Thread has been deleted
Last comment
Arguably it would be COD, if you haven't watched competitive call of duty then you wouldnt know. Alot of different gamemode-knowledge, games switching every year, the esport has "league" format, so basically no chance to make it by with a challenger team
Or it would be fortnite (not a joke)
13 replies
9 replies
Cod has mechanics for three years olds to master
7 replies
6 replies
rank in apex?
5 replies
4 replies
second ranked season lul
3 replies
2 replies
So you have the forever pred trail from s2?
They made it seasonal at a later point.
1 reply
Rocket League for sure, skill ceiling is inhumanly high that we are pushing it every month and we're still far off.
New moves are still being made which is insane, level of strategic knowledge and 3d coordination has to be trough the roof in order to compete there.
It's actually insane, game is easy to get into but impossible to master.
And it's impressive that game mechanics had no changes since game's introduction, they 100% nailed it from the start.
2 replies
I actually kinda agree.
rt, at the first months of rl, i was top 500 player, before rl i played a lot sarpbc and i was a lot better than new or upcoming players from that game. By the time ppl became so much better, i couldnt follow the level of new players, couldnt play that much hours or tryhard that much. I quit rocket league and started my journey at being the worst csgo player of csgo, and here i am, 2,5k h on csgo and gold nova 1, im the best worst player now
GTA because there isnt proscene so it is impossible.
2 replies
he meant switching games in the context of his COD example as COD gets a new title every year or so
16 replies
2 replies
the game only switches every year because people get tired of that shit game quick and only plays for a while after each release
even if you don't respect the game, it might be an objectively correct answer lmao
11 replies
No. Call of Duty releases new games all the time. While they're similar (Because they're the same game, every single release) they're not 100% the same. This means that finding a skill ceiling is impossible, because the game never stands for long enough for a real meta to materialize, its a "new player's game" always, you never get to seize it before its too late and a new game is on the horizon, possibly even on a new platform.
My comment is not said out of an inherent dislike of the game (Although I dislike it, CoD hasnt been good since CoD 4, and even that needed a promod to be taken seriously,) its stated from the point of view that the game never gets to mature. Remember how unpredictable CSGO was at first? Aside from NiP, it was anyone's game. That's CoD, but always.
10 replies
You know what, I take what I said back
Since you've written up a full answer instead of just dismissing OP's question, I think I agree with everything that you've said.
That's a good point. If they keep releasing new games, then there is no true stable "scene" for COD in that case
7 replies
Yeah, in truth it would be great if CoD didn't release new games constantly. Have a 3 year break between each game to let it develop, and don't release the same game every year.
As someone that does not like Mobas or arcade shooters, like Overwatch for a viewing experience, it would be great with another non-Battle Royale esport to watch, similar in concept to CSGO. But alas. The only other game is Valorant, but as a CS diehard, I stubbornly dislike the notion of supporting it :]
6 replies
I do enjoy playing valorant casually, but I will say, it's not a good spectator esport for similar reasons that you've outlined.
I feel like it has a similar issue with the meta changing so often. The nerf of an in-meta agent can really hit teams hard, that gain a lot of traction playing strategies around that agent
Like sure we've seen this sooomewhat in CS occasionally, such as how the scoped rifle nerf affected a few high skill pros a bit. But overall the CS is more conservative with meta changes. I think as the viewer, I prefer that, because it makes the scene more stable - fewer/slower changes allows the scene to mature and for the skill ceiling to rise more.
3 replies
In general I think CS:GO is the perfect game for esport, because nerfs to things doesnt shake the entire scene to the core, except for the R8, In games like Valorant, League, Overwatch, if you change a hero, you not only change that hero, but also all the matchup the hero is in. Its much, much more delicate to balance, and devs tend to just add heroes repeatedly, even if many of them are echoes of each other (Like how Smash Bros have like 10 different Marth clones at this point.)
In CS, you dont play a "class," you simply play, on equal footing to everyone else. Your skill decides how good you are, not your match-up. So even if a weapon is periodically super broken, you get to also benefit from that once its your turn to wield the weapon. This is not the case for most other popular esports today.
2 replies
Yeah I agree
Little things like dropping nades, the occasional nerf or buff of a few guns .. none of this shakes the pro meta that much.
I wonder if in the future, they will tweak valorant less as it gets more stable.
But no, I think they will probably feel the need to keep tweaking, just to keep it fresh.
