Do you take competitive console FPS serously?

  • 66 results
  • 1
  • 2
Edited 9 months, 21 days ago

Poll: Do you take competitive console FPS serously? (47 votes)

Yes 9%
No 66%
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.

#51 Posted by enzyme36 (1659 posts) -

Halo yes

Everything else is on PC and just a fun romp

#52 Posted by shawn30 (4367 posts) -

@Shielder7 said:

@santoron said:

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

This.

This. Gaming is entertainment and competitive. But serious, lol. No. When my Xbox One starts spiting out $100 bills or docking my checking account at the end of matches, then I will take it serious.

#53 Edited by Wasdie (50667 posts) -

Competitive Halo yes because the game was built around the confines of a controller with light aim assist. It's one of the only consoles shooters truly built around the platform. Until Halo Reach the series also put all players on an equal footing. It was a truly great competitive experience.

Competitive CoD is a joke as well as any where there are unlocks and whatnot that aren't part of some match based metagame (like CS). So that rules out pretty much all of the popular console FPSs.

#54 Posted by JetB1ackNewYear (2930 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Competitive Halo yes because the game was built around the confines of a controller with light aim assist. It's one of the only consoles shooters truly built around the platform. Until Halo Reach the series also put all players on an equal footing. It was a truly great competitive experience.

Competitive CoD is a joke as well as any where there are unlocks and whatnot that aren't part of some match based metagame (like CS). So that rules out pretty much all of the popular console FPSs.

This is exactly how i feel. I love watching LCS and recently CS:GO competitive matches (playing in some myself now) But watching COD games is way too boring for some reason.

#55 Posted by cfisher2833 (2150 posts) -

That wasn't even particularly good Quake Live footage, as the guy isn't really demonstrating the intricacies of the movement much in that video. You can't really compare the two. Quake Live is just in a different stratosphere when it comes to skill.

I don't take many competitive FPSs too seriously though. Playing Insurgency atm--fun as hell.

#56 Posted by PapaTrop (1710 posts) -

There's an argument to be made for both Halo 2 and 3. They were imbalanced in some aspects (though what game isn't?), but overall they were pretty legit as far as how necessary it was for team communication, map control, and weapon control which are the makings of great competitive arena shooters. That coupled with mostly-great weapon design and balance, and map design as well. I really hope that Halo MCC collection is hugely popular, and brings back the glory of Halo 2 and 3, and I love that Halo 1 will also officially have online multiplayer now. Halo 4 is rather terrible as far as Halo multiplayer is concerned, but it's still a step over any other console FPS.

As far as literally every other FPS series on consoles go? lol

#57 Posted by DJ-Lafleur (34330 posts) -

Not any less so than any other competitive gaming?

#58 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (7909 posts) -

I don't take any form of competitive gaming seriously, really.

#59 Posted by PannicAtack (21040 posts) -

Shooters in general aren't the big place for competitive gaming nowadays outside of maybe Counter-Strike. Not since Quake Live fell out of favor, anyway.

Now it's mainly MOBAs and strategy games.

#60 Posted by MiiiiV (537 posts) -

Being a pc gamer mostly, I think competitive fps games are much better on pc, given the advantages in frame rate, responsiveness and precision. But I really like the idea of everyone being on a level playing field, with the same controllers, the same frame rate and response time. It really makes for a fair competition.

#61 Posted by Bruin1986 (1369 posts) -

Your real thread should be:

Do you take videogames seriously?

Correct answer:

No, they are videogames.

#62 Posted by CrownKingArthur (5262 posts) -

the gameplay of cod in that video looks ... terrible. i call that 'camping'.

#63 Edited by KingsofQueens (2250 posts) -

Nope. Even with the XBOX platform being my preferred platform. I don't compete. I don't care enough for MP online nor do I play MP very often, but just for Shits & Giggles.

It's fun with Coop with friends though, but that's about it.

#64 Posted by RoboCopISJesus (1629 posts) -

Nope. This is mostly due to the low skill cap of fumblesticks, and slow paced gameplay, on top of rather large hitboxes with magnetic bullets.

It's not just FPS, Console competitive anything is a joke compared to the competitive and/or e-sports scenes of PC. They gens years behind in this aspect of gaming.

The only thing that even remotely comes close is the Fighting scene....and even that is far behind.

#65 Posted by SolidGame_basic (19333 posts) -

It's a video game, I hope you're not taking it too seriously...

#66 Edited by RoboCopISJesus (1629 posts) -

@SolidGame_basic said:

It's a video game, I hope you're not taking it too seriously...

many pc gamer e-sports players earn more than anyone in this thread.