You know why it could never be truly competitive. Here is just one of many examples.
Two teams left, small circle, both behind perfect cover. Next circle spawns and it is directly on one team, whilst the other team needs to run in the open to make the circle. If both these teams CS level shooters then the team with cover wins 99% of the time.
Even the 50th rated CSGO team would beat the #1 rated CSGO team in this situation and no one wants to see that.
Edit: I made an to show exactly the situation I am talking about
Right on the nose.
He's right, it's too random for an e-sport. CS:GO is probably the best e-sports game cos there's no random shit basically.
make it a point system like NASCAR. every tournament/match rewards X amount of points per finishing place. player with the most points at the end of the season/tourny gets the trophy.
This type of game shouldn't have "semi-finals" or "finals", or maybe they could but that's a ton of players and a lot of time. I think what a tournament needs to do is just play the most games possible. Instead of having 5 days, and after each one, people get eliminated, there should instead be just maybe 5 games every single day for those 5 days. Determining a winner in this game heavily relies on how many games they play, instead of advancing to different stages in the playoffs.
TL;DW this game will never be an e-sports game and should not be treated as such. They should treat it as a fun casual game with fun tournaments that have fun personalities and popular streamers.
I am a Pro player for Tempo Storm so maybe I am bias on this whole discussion, but to say that this game 100% doesn't belong in competitive due to RNG being too much of a factor is just ridiculous. Yes the game can definitely make some changes to make the RNG factors a little less harsh, but I have been in the competitive scene for PUBG since basically the start back during the summer, I have been on the TOP NA team since the start, we have consistently placed top 3 in almost every tournament, we have been top 1 or 2 In pretty much every NA league for multiple months vs other top orgs/players.
Yes the scene is fairly new and the competition will always be improving/changing, but to say there is no consistency factor is just a complete joke. No point in going in depth about different competitive games having RNG because a lot of people here have already made their statements about "poker" or other games. I can if people want but we have consistently been at the top for months on end including getting 2nd place at IEM as the top placing North American team. I am not saying this from an ego as "we are the best" because we have sooooooooo much to learn and grow since the scene is very new. I just want to back up the point that teams can be consistent and top NA/EU teams have proven this time and time again.
Teams/Players who complain about RNG being the reason they lose, have a terrible mindset and it is the reason they under perform. "In poker you can get unlucky and some1 can hit quad aces on the river" and in PUBG that is basically in the final zones a team being gifted the zone, but with team coordination and proper nade use (even though smokes are very unreliable until the new patch hits) there are still ways to win games that in other "RNG" driven games it may be deemed impossible" I do agree the game still has a lot to improve on in regards to the competitive aspect, but to be as harsh to say this game will never be a respected esport due to RNG is very unfair to say. Please be open minded, if it is not your cup of tea, then it just isn't your cup of tea. Don't bash/shut down others who want to see it succeed.Consistency is Key in this game, it's not always about winning every game.
Rainbow Six: Siege and Rocket League are also contenders for best e-sport I think
You're wrong and that's ok.
I agree with RL being the most balanced, but being put at a disadvantage in CSGO (probably LoL too, but I don't play it) are a consequence of making bad plays or messing up on your part, or just being not as good. It's less about the gaming being less balanced or something, more about the skill of the player. I'd mention the "luck" of getting good teammates, but in a esport situation that's not really a concern. Like Fnatic wouldn't be queuing to get some random at an event.
Still don't understand why you would be downvoted, you are right.
Rocket League is by far the most balanced esports ever.
Edit: Downvoters, explain my why I am wrong?
Every single round is set to 0, everyone has the same chance, nobody has an advantage, hell even after every goal, everything resets to even chances.
CS:GO? Doesnt have this, lose pistol? You are at a disadvantage
LoL? Behind in CS? Lost lane? You are at a disadvantage
This goes for every other major esports game.
Rocket League does not have this, its always even, nobody has an advantage, at any given time.
If everyone wanted to watch RNG dictate winning, Hearthstone would be the #1 Esport.
StarCraft, LoL, DOTA.
The game, no matter what, will always be too random for competetive esport play. Unless they change the entire base game, which they wont.
