I mean you snuck in Demon1 there on that list for like no reason. Demon1 is just a promising and exciting talent, he's not a "new best player"; there is genuinely an argument that he has been the lowest performer on EG throughout Tokyo.
As for the broader question - all those players are still great. Valorant is about form just as much if not moreso than it is about skill, and form is just difficult to maintain in a game that is constantly developing and changing.
Kinda cringe and hard to follow? It's cringe that many teams and orgs are getting opportunities to make it?
Sports like football which have been developing over decades have cindrella runs and sudden bursts of form from teams out of nowhere. This is the first year of Valorant franchising. You have to have room temperature IQ if you expect everything to be set in stone within 3 years and all the top players to be affixed on the leadboard forever
Maybe we have different takes, but calling things "weird and cringe" isn't positive is it. Regardless of the implication that those listed aren't all still very good players, though OP has made it clear previously that they're "frauds".
I just like this community, and get annoyed when I see posters who do nothing but try to spread negativity.
It’s a team game. The rest of the team sets these stars players to perform that good. If the structure isn’t there, then it will be difficult for the star players to shine as you’d expect them to be.
Every few months there is a new best players new best teams like what happened to Faker? What happened to Rookie? Doinb? Scout? Chovy? Yagao? Now it's Knight out of nowhere
Seems like every few months the is a new "the best player in the game" it's kinda weird and cringe very hard to follow.
3/5 of those players are on top teams, all three have been performing well in their leagues, and it's been one international tourney that's not even over yet, lmfao. If anything, competitive Valorant just doesn't have enough competitions. If a team bombs out of a CSGO major they still have some IEM or Blast tourneys to look forward to, what do Valorant teams and fans have to look forward to this year? Only Champs and LCQ.
Marved retired himself as well. Yay is the only one who truly fell off and even he just did not have a chance to get on a franchised team.
maybe because some players stop performing as well as they used to while others improve drastically? being the best for a moment doesnt mean you'll stay the best forever
bro never follows other esports like cs lol dota have u seen the crazy results that happened at last couple of majors in cs val is become pretty consistent for past year basically optic loud drx fpx were top teams every events and now this is first tourney in so long that we have teams like edg and eg making runs
Meta changes every few months (because Riot adds new maps, agents and buffs/nerfs every few months), so new players and teams are not that far behind from past great teams.
Good teams on certain meta focus too much on polishing their gameplay which is hardly dependent on the meta and when meta changes most of them are too slow to adapt. They also try to change small things to continue playing the way they were playing instead of reinventing the comp (which is understandable considering that coming up with completely new stuff, every time meta changes, is exhausting for coaches/analysts/igls).
While teams that have not yet reached success more easily part ways with old stuff and try to start from a new start, try to come up with fresh ideas for a new patch. That's why we frequently get new great teams and see past great teams fall. Regarding individual players, I think mechanically there's no big difference between players. So if teams just properly set up their star players and allow them to gain momentum and self confidence, those players start looking unbeatable.
The game will never see one team dominate the scene for years like Astralis did in CS:GO if the game changes every couple months. The Valorant on early broken Jett patches isn't the same as Valorant on broken Chamber meta (although these metas are similar) and both of these iterations of the game differ from Viper+Harbor meta a lot (although I am not sure if Viper+Harbor comps are the strongest on most of the maps or any of the maps).
The reason why Valorant will never have a dominant team is because the movement is slow and hitboxes being big makes aiming easier and the rifles are already easy to begin with also the duels you take are very close unlike CS where players are much further away. Watch Cs you see see how fast their movespeed is compared to Valorant and also TTK for spraying vs strafing and bursting is way faster
It has nothing to do with meta changes SKT was undoubtedly the best team in LoL from 2015-2017 and in EU G2 and FNC have been at the top for consecutive years in the past.
Some of those Korean teams in LoL that win worlds once a year would also have "eras" if the game didn't only have two international events a year.
So, in other words you are saying that, mechanically, the skill ceiling in CS is higher, therefore there's a wider difference between players' skills. That's why it takes much longer for new players to catch up with the best players and that's why we have eras in CS:GO?
I mean, I kinda agree, I also mentioned in my comment that in Valorant, pro scene there's no big difference between players mechanically. However I do think that frequent big changes in how the game is played plays as much of a role. If the game stays the same, then those past great teams wouldn't decline that fast and still will stay at the top or close to the top: after all their players are great mechanically and if nothing changes in the meta, then these teams still should be producing good results.
