Competitive Games?

sonic · Sep 2005

It seems like all the good league/competitive games are dying out. CS 1.6 is practically dead, and not enough people from 1.6 are making the move to source. Quake and it's scene is dying, along with all the RTS (Generals, WH40k, etc). The most popular thing right now is Halo 2, which is a dumbed down version of what used to be a competetive game (Halo1).

My question is, do you think they are dying out, or do you think a new generation of competitive games are going to appear for new consoles, and preferabbly PC?

arshlevon · Sep 2005

yeah everybody quit playing everying to play battlefield 2.. my grandma even started playing it..

Joshua Stubbles · Sep 2005

I think people's interest is dying out at a faster rate. Most people are probably gearing up for next gen, so they are putting in more hours (to buy new systems), and playing less :P

Seriously though, I wouldn't worry about it. The next generation of systems/games should usher in a new era of online, competitive play.

oXYnary · Sep 2005

Or could it be that their just the "same old-same old" finally turning consumers off?

Dieing is a incorrect term. Recession would be more appropriate.

ElysiumGX · Sep 2005

With so many games using the same gameplay elements, if you've played one (or a dozen), why play another? I don't think games are meant to be as popular as they're becoming. It should be just like any other hobby. This is the way I look at the industry. Why buy Disney Monopoly, when I already own Simpsons Monopoly? Sure a Mayan chess board looks cool and costs more, but I already play on the glass board. Those games aren't terrible, I just don't care to play them. Sometimes a little backwards for video games. I have BF2, which includes more gameplay features than 1942. So no need for BF42 to be installed.

Irritant · Sep 2005

[ QUOTE ]
It seems like all the good league/competitive games are dying out. CS 1.6 is practically dead, and not enough people from 1.6 are making the move to source. Quake and it's scene is dying, along with all the RTS (Generals, WH40k, etc). The most popular thing right now is Halo 2, which is a dumbed down version of what used to be a competetive game (Halo1).

My question is, do you think they are dying out, or do you think a new generation of competitive games are going to appear for new consoles, and preferabbly PC?

[/ QUOTE ]

What makes you think they are dying out? Have you looked at the stats?

http://www.csports.net

http://archive.gamespy.com/stats/

As you can see Q3 is still in the top ten. Counterstrike is still far and away #1, both H1 and Source versions.

Halo? Are you kidding? It's closer to being around what Q2 is.

These numbers have been holding pretty steady over the last year.

Mark Dygert · Sep 2005

I read an article about a month ago that said developers make the same game over and over again (but in "newer" versions) because consumers vote with thier time and money and that is what they buy, the latest version of the same game. The article also went on to say that the customers blame the developers for not coming out with anything new and original. So vote with your money and don't buy Maden 2006.25 and Maden 2006.5. Don't buy a 360 because its the newest system and you're tired of your xbox causing your entertainment shelf to bow. Buy it because there are games you like and want to play.

Seems like a vicious cycle that is the games industry. There has never been a lot of inovation all at once, just one or two companies that set the bar and everyone else struggles to meet it.

As far as stats go, a TON of box/cs-kiddies now play WoW, I would rather they go back to halo and CS. But they make for good rank fodder when pvp'ing so you can't have them back just yet.

Striff · Sep 2005

If you are looking to play a competitive game, you might want to consider Day of Defeat Source, which comes out next week.

If the competitive community takes to it well (unlike Counter-Striker Source), the game will get supported by many companies that sponsors teams and events. I think it could be the next "big thing" if the competitive community likes it. Day of Defeat is one hell of a fun game.

oXYnary · Sep 2005

I never played Day of Defeat. Is it like Castle Wolfenstein? I dont want one thats like BF1/2.

Striff · Sep 2005

Ive never played Castle Wolfenstein, so I can't really chime in there.

The only thing similar to Battlefield is that you have to capture flags, but you don't really do any back tracking. If your team (axis or allies) controls all the points on a map you win.

Another reason I like it is that the community for it is awsome, you hardly ever see any little kids playing being asshats like you do in Counter-Strike or Battlefield.

Mark Dygert · Sep 2005

I played Day of Defeat for about 2 years it is a great game. I hope it translates well to source. It is kind of like RtCW but felt solid. DoD never feels like the controls are "slugish" like the RtCW controls do.

Personally if it comes down to WW2 shooters I would take Call of Duty any day over Return to Castle Wolfenstein.

Ryno · Sep 2005

Call of Duty is still going strong. Very nice for Team Deathmatch.

Wolfensteing Enemy Territory is very fun, great for teamplay, and free.

Battlefield 2 is where I am headed next, as I'm burning out on COD.

Competitive Games?

Replies