Yeah, I mean he really hit the nail on the head. I tried giving PUBG a chance as a competitive game and could not get into it. Also, I just don't think its the way bluehole needs to go in terms of viewership. If you made two tournaments
1 where the best PUBG players in the world compete
1 where streaming personalities compete
The one with the streaming personalities would easily overshadow the tournament with the best players in terms of viewership. I mean, in terms of sponsors and making a tournament that generates ad revenue, you could not ask for a more golden goose than having the biggest streaming personalities, with their loyal audience, watching their favorite streamer play. It also plays into synergy among other streamers and helps build everyones channel.
CS:GO experimented with having streams jump into individuals teams comms and it was SUPER fucking interesting. The big problem however was that it made teams strats visible to everyone and caused issues with fairness because people knew what other teams would do and the tell tale signs of their strats by getting that inside look. But this would be AMAZING for PUBG. If you have 4 man squads like Dr Disprect, summit, lirik and Shroud, you could absolutely give the casters a break for like half the match and just listen to the comms between those 4 players.
I would absolutely watch that if there's a tournament format. The prize pot doesn't even have to be that big. The 'prize' would be exposure. If you're a smaller streamer, getting further in the tournament would just mean more people recognize your name and potentially check out your stream. Of course prizes are nice but the bigger prize of building a stream would probably be more valuable for these guys.
world series of poker is very popular
You can't bluff the circle
that’s why you run multiple rounds like what the oakland invitational did and figure out a fair tally. situational awareness and playing the circle well (talking about edging and aggressive movement/defensive movement) should be just as much a factor as how many kills/knocks you get.
Eh, it’s probably and unpopular opinion but I think that it can be an esport. I disagree that randomness and esports are mutually exclusive.
If hearthstone can be an esport pubg can. You just have to have best of 5s or 7s or w/e to balance out the rng and it's fine.
There already is a system like that implemented for PubG. CBA Esports has this in place for collegiate level esports. You can read more on it here at the bottom of the page.
Dont know why you're getting downvoted as rocket league's balance is mainly due to it being much closer tk real sports as compared to other esports
I heavily disagree with shroud.
First off, the game didn't necessarily decide to go e-sports, the people do. Take a look at Hearthstone - it's an absolute RNG fuckfest and the leaderboards are very inconsistent because of that, but that doesn't matter - lots of people enjoy and watch it. People make fun of it because of that all the time, and blizzard wanted to do exactly what shroud said: Keep it fun and casual.
But from my experience especially Americans grow up with this very competetive mentality and everything has to be competetive in america, and often in other parts of the world aswell, so E-Sports it popular and people want to see the games they're playing on a competetive level.
The audience makes E-sports, and the audience is DEFINETELY here, is it for Hearthstone or for PUBG - nobody forces you to create a team and play for the money. Whichever game you're playing for, you exactly know what you're getting into, you know the game is buggy, RNG heavy or both, so you either roll with it or you don't compete in the first place. If don't like PUBG but want something similar that's more competetive, go try some CSGO or Rainbow 6: Siege.
E-Sports is not only about who's the very best - it's a show and there to create entertainment, which I can see PUBG pull off.
Too be honest The PUBG esports already own a huge fan base in Eastern Asia, even tho most of the teams are semi-pro, they participate tournament and streaming for living at the same time. OGN is starting to build venue for PUBG already and I think they are gonna get some cool shit done. You can't deny that there will be some one watching PUBG esports right? From my personal experience; I think with appropriate observer like what they did in G-star, I would enjoy it, if it's shit like IEM Oakland then fk off
You know why poker could never be truly competitive. Here is just one of many examples.
Two players left on the final table. Both players have the same cash. Dealer deals and one player gets quad aces whilst the other player gets a royal flush. The player with the royal flush is going to win because there is no way the player with quad aces doesn't go all in.
Oh wait... Poker is an extremely popular spectator sport with a healthy pro scene and tons of tournaments.
All a game needs to have a pro-circuit is a large audience wanting to watch highly skilled players compete. That's the ONLY pre-requisite. Everything else falls into place after that.
Audience demand -> advertisers -> money -> events -> leagues...
however PUBG stated that they are willing to improve the game as much as possible for e-sports too.