And on a more cosmetic note, valorant abilties just cover the field in stuff that makes it hard to follow what's happening
1 reply
Valorant would decline hard without those huge updates. They have built a playerbase that expects giant shakeups with new agents and maps being added every now and then. This hype farming is pretty good at making players come back to the game, but if they were to stop doing that those people there for the hype would just stop playing.
Man yall REALLY missed the title of the post. It said "hardest game to become pro" not what is the best esport or what game has the highest skill ceiling. In fact, for many of the reasons stated of why you all dislike the games/franchise are actually points in favor of the game being hard to break into the scene as a new pro and get signed... smh mens
1 reply
It might be the hardest e-sport to turn pro though, simply because of the stupid franchising. Basically impossible to make a name for yourself, very limited amount of spots in the league, and when someone gets dropped its just the same old players who are picked up. Horrible. Nowhere near the hardest e-sport though.
Wouldn't that support the notion of it being hard to become pro?
You basically need to show skills across several titles with drastically changing mechanics and metas, staying on top along that ride seems difficult.
I guess it depends how you want to answer the question. It might not be so hard to fluke a single cod game and become pro in it but then staying relevant across several titles might be harder than hitting a high ceiling in csgo for one time and staying there because the game fundamentally doesn't change
He also mentioned fornite as another option xDDD. Dude must be 15yo
chess
8 replies
5 replies
I wanted to say this too. But pro CSGO players have at least 10k hours on the game. And the top 1 osu player has as many hours as I have in CSGO.
1 reply
1 reply
lol friendship league is a good one
1 reply
Was searching for this. Brood War is hard as shit,much harder tham most FPS or hand-eye coordination based games. And it's also very hard to start going pro, bc people have been playing it for 20 years.
ur a complete noob for saying cod
Quake
Fortnite I would say.
If you have not followed that game or only tried it in 2018 when everyone was playing it and then gave up since you didn’t like the building/cartoonish aspect of it, then you may not fully understand.
But that game has an ever evolving skill ceiling. And the skill gap between an average player and a pro player is simply massive. Mechanically I don’t think there is another game that comes close to it. There’s a reason why most of the pros in that game are very young.
17 replies
16 replies
There is like 5k players in street fighter, meanwhile there were ~250million people playing fortnite so what exactly do you think that does to the skill ceiling of the game?
It's you who needs to reconsider. It's simply impossible for a game to have higher requirements in becoming a pro that has less than 0,1% of the player count than the other one.
Sure it sold a couple million copies but 99% of those people either don't play it online or even try to get really good at it. It's a nice game to play for fun when drunk.
13 replies
Are you nuts ?
The question is not which is the most popular but which is the hardest to master and go pro. The fact that there are alot more players into a specific game than another is that its way easier to master it therefore way easier to go pro when it comes to competitive games/e-sport games. You compare what exactly ?
Its like saying VALORANT needs way more skill than CSGO because it has way more people playing it. I dont think so works like that.
Have you ever tried fighting games at a really high level ? Youll be shocked what kind of work you have to put into to even have a small chance to beat a really good player. Imagine what you have to do in order to go pro and someone willing to pay you for that. Oh boy !! Fighting games are far more than extreme aiming. You need extreme knowledge, extreme reflects, extreme timing, extreme reactions all together. No room for a single error, no room for " had a bit of bad day " or " my team carried me ".
10 replies
It's irrelevant how hard the game is. The amount of players who plays the game dictates the level of competition. There is always that top x% of players that dictates how hard it will be to become a pro. If you don't understand this much it's impossible to explain the rest.
How hard the game itself is, is completely irrelevant in how hard it is to become a pro in it. If there are 100 players playing a game, and you're in that top 5%, congrats, you're eligible in becoming a pro.
Even if you're playing the most difficult game on earth, and you can't get past the first level, you can consider yourself the best player in the world as long as you're the only one.
That's why you can never compare street fighter to csgo, valorant or fortnite, unless they reach at least a remotely similar player base
9 replies
+1 big W for LuboDai. The actual skillcap in hockey, football, basketball, CSGO etc. would not be near the average skill in a faceit lvl 5 lobby now, if they have 5k active players. If streetfighter suddenly got 10 million players, it might be something else after a while.
7 replies
The topic is the hardest GAME to become a pro not the hardest scene to get into. Wake up you dummies, you just debating for stupid reasons. Its a comparison between games themselves as which is a HARD GAME and i have you telling me is not about which is the hardest while you calling stupid other people in many of your responses ! Damn IQ
6 replies
Being a HARD GAME with no relevance whatsoever is sort of like being the worlds best at something ultraspecific... like spitting-from-235-centimeter-and-still-hitting-the-green-bucket-on-a-tuesday. Cool to be good at, still not the hardest game. Competitive games have an exponentially growing skill cap based on how many players play the game.
