quitting tf2?
see you in a few weeks
Who is leaving?
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
TwitchThe real reason CoD is bad is because the competitive CoD scene plays on Xbox which is limited to 30fps and uses controllers and auto-aim. Please understand this is like trying to hold a triathlon where all the athletes have to ride BigWheels and wear floaties while swimming.
CoD actually runs at 60FPS. They tend to cut the resolution/graphics more than other developers to keep the game running at 60FPS.
CoD still isn't a very good competetive game.
[quote=Twitch]The real reason CoD is bad is because the competitive CoD scene plays on Xbox which is limited to 30fps and uses controllers and auto-aim. Please understand this is like trying to hold a triathlon where all the athletes have to ride BigWheels and wear floaties while swimming.[/quote]
CoD actually runs at 60FPS. They tend to cut the resolution/graphics more than other developers to keep the game running at 60FPS.
CoD still isn't a very good competetive game.
CoD actually runs at 60FPS. They tend to cut the resolution/graphics more than other developers to keep the game running at 60FPS.
CoD still isn't a very good competetive game.
KingReptarTwitchThe real reason CoD is bad is because the competitive CoD scene plays on Xbox which is limited to 30fps and uses controllers and auto-aim. Please understand this is like trying to hold a triathlon where all the athletes have to ride BigWheels and wear floaties while swimming.
CoD actually runs at 60FPS. They tend to cut the resolution/graphics more than other developers to keep the game running at 60FPS.
CoD still isn't a very good competetive game.
shootmania also runs at 60fps
and it's still bad
[quote=KingReptar][quote=Twitch]The real reason CoD is bad is because the competitive CoD scene plays on Xbox which is limited to 30fps and uses controllers and auto-aim. Please understand this is like trying to hold a triathlon where all the athletes have to ride BigWheels and wear floaties while swimming.[/quote]
CoD actually runs at 60FPS. They tend to cut the resolution/graphics more than other developers to keep the game running at 60FPS.
CoD still isn't a very good competetive game.[/quote]
shootmania also runs at 60fps
and it's still bad
CoD actually runs at 60FPS. They tend to cut the resolution/graphics more than other developers to keep the game running at 60FPS.
CoD still isn't a very good competetive game.[/quote]
shootmania also runs at 60fps
and it's still bad
TwitchThe real reason CoD is bad is because the competitive CoD scene plays on Xbox which is limited to 30fps and uses controllers and auto-aim. Please understand this is like trying to hold a triathlon where all the athletes have to ride BigWheels and wear floaties while swimming.
The real reason why Call of Duty is bad is not because of a sub-community playing the game a way they would rather want to that isn't vanilla. The real reason why Call of Duty is bad is because it's had the same basic core for the last half decade or so. Call of Duty 4 and 5 were remarkably fun. It made the series incredibly popular. They have kept the game generally the same since, though adding in more ridiculous bullshit each year, completely overshadowing anything they do that's an improvement. This is also a valid reason as to why the series is a joke now. In fact, there are a lot of other reasons, big and small, but this thread isn't even about this.
The only reason to bring up playing with a controller and having auto-aim is when those who do it try to argue that it takes less skill to play with kb+m.
[quote=Twitch]The real reason CoD is bad is because the competitive CoD scene plays on Xbox which is limited to 30fps and uses controllers and auto-aim. Please understand this is like trying to hold a triathlon where all the athletes have to ride BigWheels and wear floaties while swimming.[/quote]
The real reason why Call of Duty is bad is not because of a sub-community playing the game a way they would rather want to that isn't vanilla. The real reason why Call of Duty is bad is because it's had the same basic core for the last half decade or so. Call of Duty 4 and 5 were remarkably fun. It made the series incredibly popular. They have kept the game generally the same since, though adding in more ridiculous bullshit each year, completely overshadowing anything they do that's an improvement. This is also a valid reason as to why the series is a joke now. In fact, there are a lot of other reasons, big and small, but this thread isn't even about this.