So im guessing, 100% spawns, less people, circle showing before the planejump etc etc,...
basically base game stays, but the ranked servers(for general players)/esports(tournaments) will have a better more improved system of less rng more skill.
not saying that it completely eliminates the rng, but maybe more reliable than the current system.
There's nothing competitive about RNG. Some games may have RNG aspects to shake up gameplay, but the total outcome of the matches are based too heavily on RNG to be considered competitive.
bro he's rich as fuck already. even if they go total e-sport he's still going to have a massive following and be just fine.
You're on to something here.
I've seen a lot of streamers skip tournaments because they'd lose money to go.
Pay the talent just for showing up, with a more modest prize pool for winning. Pay the big names enough to make it worth coming, pay the smaller guys less but they get a chance at the prize pool and the exposure that comes from being with the big guys.
Implement multiple audio streams. Do you want to hear commentators, or maybe you want to take a break and listen to the voice chat of your favorite team. You're hiring personalities, not competitive gamers, so the fact that everyone can listen to their strats isn't a big deal.
Give cash prizes for random shit. $1000 bounty for killing a player that survived the previous match. $5000 for the fan voted "Best kill with a car." $500 for a crossbow kill.
Hell, steal from that other "sport" that does battle royale, "professional" wrestling. I wouldn't care if Bluehole was rigging loot drops and circle locations if it made an exciting, drama filled "tournament."
If Hearthstone can be an eSport anything can be.
world series of poker is very popular, as are other games of partial chance.
you could make pubg just like CS-Go but then you just have CS-Go with buggy code.
maybe people will enjoy watching pros play a game where chance is involved, maybe they won't. one way to find out. Having multiple matches per tournament with a points system is an obvious way to make it more fair.
In essence what is outlined here are two completely different versions of the game - the public version in which luck plays a large role in win conditions, and a tournament version which would somehow try to mitigate the luck elements to a degree that skill is the determinant of the outcome.
The issue with the concept of removing luck from battle Royale is that, in break’s words, luck is what makes the game fun and why every game is different and compelling. In its current form I have to agree with shroud, pubg as we have seen from the tournaments so far does not make a good esport (although nearly all of us would love to have a dota2 type pedigree of viewing experience for pubg).
"If you treat it in a way that benefits me, I'm sure it will work out!"
I was a poker player during the poker boom, and the lesson there for me is that there is absolutely an audience for a game where class tells over time and luck is a big factor in the short term. And yes, it has to have some sense of a clash of personalities, but the more solid fans will eventually want to see the best players showing their amazing skills.
Smoke and stun grenades are valuable after all...
This discussion is pointless, really. It doesn't matter if some people don't like it as an esport or don't want it to be. Fact is, it already is an esport with major teams involved and there's a good amount of people watching and it's increasing. As long there's players willing to play competitively and people watching it, I don't see how it shouldn't be an esport.
I'm not a big fan of it either but if people don't like it, don't watch it. Simple as that.
Siege is a contender for best esport? LUL
I doubt it. Theres too many RNG elements to the game even if you make it like that.
If you put 100 people of equal skill (or close to it) on the same server, it will most likely be totally random who will win the last few fights. It all comes down to circle RNG, loot RNG (scopes, meds, weapons), whatever. And even the best players can still, no matter how mechanically skilled they are, can be outcamped by a zero kill bushwarrior. The map is also way too big, which makes it even more random in that sense, and also makes it less spectator friendly as less fights will happen due to players being spread across a gigantic map.
"You don't share my opinion so your'e wrong"
I have never gotten the appeal of e-sports or cared about watching other people play a game; I always thought it was weird. But PUBG is one game where I feel differently about that. I enjoy watching people play and could potentially get into as an e-sport.
Valliate is definitely someone who can speak about skill and strategy being a bigger part of the competitive scene than anything else. They got second at IEM without winning a match, which gives a huge boost to points, because of their incredible consistency. His teams style, from my limited third party perspective, is passive w/ heavy rotate emphasis, and to be honest it simply reduces the chances for mistakes, the foil for any pubg game. If you study the game enough, even as a viewer, you can tell the different strategies that are being run and the great thought put into most teams rotations. For me the viewer experience is about enjoying and deciphering the different strategies employed by the teams...kind of like watching chess? But with the excitement and skill requirement of a first person shooter.
i might be wrong but there is barely any peeker advantage on lan.