5 replies
2 replies
The hardest scene to get into = the hardest game.
1 reply
1 reply
Cant tell you enough how stupid you all sound when you say only 0.01% make it to be pro in every competitive game and you dont get that even if we agree to that for the sake of this trollish ( from your part ) discussion ... your chance to be a pro is 0.01% WHATEVER game you gonna play yet you calling one harder than the other when you give the same percentage by your own measures. What to expect from Fortnite fans
Keep trolling, lol.. Whats your iq i wonder for either not getting what topic creator really asking and even worse than that , you self counter your own logic. Damn that IQ.
What the hell are you talking about ?
You jump from argument to argument, bypassing simple facts and logic, to get where you wanna get.
Now you made it sound like CSGO + Valorant + Fortnite vs street fighter. Haha. Im out theres no way to have a proper debate like this. Clever way to avoid my CS to Valorant comparison and make it all fps games to Street Fighter.
You have zero knowledge about fighting games, i can tell that, you have zero knowledge about fighting competitive scene and yet even if you lack knowledge you dare to compare them to that extend. When you try to master something like Street Fighter and compete there too, come tell me your experience. Since you have zero experience, you cant have an opinion. Till then, keep playing Fortnite
+1 ofc but seems like you're talking to the wall
1 reply
1 reply
CSGO, Dota 2 or League. These are the games with the highest skillcap.
Almost forgot Starcraft:)
17 replies
14 replies
Street fighter might have a higher skillcap, but I do not know because it is an absolute no-name eSport.
bro, it hurts my brain reading your comment. fighting games are high skill ceiling but to call them harder than csgo or dota is delusional.
12 replies
It hurts my braincells too for you to think being a csgo pro is harder than a street fighter pro because you have no idea how hard of a game a fighting game can really be in order to be up there. I doubt any of you ever played a fighting game at a high level to begin with other than some button smash tekken/smash bros and some matches on Mortal kombat to do some fatalities for fun and even that is questionable.
10 replies
We are not roasting Street fighter pros for being bad at the game. But with almost 100% certainty, the best CSGO/League/Dota2 players are better in those games, than Street fighter pros are in Street fighter.
9 replies
8 replies
Difficulty of a multiplayer game in terms of going pro is a function of player count and how long the game is existing.
7 replies
youtube.com/watch?v=bUuFOip-bHk&t=637s
youtube.com/watch?v=AGrIR_jlLno
Watch to learn few things and then find me a harder game to be pro of
6 replies
thats like saying F1 is easier than tennis bcz Verstappen never played tennis and he is shit at it
1 reply
? Being a pro simply means that you are in top 0.01% of the players. It doesn't matter how hard the game is for you, it only matters how well you compare to other players.
So if you are trying to convince me that no-name fighter game is more competitive than csgo or lol or even fortnite, then I suggest you watch "logic 101" course
youtube.com/watch?v=JBjAyrX7wms&list=PLK..
3 replies
Being pro means that you getting paid or compete in tournaments. You dont have to be tier 1 player to be considered a pro. Its like saying whoever playing in league 2 or league 3 of any sport isnt considered PRO.
Simple stuff, just use your brain is not rocket science to understand what topic creator asked. Read it again and try again
2 replies
That's what 0.01% means fam
1 reply
In case of csgo that would be around 1000 players that are currently pro
+1
Starcraft Pro play is insane but it doesn't even look fun trying to become a robot and press 3 hotkeys per second.
The controls are not feeling natural so it's more about translating simple commands like army splits in a multitude of individual commands.
Loved playing it casually tho and even considered buying the DLC after not playing for many years haha
1 reply
Understandable
For items when people build like castles, idk if its still like that but it ruined the fun
is there anything more nerdy than this?
got to be warcraft/starcraft
youtube.com/watch?v=zmYhX8fjmo8&ab_chann..
world of warcraft PvE
you need to play 24/7
Rocket League and CSGO, Rocket League for skill ceiling and CSGO for everything, I believe CS players are the most rounded players especially on a team work level.
StarCraft or Warcraft 3
13 replies
12 replies
think of it this way, if there are only 500 players in csgo, but they all played like ZywOo and NiKo, it would still be way harder to become pro in than if there were 5 million players but they all play like bots.
The skill ceilling in starcraft is way higher than cs, the only fps that got close to that was Quake.
