I think most of your points are valid, especially how even after all the crazy good cinematic trailers and everything, riot hasn't been able to create a usable in-game HUD.

I'd also add that riot has always catered to the casual audience and player base more, who don't care what is good and what is bad competition. New maps and agents are added every 3 months, existing agents have huge changes; this changes the meta constantly. We have a situation where a team that destroys everyone in one international event doesn't even qualify for the next one because the meta change was not in their favour.
This means that we very rarely see high-level, even matches on international lans; because most regions have different comps/meta working for them. The level of competition is higher when watching intra region tournaments like LCQ.

I think finals will overperform unless it is same region teams.
That's because valorant still has a pretty big casual fanbase.

idc about total viewership. I'm asking how can champions perform worse than Berlin

eggsplain pls

Why is peak viewership so low for Champions even during Sen vs EU matches? Masters hit 800+k during the group stage itself

But i hecking love Zombs BatChest ZOMBSNATION BatChest

How tf did Sen vs G2 get 800+k viewers in Masters Berlin, someone pls eggsplain

Don't bother Sen fans don't car about how good Zombs is, they care about how big of a personality he is.
Sentinels is the ultimate content creator team after all.

You're too naive. Favouring big and famous orgs isn't anything new, it happens all the time in traditional sports and other esports as well.
Whether it is subconscious or intentional is beside the point.

If sentinels did it,
1) they would be warned in the game or
2) they will not be penalised or
3) map replayed

Without sentinels fanbase riot loses half their money

Rigged for na vs eu finals for highest viewership.
World against BR, BR against world

Why is that not how it works?? It is well known by tournament organizers that a double elim bracket brings in more viewership than a swiss system, because each game is more valuable.
Swiss system on the other hand is much more fair to the participants

I watch sen because I HECKING LOVE TENZ BatChest

NA lose = upset KEKW

Major challengers stage is considered more as qualifier, actual 'group stage' is Legends stage in which avg viewership was ~590k.
Also remember major had Swiss system which has a lot more matches than simple double elim bracket, +all matches were bo1.
So valorant should have the edge in views at least in terms of bracket and schedule

https://escharts.com/blog/pgl-major-stockholm-knockout-stage-preview

Why right call? They could've rescheduled to a place with less cases

Point is no one knows where they stand. If I'm not wrong they haven't played anything since masters

Yea but I'm not talking about just the prize money. I'm comparing it to masters and thinking how it's not so different. If you compare with csgo, major is the only valve sponsored tournament, only tournament in which each region has representation, player autographs team stickers gotv viewing predictions coins etc.

Let's see

First account i made because i was curious about this exact thing :/

Didnt kno lul, but still masters berlin had 700k prize pool, not a huge difference

I have a hard time understanding what really makes champions 'special' and 'different' from masters tournaments. It's literally the same place and no audience, prize money hasn't even been disclosed etc