And takes away from competitiveness.
A game where the winner can be decided almost entirely by a random outcome is a bad esport.
Even hearthstone has more controlled/predictable RNG.
Fucking mobile games can be 'e-sports' if they want.
The only thing that matters is if the game is fun for the people playing it. After that, the whole 'e-sports' circlejerk is just dependant on if people want to watch it. Anything more or less than that is just gatekeeping and nonsense. Who gives a shit.
Only thing I care is that they don't fuck the actual game to shoehorn it into what fits better on TV/streams, and that they quit shoving their shitty tourny ads in the game. Let people play the thing, and if people also want to watch it, good for them.
RL is better as an esport than any sports game because there's no AI involved whatsoever (in competitive at least). Everything comes down to the players and the physics.
I played FIFA religiously until 18, and the amount of control you actually have over the game is frustratingly small. And there's no way around that unless you play 11v11, which I would love to see, but EA doesn't make extra money from pro clubs, so I don't see it happening.
Yeah, you're right. Pack it up boys, we can go home. Obviously there is no way we can fix this, so why even try?
I know I'm gonna catch a lot of downvotes for this, but having randomness in the game doesn't necessarily mean it can't be competitive. Just look at card games like poker or Hearthstone. Of course in these card games and in PUBG you're going to have those bad beats where nothing is going right for you and your opponent is going to have everything going right for him. That doesn't mean that there's no element of competition. Why would it be any different for PUBG? Sure, they're different genres, but adapting to bad rng is just another skill set you need in PUBG in addition to mechanical skill and game sense.
For a game to be an e-sport all you really need to have is players that are willing to participate and people that are willing to watch. It really is up to the community to decide. I think that PUBG can absolutely have a strong long lasting esports community as long as the game is fun to play, they develop tools to make watching the game more enjoyable, and find ways to keep the game feeling fresh in the long run.
I do agree that PUBG may not be the best contender for eSport and randomness is definitely the main factor but why is a game like hearthstone an at least marginally respected eSport with prizes?
i mean it's literally soccer with fewer players and cars. it's as close as eSports can get outside of the video game version of the sports (NBA 2k, Madden, FIFA, etc)
while most of what you're saying is true, that's not what peeker advantage is. peeker advantage is when some players have more time to react than other because of the ping or how the game works.
Watched Oakland IEM Invitationals and local Cybergamer finals. Enjoyed the shit out of them. Even with missing the action (IEM =/ ) loved watching that kill feed, teams slowly eliminated, surivival of the fittest style that BR brings.
No other game does that.
As for RNG, its no different to luck in any other sport. RNG loot I dont see being a problem. We only feel fucked over by loot cause we drop in places with 20 other guys.
Circle sucks at times, but its like every other game. You play the percentages and you'll get your fair share of good circles.
Poker has a massive scene and the whole thing is built on luck. Why can't PUBG be like that? Play the percentages, get screwed sometimes, get payoffs most of the time.
Imo the top players of siege are to fast and make the pro scene hard to watch.
there are a lot of "big " esports who are asia only though. like all those fucking mobile games no one knows why people watch them,and OGN has no choice as to bet on PUBG cause Blizzard AND riot are taking over lol and overwatch next year
It's not the only factor but it's far too big of a factor.
It's not the fact that other esports don't have RNG, it's that it plays a much smaller role. You can dispute rng loot, but getting circlefucked is all too common to not have at least 1 team elimated from a match for no true reason.
I think csgo is the best because it has a tennis like scoring system. You have to reach a set number until you win. Allowing spectacular comebacks more often. Football and RL you can have blowouts where the score difference is too high with the amount of time left to even be possible.
It's never over until it's over in CS. The scoring system is why nail biting matches at huge tournaments are so common. It's the best spectator esport imo.
If there were only two teams then increasing the number of matches would significantly reduce the effect of randomness, however when we are dealing with up to 25 teams that means we will rarely see a single one of them winning the majority of the matches, so in the end a single lucky win would still puts a worse team ahead of others since the win count of every team is low. Increasing the number of matches isn't an easy solution with each one of them lasting for 40 minutes and there aren't many other solutions available to reduce the randomness.