10 replies
:D
Not the smartest one of the lot are you? If startcraft had the same amount of players as CSGO, probably none of todays pros would be pros. Simply because there would be better ones out there. There is literally nothing indicating that todays pros in starcraft are unbeatable. South Korea was dominating SC scene for 20 years straight. Then one kid from Finland came up and started dominating the scene for the better part of 3 years, completely trashing records and was almost unbeatable in 2018, still being the only player who has won every single WSC tournament in one year, and has won the most in total.
Why do you think that is? Because the right person of many started playing the game. It would be just as possible that if SC2 had as many players as CSGO does, Serral wouldn't even be at the top. In fact it would be almost certain.
The amount of competition will ALWAYS make the competition harder. That's why astralis dominated so hard for almost 3 years, and other teams had to adapt to their style. If not for the big player base, we would still be watching the same shit show from 2013 where NIP had their unbeatable 87-0 streak of map wins.
It just happens to be that better ones came out eventually when the game grew bigger.
Think of it that way
9 replies
And people call me delusional...
6 replies
4 replies
not the one you're thinking
I think you're partially right but you end up exaggerating to a certain extent the impact of a player base after a certain point. I think you have massively diminishing returns after a certain threshold, meaning that you wont have the same impact of going from 100k active player base to 500k like you would from 20k to 100k. After a certain point you have enough players in the pool to have relatively stable top talent.
Lets look at former polish VP as an example. They developed their talent in a relatively small game and were consistent top5 team from 2014 to 2017. They won their first major when the player base was 60k active players, and they almost beat Astralis in 2017 when the player base was 400k. NiP on the other hand had their 87-0 when a lot of players still didn't move on to CS GO, 1.6 still had a bigger player base, but by the end of 2013 most 1.6 moved on and indeed the talent pool got a lot better for CS GO.
I think starcraft II player base is big enough to not have extreme changes in the top level if they went from 40k active players to even 1100k like cs go. A bigger active player base in this case increases the number of pro players in the lower levels, that is tier2-3 usually gets a lot better like it did with CS. I see no reason why I'd consider the top10 in starcraft to not be at around the peak of the ability for the game, they would only have more competition and not be irrelevant like you seem to suggest. It's reasonable to think that in a bigger game you have better odds of going pro because there is a lot more exposure in the lower levels and better pay aswell. There's plenty of local football pros that are completely shit compared to the world elite level for example, but they are still pros.
1 reply
I do agree with most of what you say here, but the fact remains that if you play against 10 people, the chances for you to win are much better than if you were playing against 1000. SC2 scene is small to begin with, not to mention that while all CSGO players play online, most of SC2 players play it for the single player campaign. Not even going to mention wc3 here because the game has like 10 daily users.
Many people here seem to have a delusion that if the game is somehow harder to play, it would benefit other players in some way, where in reality the game is the same for everyone. I played wings of liberty, and the next version at their peak time, played for maybe a couple of months and was casual as shit, and still hit diamond fairly easily on two different races. Then I did the same thing again next year. It just tells you of the lack of competition.
I'm not saying it's easy to become the world nr #1 in SC2, because it's not. They're very good. I'm simply saying that while I could've played tournaments with my 200 hours in SC2, I could barely hold my own in ESEA and faceit after 4000 hours in CSGO, and I've been playing cs since -99.
The way I see it, it's just their ego talking if they're assuming that a game that has a fraction of the amount of players than the other one, could be harder to become a pro at, and simply expect that all the pros in that tiny game are much better than in that other game that literally has 100 times bigger player base to choose their pros from.
The Finnish dude is right, you are delusional.
'The amount of competition will ALWAYS make the competition harder.'
so true
I dont see Valorant having HARDER competition than CSGO you Einsteins.
Nor i see Fortnite having harder competition to Street Fighter !!
Let me make you understand how stupid all you sound when you say that. How many teams NBA have in total ? Now how many teams in EU there are ? Compare now the NBA champion vs the EU champion basketball team. Oh wait, why is that ? Maybe because its not about the amount but the quality of players ..
Dummies
In games that have no public relevancy the super tryhards gather for passion and not to achieve anything financially which is the recipe for craziest players
Dota by far the hardest one. In cs for example you can learn to strafe and aim and you can easily go really high in ladderboards and be noticed from pros, in dota you have to spent a shitton of time to study and practice and youre a complete bot stil
5 replies
3 replies
Cringe
2 replies
I'd say when we're talking about FPS games, counter strike would be the hardest. The skill ceiling (as in every other game) is insanely high, but it has the most players, so probably the competition is highest as well.
