Let's not omit one thing that comes of as a HUGE difference to most players; there is no going back in multiplayer. pusga, you can argue using your flawed logic omitting this substantial point and thus not get your message across to the wide community which inherently understands the fundamental difference of time pressure and the inevitability of time going forward, whilst you yourself picture both in a indefinite vacuum in which one is a spar with idk, 200h time-frames, whereas most other players put it realistically to the test in for example QA time-frames.


And how is that true? Most of us have come to the conclusion that multiplayer replays can also look good without being handcrafted in advance and then completed using a spar environment. You arguments are just as flawed as me comparing the average multiplayer game to the average single-player replay; aka complete rubbish in-between edits. If you want to compare one side of the high quality spectrum, that is good single-player replays, then make sure you compare them to the appropriate ones: the good multiplayer replays. Now, if you want to compare stuff, don't try to force it into your narrow flawed framework that simply is heavily singleplayer biased, and then don't come on the forum 100% narrow-minded and don't even try to grasp the other arguments posted.

And lets move on to the non-rewarding argument. How would you feel if you were the worlds best X. Let X be anything you want to be good at, and recognized being good at. Now, lets say X is playing Toribash, you specialty is aikido-based mods. My question to those who argue the non-reward-argument: Is there no value in being the worlds best competitive player at something? Is there no value in being the worlds best football player, chess player, Starcraft player etc? And don't add the money argument, as it's easier making money out of Toribash by earning TC than it is selling replays I'm sure.