The only reason to bring up playing with a controller and having auto-aim is when those who do it try to argue that it takes less skill to play with kb+m.
The real reason why Call of Duty is bad is not because of a sub-community playing the game a way they would rather want to that isn't vanilla. The real reason why Call of Duty is bad is because it's had the same basic core for the last half decade or so. Call of Duty 4 and 5 were remarkably fun. It made the series incredibly popular. They have kept the game generally the same since, though adding in more ridiculous bullshit each year, completely overshadowing anything they do that's an improvement. This is also a valid reason as to why the series is a joke now. In fact, there are a lot of other reasons, big and small, but this thread isn't even about this.
The only reason to bring up playing with a controller and having auto-aim is when those who do it try to argue that it takes less skill to play with kb+m.
motherfuckers complainin that EU and NA have things bad due to "super teams"
atleast you guys have "super teams"
meanwhile in Australia. "super team"
motherfuckers complainin that EU and NA have things bad due to "super teams"
atleast you guys have "super team[b]s[/b]"
meanwhile in Australia. "super team"
atleast you guys have "super team[b]s[/b]"
meanwhile in Australia. "super team"
Thread back on track,
I'm quitting for a bit (apartment wide wifi blows) because I physically can't play. I'll still map though.
Thread back on track,
I'm quitting for a bit (apartment wide wifi blows) because I physically can't play. I'll still map though.
I'm quitting for a bit (apartment wide wifi blows) because I physically can't play. I'll still map though.
it_is_crownActually no one ever leaves tf2.
i really love this post, nice one my friend! :)
[quote=it_is_crown]Actually no one ever leaves tf2.[/quote]
i really love this post, nice one my friend! :)
i really love this post, nice one my friend! :)
Gunblademotherfuckers complainin that EU and NA have things bad due to "super teams"
atleast you guys have "super teams"
meanwhile in Australia. "super team"
Not only that, but our super team has literally won everything since owl 2. We just finished owl 11, and we run two of these a year.
4 years a team had been nearly uncontested.
[quote=Gunblade]motherfuckers complainin that EU and NA have things bad due to "super teams"
atleast you guys have "super team[b]s[/b]"
meanwhile in Australia. "super team"[/quote]
Not only that, but our super team has literally won everything since owl 2. We just finished owl 11, and we run two of these a year.
4 years a team had been nearly uncontested.
atleast you guys have "super team[b]s[/b]"
meanwhile in Australia. "super team"[/quote]
Not only that, but our super team has literally won everything since owl 2. We just finished owl 11, and we run two of these a year.
4 years a team had been nearly uncontested.
Gunblademotherfuckers complainin that EU and NA have things bad due to "super teams"
atleast you guys have "super teams"
meanwhile in Australia. "super team"
It's not much better in EU to be honest, the only seasons Epsilon didn't win since Season 8 are Season 9 (didn't play), Season 11 (2nd place) and Season 17 (didn't play). The contest is closer for sure but the outcome is usually the same.
[quote=Gunblade]motherfuckers complainin that EU and NA have things bad due to "super teams"
atleast you guys have "super team[b]s[/b]"
meanwhile in Australia. "super team"[/quote]
It's not much better in EU to be honest, the only seasons Epsilon didn't win since Season 8 are Season 9 (didn't play), Season 11 (2nd place) and Season 17 (didn't play). The contest is closer for sure but the outcome is usually the same.
[img]http://i.gyazo.com/65e44ae9f36887ef937fc5fc81f8dcb2.png[/img]
atleast you guys have "super team[b]s[/b]"
meanwhile in Australia. "super team"[/quote]
It's not much better in EU to be honest, the only seasons Epsilon didn't win since Season 8 are Season 9 (didn't play), Season 11 (2nd place) and Season 17 (didn't play). The contest is closer for sure but the outcome is usually the same.
