@groowagon: I agree with you. Dont get me wrong, i have a great time with casual friendly games myself. For example League of Legends and why not Dota 2.
But then you play the "overcasualization" version of Dota 2 with a game like HOTS and there you have it. A super accessible DOTA 2 style of game that looks and plays great BUT ends up a chore experience. No last hits for gold, no economy, no penalties, no strategic approach to items since there are none, no zoning since last hits dont matter, not enough depth for individual skill to shine and the list goes on and on with so many different example to mention ( D3 vs Path of Exile or Destiny to Warframe to name few i know ).
So there you are, having a splendid casual friendly game like LOL/DOTA 2 vs a what a call "overcasual" game like HOTS. I would choose LoL/Dota 2 all day long personally and so majority of moba fans.
Another fine example as you mentioned is Counter Strike. Im a very competitive gamer on this game for ages i get what you talking 100%.
All in all my opinion is that some genres getting hit for being way more casual than they should. They arent supposed to be so much in the first place. PUBG is not one of those i guess but many other games in different genres definitly are.
Guys lets face it. Games like Destiny, Diablo 3 and many more having what im calling as "overcasualization" effect. This crap of approach is ridiculous. No depth at all. No depth in itemization, skill trees, different mechanics and end game content. Just pure "zerg". Shoot whatever, keep shooting ... kill, pray to gods for a decent loot... repeat. Everyone playing the same tree, aiming for the same items, playing exactly the same way. And its right there you know there is huge problem if you want to stick to the game.
Its for a reason why people starting moving away of such games and many thinking for example Path of Exile far better than Diablo 3. Warframe far better than Destiny. Monster Hunter World better than Destiny 2 and so many other examples. "overcasualization" not letting many games shine when they could since gameplay wise are on point. The whole journey becomes a BORING experience veeery fast because of this super casual approach.
I dont mean for all super casual games to dissapear nor there is no room for super casual games, dont get me wrong, but we need a good balance to that in genres like Destiny, Diablo etc and not make games so easy with so shallow mechanics and content every time. It BACKFIRES in the end and im amazed how big publishers/developers cant tell that already. But on the other hand maybe they do know yet they dont give a shit since with alot of marketing and hype ... sales are good enough.
Im into E-sports since early 2000. Watched and still watching E-sports. Im so experienced with numerous scenes that im betting on E-sports the last few years as well.
So with that being said popularity is not enough for a game to be an E-sport candidate. Ive watched months ago an Overwatch tournament and was so messy and ridiculous to watch that i couldnt handle to watch for too long. Not fun to watch, not clear what was happening, a zergy and messy approach to everything ...
Sorry but i dont see this game to be among the best E-sport games. It will have its moment since its very popular and has a big audience out there but to REVOLUTIONIZE E-sports ? Pleaaaase....
The only thing it can do is drive some E-sport newbies into the E-sport scene which isnt a bad thing. But games structure and how it looks in streaming and how game plays ... Not in a million years will be a long term success let alone revolutionize E-sport scene. Who the hell thought a game like this can revolutionize something is beyond me.
Popularity is NOT revolution. Popularity is NOT success when it comes to E-sports even if popularity matters in a sense. For example, Call of Duty tried numerous times with big prize pools and hype to establish itself as an E-sport and few other well known games with tremendous popularity to take the crown from games like LOL, CS GO, DOTA 2 etc ... no luck. And thats for a reason.
And now a zerg type of game that its pain to watch ( except if youre die hard fan i guess ) will revolutionize E-sports ? Really ?
@jumpaction: What are you trying to explain here is beyond what my point is. You are fan of picross or for you $8 is nothing ? So be it. But when we talk about value we need to get our facts straight.
$8 has value nowdays and someone can buy top notch games. For you picross might be something that doesnt sound overpriced to me it does. It doesnt matter if its NEW or OLD. If a game that costed more than 10 million dollars to be made and costs 13$ as we speak its of a very higher value than a NEW PICROSS game at 8$. What cant you understand ? It is what it is. I would never pay $8 for such a game when for the same amount of money i could buy so many better video game experiences, even if i would i would consider it overpriced for the buck though i would let it go by since supposedly i would like the game.
It is what it is.
Now if you wanna debate about new vs old which is something different, explain how 25 years old games cost $8 to $10 on Nintendo shop and lets debate about value when SEGA few months ago had a sale of 59 of their classics for as low as 50$ on STEAM. Which is considered of greater value ?
@jumpaction: You still are in denial what is great value for your precious $8 about. I mean if you dont even understand that with the examples i mentioned, so be it.
@jumpaction: I wont engage to side arguements or try to prove an elephant is .. an elephant.
Games like picross or similar games are considered overpriced for $8 when there are super duper titles for that amount of money.
End of story, i wont argue like forever to prove that, its common sense. I dont care if are 100 or 300 puzzles. Portal + Portal 2 for 7$. THATS a great value combo for the money.
You get what value stands for now ? Thats what i call great value for $8. Now put those 2 next to picross S and convince me picross has the same or better value than that combo i just mentioned. Oh wait .. something doesnt fit here right ?
@jumpaction: My point is pretty clear, the problem is you dont want to admit the obvious for your own reasons.
For example if X1X costed 1000 instead of 500 bucks you would tell me that if some thousands people would buy it means that value wise wouldnt be considered overpriced just because some people would buy it and because those people mind find it fun or whatever we gonna say " hey, this is great value for some people " ? Are you out of your mind ?
Really now ? Thats how value works for you ? Lol. You dont even value what 8$ stand for, dont talk to me about value. My point is pretty clear, do your best to prove me wrong, my point stands as it is.
@jumpaction: This isnt if $8 is justified by fans, dont compare a digital product in form of a game to a real deal puzzle or a hard copy if you wish. This sounds QQ.
You need to learn what value stands for and what fanboyism of a genre or a thing stands for too.
Someone can be fanboy of X product that costs 1000$ and still X product value being crap. What are you trying to say here, you dont even make sense. You saying value=enjoynment ? At this point is clearly you run out of arguments are you ? You clearly spinning the meaning of value to fit it to your argument.
You can still have enjoynment and justify an overpriced product purchase but that doesnt make the product a great value one , what the hell. In the end youll tell me the 25 years old games on Nintendo shop that costing 8 ot 10 bucks are of great value because people like them ... come on now, it doesnt work like that. What the hell !
@jumpaction: Eight bucks for a "zero" production value game when there are so many far better games or experiences if you like, people havent played yet or missed or didnt have time to play is alot. You sound like 8$ is nothing, i beg to differ. You asked me why, answered that with examples.
There are numerous experiences out there, tens if not hunderds, having far greater value based on 8 bucks. I mentioned few, i can mention newer games if thats your issue.
Also i mentioned 80s TETRIS as a paradigm, havent played or saw the games you mentioned to have an opinion.
@jumpaction: I compare a simplistic puzzler with almost zero production value under puzzle genre to 2 of the best puzzlers like ever.
Im trying to make you understand the value of eight dollars, nothing more nothing less. There is value in 8$ and im just proving it. If you want i can make a huge list of epicly great games that can go next to this game that cost ten dollars or less that proving my point further.
AzatiS's comments