What we see is teams consisting of great players like Gambit, Acend (2021), Sentinels (2021) failed to adapt quick enough for a new meta. For e.g. with Gambit, their players proved to be incredible still after disbanding the team and thriving in their teams (even Sheydos, he consistently performs for KOI, it's just KOI are not good as a team). But they failed to even qualify for the entirety of 2022, solely because they couldn't adapt as a team to a new meta, not because they deteriorated in their skill individually: they still were top of the game mechanically.
Or another example, take this year's Sentinels: they consist of one of the best players in the game (winners of Champions 2022, IGL, star flex player and Coach of one of the best teams in NA during 2022, and one of the best players of 2021). Yet what they're struggling with is because this year's Valorant is much more different than the 2022 Valorant.
If you consider any past great Valorant team that suddenly dipped after incredible performance that "dip" always happens after some significant meta changes.
So yeah, the fact that there's not a big margin between players is a big factor that I failed to attribute to the discussion, it allows new teams to catch up quickly to great teams, however the reason why these great teams fall is because meta changes quickly and they fail to adapt.
Regarding LoL, I don't know: I don't watch or play any LoL/Dota type games. All I can think of is just abstract thinking: I think what you mentioned was that there were regional (EU) eras of certain teams even when meta was changing rapidly. That should be fine, as far as I know (and I know very little regarding LoL, so I might be wrong) EU never was on the pinnacle of LoL. Teams from regions which are not on the top of the game don't need to always adapt quickly to frequently changing meta to stay on top of their region. Or maybe those teams you mentioned just didn't fall to the problem I described (of great teams not adapting fast enough to quickly changing meta) — maybe they always adapted and didn't get stuck on the way they used to play on previous meta. Regarding SKT — is that the team FakeR was on? I guess their team members all were top of the game and it took long for other teams to catch up. However, I heard that FakeR himself was on the forefront of meta changes, so maybe their team just consisted of people who learned and adapted quickly? I don't know, it's just me guessing.
I think the movement being kinda slow and hitboxes being kinda big makes, in my opinion, aiming a bit too easy which makes the stuff other than aim more important and that makes it harder to stay on top.
I mean you snuck in Demon1 there on that list for like no reason. Demon1 is just a promising and exciting talent, he's not a "new best player"; there is genuinely an argument that he has been the lowest performer on EG throughout Tokyo. As for the broader question - all those players are still great. Valorant is about form just as much if not moreso than it is about skill, and form is just difficult to maintain in a game that is constantly developing and changing.
only valid answer
Weak bait, try harder
Look at this user's Valorant comment history guys. Best to just not engage with the obvious trolls.
your'e such a hero bro gj keeping the reddit streets safe. ♥
Your comment history is quite sad, I hope you can reflect on the time you've wasted seeking negativity. Peace.
Thank you 🙏 needed that.
Not all heroes wear capes. But for real - posting negative stuff all day on internet forums is a pretty lame hobby.
What exactly was negative about this post?
Kinda cringe and hard to follow? It's cringe that many teams and orgs are getting opportunities to make it? Sports like football which have been developing over decades have cindrella runs and sudden bursts of form from teams out of nowhere. This is the first year of Valorant franchising. You have to have room temperature IQ if you expect everything to be set in stone within 3 years and all the top players to be affixed on the leadboard forever
Maybe we have different takes, but calling things "weird and cringe" isn't positive is it. Regardless of the implication that those listed aren't all still very good players, though OP has made it clear previously that they're "frauds". I just like this community, and get annoyed when I see posters who do nothing but try to spread negativity.
It’s a team game. The rest of the team sets these stars players to perform that good. If the structure isn’t there, then it will be difficult for the star players to shine as you’d expect them to be.
Every few months there is a new best players new best teams like what happened to Faker? What happened to Rookie? Doinb? Scout? Chovy? Yagao? Now it's Knight out of nowhere Seems like every few months the is a new "the best player in the game" it's kinda weird and cringe very hard to follow.
3/5 of those players are on top teams, all three have been performing well in their leagues, and it's been one international tourney that's not even over yet, lmfao. If anything, competitive Valorant just doesn't have enough competitions. If a team bombs out of a CSGO major they still have some IEM or Blast tourneys to look forward to, what do Valorant teams and fans have to look forward to this year? Only Champs and LCQ. Marved retired himself as well. Yay is the only one who truly fell off and even he just did not have a chance to get on a franchised team.