[img]http://i.gyazo.com/65e44ae9f36887ef937fc5fc81f8dcb2.png[/img]
God bless JoeyC, saviour of the EU scene. If not for him mercing, they'd have won everything.
God bless JoeyC, saviour of the EU scene. If not for him mercing, they'd have won everything.
d_bif you even put the slightest bit of thought in it csgo more exciting to watch than tf2.......
there are no 5+minute stalemates in cs like there are in tf2
there is no ubercharge in cs
there is no 10 minute stalemate timer in cs
in cs youre guaranteed to see action every 1 minute 45 seconds
The "action" in CS:GO is a fuckin stalemate in itself... Just back and forth strafing from cover and taking popshots. It's like a tank battle game. If people like that, that's fine by me. I can also see how there's a lot of skill involved.. thats not the point.
1 min 45s is is almost enough time for 3 ubercharges btw, so plenty of action in that timeframe in TF2 :)
maybe if you have a.d.d
i honestly think that the only people that find watching csgo dull are people that play tf2 and other twitch shooters like quake
yes
and people who find american football dull are people who play or watch soccer, etc... people who like sweet drinks dont like dry white wine or an IPA... point being?
i honestly dont see how someone can call csgo boring when in quake dueling people jsut +back and low scorelines are extremely common and ctf is just a huge shitfest where nothing happens for 5 years while people build up a stack and then die instantly and then you wait another 5 years for something else to happen
How can Quake be just +back when we more than often see 10-20 frag comebacks? The most amazing games emerge from a 2 frag deficit with 1 minute left on the timer, and the player behind trying to outsmart the +backer. Also, if +back somehow truly is the problem, there is always CPM. According to your reasoning, CPM must be the superior game above all.
just look at the viewership
6.3k viewers for i52
20k viewers for quakecon (i think i dont really remember)
~400k viewers for esl one
Idk what youre trying to point out by this. People like to watch what they play mostly. Most people that play PC FPS play (what i would call) 'pseudo realistic hitscan shooters' (PRHS). I think there are many reasaons for this. Playing soldier, cowboys or cops and robbers is something every kid grows up with, there's a certain fascination with simulations of lifelike warfare and violence. The average PRHS also has a very moderate learning curve, as it is mainly based on wasd + pointing your crosshair and clicking. Every gun is about the same, just different damage/ammo/spread/fire rate modifiers. It is easy and comprehensible to pick up (im not saying its not hard to master!) and easy to identify with due to the photorealistic theme.
The pick up and play thing is also why FPS is declining in popularity. If you haven't grown up with PC FPS, and arent used to interfacing with your game through keyboard movement and mouse freelook, it might pose a serious learning curve to actually get decent at any FPS. The younger pc gaming crowd, who might have grown up gaming mainly on consoles, will look towards MOBAS, as there is no mechanic "gap" between using your internet browser and clicking hyperlinks and issuing commands to your hero in a MOBA.
Didn't even mention the obvious fact that there is very little of a gap between CS pub or matchmaking and comp. It's just smaller teams, for the rest the dynamics stay the same. Obviously a majority of CS pub players are interested in watching comp.
So yeah, it's obvious that a game like CS (and CoD, and BF) will always be a more popular FPS. It's also obvious that CS will always have a bigger comp scene and bigger viewership.
There's no such thing as a 'better' game though.
[quote=d_b]if you even put the slightest bit of thought in it csgo more exciting to watch than tf2.......
there are no 5+minute stalemates in cs like there are in tf2
there is no ubercharge in cs
there is no 10 minute stalemate timer in cs
in cs youre guaranteed to see action every 1 minute 45 seconds[/quote]
The "action" in CS:GO is a fuckin stalemate in itself... Just back and forth strafing from cover and taking popshots. It's like a tank battle game. If people like that, that's fine by me. I can also see how there's a lot of skill involved.. thats not the point.
