Ephraim said:
I couldn’t care less about what the top tiers of competitive play find aceptable. Personally, I find these organizations to be silly and contrary to the very purpose of video games (fun). We are an individual organization which should base its rules upon common sense, not the rules of others. Cheap is cheap. Wavedashing does not give a slight advantage, but is so disruptive that it can win a match.
What they find acceptable is generally fair and balanced. And silly and contrary? I don’t believe so. Multiplayer has always been a form of function to show who is better and have fun while doing it. And generally, I’ve had fun at all competitive tournaments I’ve been to. All the competitive institutions do is reward the top player who shows up that day and wins. These institutions foster their own communities, some quite massive, but very similar to our own in many respects. And if you want to talk about cheapness? I find it cheap that people use shotguns in Snowbound. But it doesn’t stop me from playing that map. In fact, it makes me use the same tactics I appall just to win. But, at the same time, I realize it is a very legitimate strategy because the structure of the map forces an easy set-up that way. But, whatever. People are entitled to their own opinions. But the reasons why some of the executive staff choose to use the same or similar settings as that of top tier competitive gaming leagues and communities is for the reason I stated earlier. I can breakdown the argument for Halo very much so, just as Matt has at least pointed out a few reasons, and probably could find several more.