Saying that cod is the hardest because it's a new game every year is rather stupid because the same rules apply to every single player. Also the game is more arcade-ish than cs, so arguably, the mechanics are easier to learn. Reaction time probably plays a bigger role in cod though.
chess
AFPS in general, you could start training for 10 years that you couldn't compete against the current monsters that are at the top for 15 years. I think it's the same for most niche games, like RTS and chess.
Note that they are still at the top with no meta changed over the years.
Starcraft bw
AoE II
The game has so many civs by now and old pros still dominate the game
3 replies
1 reply
1 reply
nah
skillgap is so low at the high level
everyone uses the same teams, abuses the same mechanics
1 reply
Honestly probably quake
Watching Quake tournaments those people are just doing things I have not seen in any other game
BUT
Its kinda dead so skill ceiling could probably be waaaay higher if the playerbase were as big as the one of other games
1 reply
dota 2 and it's not even close lol
1 reply
+1 Evolving constantly and younger players doesn't have same amount of experience of different patches and updates. Also older players usually have wider hero pool, so they can surprise opponent with some random hero which isn't that popular in the meta. For example zai, MATUMBAMAN, Puppey etc have so many heroes to choose from, because they know how to use them.
4 replies
3 replies
2 replies
The champion pool evolves by a certain margin from one patch to another. Some broke the game more than others, like this one where you basically have zeri/jinx/Afelios as ADC every game. However the champion pool isn't that small considering how fast it evolves. The map doesn't change ? The towers changed, the bushes evolved through times, they have new dragons so new changes on the map (the plants from Chemtech drake), the Herald was modified last year and his impact was simply massive.
1 reply
1 reply
And you would still be bad and get beat by 12 yo indian kid
Whichever game has the largest active player-base will become the most difficult to go pro in.
"But [x] is easy because..." -- Yeah, that means it's easy for every other player, then. What now?
3 replies
1 reply
i'm not online enough to know what this is supposed to mean
Hard disagree with CoD...
Quake, Chess, Starcraft and SSBM I would consider way more difficult.
1 reply
Boku no Natsuyasumi
To end this, whoever thinks which genre is check this
youtube.com/watch?v=bUuFOip-bHk
DOTA 2
no chance
League maybe. The game has an insanely higher skill celling but also all of the biggest tournament are basically closed and franchised , so only way to play tier one , is by being picked up. Unlike games like csgo or rocket league , although hard , you can work your way to the top
1 reply
Is it really true after a certain threshold? I don't think so. Sure it might be easier to go pro in a game only 100 people play, but what about going from 1 million to hundreds of millions? The bigger the game from that point the better the exposure in the lower levels and a lot more opportunity to go professional, even without world class elite level. For example football. You can be professional in your local city, even without having any chance in hell against the top teams.
Quake or unreal tournament, those games were ridiculously skill-based and no beginner would have a chance even killing a pro once.
Hardest? By what metrics?
CLASH ROYALE
Dota2, League for sure. Have to undertand cooldowns for every champion in the game, lane matchups, jungle pathing, when to harass, powerspikes at certain levels, item build diversity, which champion counters who etc.
FPS games in the end is mostly down to aim and reaction, which lowers the skill ceiling a lot. Tactics only carry you so far.
3 replies
The things you listed are extremely basic, like that is the shit which every plat+ player should know. A bit more advanced would be stuff like wave states, tempo, roaming, and yet still these things are extremely trivial. The only big skill cap in pro play is team play and macro, because micro is so extremely easy in this game
2 replies
Yes but its "should know". In reality, good macro and average mechanics will carry you to Diamond 4. In order to master all of these things, it takes years. More advanced stuff like tempo is difficult to learn unless you part of an organized team, also lane match ups are constantly changing due to nerfs/buffs to champions, while in CS guns stay relatively the same, you just swap between M4A4 and M4A1-S occasionally or FAMAS vs MP9.
1 reply
Yeah about right but while the macro aspect of league is very hard to grasp, the micro aspect of CS:GO has not even been mastered by anyone yet, that's why cheats are extremely oppressive in CS, while cheats in League (scripts) are mostly just "meh".
But I also believe the macro aspect of League has not been mastered yet (pros aren't using tempo, team play to its best potential)
Now playing
jasonR
1629 viewers
Top streams
All(12)
Casters(5)
Streamers(6)
Organizers(1)
jasonR
(1629)
Stewie2k
(1510)
EliGE
(1190)
Cooper
(990)
ESL TV B (YouTube)
(454)
ESL TV
(382)
emilio
(379)
fbz
(171)
mch
(170)
bt0
(100)
Laski
(96)
Vikingz_Odin
(59)