1 min 45s is is almost enough time for 3 ubercharges btw, so plenty of action in that timeframe in TF2 :)
[quote]maybe if you have a.d.d
i honestly think that the only people that find watching csgo dull are people that play tf2 and other twitch shooters like quake[/quote]
yes
and people who find american football dull are people who play or watch soccer, etc... people who like sweet drinks dont like dry white wine or an IPA... point being?
[quote]i honestly dont see how someone can call csgo boring when in quake dueling people jsut +back and low scorelines are extremely common and ctf is just a huge shitfest where nothing happens for 5 years while people build up a stack and then die instantly and then you wait another 5 years for something else to happen[/quote]
How can Quake be just +back when we more than often see 10-20 frag comebacks? The most amazing games emerge from a 2 frag deficit with 1 minute left on the timer, and the player behind trying to outsmart the +backer. Also, if +back somehow truly is the problem, there is always CPM. According to your reasoning, CPM must be the superior game above all.
[quote]just look at the viewership
6.3k viewers for i52
20k viewers for quakecon (i think i dont really remember)
~400k viewers for esl one[/quote]
Idk what youre trying to point out by this. People like to watch what they play mostly. Most people that play PC FPS play (what i would call) 'pseudo realistic hitscan shooters' (PRHS). I think there are many reasaons for this. Playing soldier, cowboys or cops and robbers is something every kid grows up with, there's a certain fascination with simulations of lifelike warfare and violence. The average PRHS also has a very moderate learning curve, as it is mainly based on wasd + pointing your crosshair and clicking. Every gun is about the same, just different damage/ammo/spread/fire rate modifiers. It is easy and comprehensible to pick up (im not saying its not hard to master!) and easy to identify with due to the photorealistic theme.
The pick up and play thing is also why FPS is declining in popularity. If you haven't grown up with PC FPS, and arent used to interfacing with your game through keyboard movement and mouse freelook, it might pose a serious learning curve to actually get decent at any FPS. The younger pc gaming crowd, who might have grown up gaming mainly on consoles, will look towards MOBAS, as there is no mechanic "gap" between using your internet browser and clicking hyperlinks and issuing commands to your hero in a MOBA.
Didn't even mention the obvious fact that there is very little of a gap between CS pub or matchmaking and comp. It's just smaller teams, for the rest the dynamics stay the same. Obviously a majority of CS pub players are interested in watching comp.
So yeah, it's obvious that a game like CS (and CoD, and BF) will always be a more popular FPS. It's also obvious that CS will always have a bigger comp scene and bigger viewership.
There's no such thing as a 'better' game though.
there are no 5+minute stalemates in cs like there are in tf2
there is no ubercharge in cs
there is no 10 minute stalemate timer in cs
in cs youre guaranteed to see action every 1 minute 45 seconds[/quote]
The "action" in CS:GO is a fuckin stalemate in itself... Just back and forth strafing from cover and taking popshots. It's like a tank battle game. If people like that, that's fine by me. I can also see how there's a lot of skill involved.. thats not the point.
1 min 45s is is almost enough time for 3 ubercharges btw, so plenty of action in that timeframe in TF2 :)
[quote]maybe if you have a.d.d
i honestly think that the only people that find watching csgo dull are people that play tf2 and other twitch shooters like quake[/quote]
yes
and people who find american football dull are people who play or watch soccer, etc... people who like sweet drinks dont like dry white wine or an IPA... point being?
[quote]i honestly dont see how someone can call csgo boring when in quake dueling people jsut +back and low scorelines are extremely common and ctf is just a huge shitfest where nothing happens for 5 years while people build up a stack and then die instantly and then you wait another 5 years for something else to happen[/quote]
How can Quake be just +back when we more than often see 10-20 frag comebacks? The most amazing games emerge from a 2 frag deficit with 1 minute left on the timer, and the player behind trying to outsmart the +backer. Also, if +back somehow truly is the problem, there is always CPM. According to your reasoning, CPM must be the superior game above all.