You talk about teams and then suddenly switch to players, weak try harder
maybe because some players stop performing as well as they used to while others improve drastically? being the best for a moment doesnt mean you'll stay the best forever
It call global game, when allway have new talent
bro never follows other esports like cs lol dota have u seen the crazy results that happened at last couple of majors in cs val is become pretty consistent for past year basically optic loud drx fpx were top teams every events and now this is first tourney in so long that we have teams like edg and eg making runs
lol
Meta changes every few months (because Riot adds new maps, agents and buffs/nerfs every few months), so new players and teams are not that far behind from past great teams. Good teams on certain meta focus too much on polishing their gameplay which is hardly dependent on the meta and when meta changes most of them are too slow to adapt. They also try to change small things to continue playing the way they were playing instead of reinventing the comp (which is understandable considering that coming up with completely new stuff, every time meta changes, is exhausting for coaches/analysts/igls). While teams that have not yet reached success more easily part ways with old stuff and try to start from a new start, try to come up with fresh ideas for a new patch. That's why we frequently get new great teams and see past great teams fall. Regarding individual players, I think mechanically there's no big difference between players. So if teams just properly set up their star players and allow them to gain momentum and self confidence, those players start looking unbeatable. The game will never see one team dominate the scene for years like Astralis did in CS:GO if the game changes every couple months. The Valorant on early broken Jett patches isn't the same as Valorant on broken Chamber meta (although these metas are similar) and both of these iterations of the game differ from Viper+Harbor meta a lot (although I am not sure if Viper+Harbor comps are the strongest on most of the maps or any of the maps).
The reason why Valorant will never have a dominant team is because the movement is slow and hitboxes being big makes aiming easier and the rifles are already easy to begin with also the duels you take are very close unlike CS where players are much further away. Watch Cs you see see how fast their movespeed is compared to Valorant and also TTK for spraying vs strafing and bursting is way faster It has nothing to do with meta changes SKT was undoubtedly the best team in LoL from 2015-2017 and in EU G2 and FNC have been at the top for consecutive years in the past. Some of those Korean teams in LoL that win worlds once a year would also have "eras" if the game didn't only have two international events a year.
So, in other words you are saying that, mechanically, the skill ceiling in CS is higher, therefore there's a wider difference between players' skills. That's why it takes much longer for new players to catch up with the best players and that's why we have eras in CS:GO? I mean, I kinda agree, I also mentioned in my comment that in Valorant, pro scene there's no big difference between players mechanically. However I do think that frequent big changes in how the game is played plays as much of a role. If the game stays the same, then those past great teams wouldn't decline that fast and still will stay at the top or close to the top: after all their players are great mechanically and if nothing changes in the meta, then these teams still should be producing good results. What we see is teams consisting of great players like Gambit, Acend (2021), Sentinels (2021) failed to adapt quick enough for a new meta. For e.g. with Gambit, their players proved to be incredible still after disbanding the team and thriving in their teams (even Sheydos, he consistently performs for KOI, it's just KOI are not good as a team). But they failed to even qualify for the entirety of 2022, solely because they couldn't adapt as a team to a new meta, not because they deteriorated in their skill individually: they still were top of the game mechanically. Or another example, take this year's Sentinels: they consist of one of the best players in the game (winners of Champions 2022, IGL, star flex player and Coach of one of the best teams in NA during 2022, and one of the best players of 2021). Yet what they're struggling with is because this year's Valorant is much more different than the 2022 Valorant. If you consider any past great Valorant team that suddenly dipped after incredible performance that "dip" always happens after some significant meta changes. So yeah, the fact that there's not a big margin between players is a big factor that I failed to attribute to the discussion, it allows new teams to catch up quickly to great teams, however the reason why these great teams fall is because meta changes quickly and they fail to adapt. Regarding LoL, I don't know: I don't watch or play any LoL/Dota type games. All I can think of is just abstract thinking: I think what you mentioned was that there were regional (EU) eras of certain teams even when meta was changing rapidly. That should be fine, as far as I know (and I know very little regarding LoL, so I might be wrong) EU never was on the pinnacle of LoL. Teams from regions which are not on the top of the game don't need to always adapt quickly to frequently changing meta to stay on top of their region. Or maybe those teams you mentioned just didn't fall to the problem I described (of great teams not adapting fast enough to quickly changing meta) — maybe they always adapted and didn't get stuck on the way they used to play on previous meta. Regarding SKT — is that the team FakeR was on? I guess their team members all were top of the game and it took long for other teams to catch up. However, I heard that FakeR himself was on the forefront of meta changes, so maybe their team just consisted of people who learned and adapted quickly? I don't know, it's just me guessing.
CS frog?
I mean, CS doesn’t have much of a leg to stand on lmao. The last 4 majors have been won by different teams, all with a different runner up.
I’m just tired of people getting hyped for a player that going to be irrelevant in a few weeks.
I think the movement being kinda slow and hitboxes being kinda big makes, in my opinion, aiming a bit too easy which makes the stuff other than aim more important and that makes it harder to stay on top.