded if you haven't. You're full of safe at home, first world, opinionated bullshit. Nothing grounded about that.

He didn't serve. A bunch of us called us out on his BS about that. He's just a troll. And not even a very good one.

#49 Edited by bforrester420 (1662 posts) -

The only FPS I played last gen was the first Modern Warfare and Borderlands. Neither game did I take online. I don't think I played a single game online last gen.

I would rather beat-off with sandpaper than watch other people play video games.

#50 Posted by pyro1245 (873 posts) -

Hahaha. FPS with a controller, competitive? Hah I'll go with Bill Murray because this topic is silly.

Most of the console FPS have some sort of XP system so the more the play the better your character is. True competitive FPS are arena shooters in which every character is the same. They require sharp reflexes and a mouse for extra sensitive aiming.

I also don't see why consoles can't have this type of a game. You should be able to just hook a keyboard and mouse up (obviously we wouldn't allow controllers, but who would want to play like that since you'd just get owned).