[quote]just look at the viewership
6.3k viewers for i52
20k viewers for quakecon (i think i dont really remember)
~400k viewers for esl one[/quote]
Idk what youre trying to point out by this. People like to watch what they play mostly. Most people that play PC FPS play (what i would call) 'pseudo realistic hitscan shooters' (PRHS). I think there are many reasaons for this. Playing soldier, cowboys or cops and robbers is something every kid grows up with, there's a certain fascination with simulations of lifelike warfare and violence. The average PRHS also has a very moderate learning curve, as it is mainly based on wasd + pointing your crosshair and clicking. Every gun is about the same, just different damage/ammo/spread/fire rate modifiers. It is easy and comprehensible to pick up (im not saying its not hard to master!) and easy to identify with due to the photorealistic theme.
The pick up and play thing is also why FPS is declining in popularity. If you haven't grown up with PC FPS, and arent used to interfacing with your game through keyboard movement and mouse freelook, it might pose a serious learning curve to actually get decent at any FPS. The younger pc gaming crowd, who might have grown up gaming mainly on consoles, will look towards MOBAS, as there is no mechanic "gap" between using your internet browser and clicking hyperlinks and issuing commands to your hero in a MOBA.
Didn't even mention the obvious fact that there is very little of a gap between CS pub or matchmaking and comp. It's just smaller teams, for the rest the dynamics stay the same. Obviously a majority of CS pub players are interested in watching comp.
So yeah, it's obvious that a game like CS (and CoD, and BF) will always be a more popular FPS. It's also obvious that CS will always have a bigger comp scene and bigger viewership.
There's no such thing as a 'better' game though.
skeej...
1 min 45s is is almost enough time for 3 ubercharges btw, so plenty of action in that timeframe in TF2 :)
...
Valve adding the ability to change the round timer in game would make a huge difference. This is a tiny little change that could drastically increase the pace of tf2 and remove a part of the metagame that really sucks i.e. "parking the bus". Currently the round timer is irrelevant, I don't think I've ever seen a stalemate in a competitive game. But once again, this turns into a "but if Valve did this then tf2 would be saved" argument which has been shown to be a moot point.
[quote=skeej]
...
1 min 45s is is almost enough time for 3 ubercharges btw, so plenty of action in that timeframe in TF2 :)
...
[/quote]
Valve adding the ability to change the round timer in game would make a huge difference. This is a tiny little change that could drastically increase the pace of tf2 and remove a part of the metagame that really sucks i.e. "parking the bus". Currently the round timer is irrelevant, I don't think I've ever seen a stalemate in a competitive game. But once again, this turns into a "but if Valve did this then tf2 would be saved" argument which has been shown to be a moot point.
...
1 min 45s is is almost enough time for 3 ubercharges btw, so plenty of action in that timeframe in TF2 :)
...
[/quote]
Valve adding the ability to change the round timer in game would make a huge difference. This is a tiny little change that could drastically increase the pace of tf2 and remove a part of the metagame that really sucks i.e. "parking the bus". Currently the round timer is irrelevant, I don't think I've ever seen a stalemate in a competitive game. But once again, this turns into a "but if Valve did this then tf2 would be saved" argument which has been shown to be a moot point.
If you believe round timers are an issue they can be fixed. The neutral time and time added are just numbers in the map. But do you really want more stalemates? By that I mean rounds ending with no winner.
If you believe round timers are an issue they can be fixed. The neutral time and time added are just numbers in the map. But do you really want more stalemates? By that I mean rounds ending with no winner.
i dont understand how watching some guy randomly crouch and fire at a wall, throwing grenades at walls, and standing still for 5 minutes is more entertaining than looking at airshots
i dont understand how watching some guy randomly crouch and fire at a wall, throwing grenades at walls, and standing still for 5 minutes is more entertaining than looking at airshots
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.