Valorant will never reach the levels or long-term prestige of League of Legends or Counter-Strike, and will die out just like Overwatch.
to summarize use chatgpt if you have dont wanna read it all, or look at the bolded sentences for a general idea
Hero shooters are doomed to fail unless they have agent bans and/or a large agent pool; Valorant has neither. With its relatively small agent pool, every balance change and patch can drastically shift the competitive landscape, from changing metas and compositions to possibly changing how maps are played entirely. Without agent bans, players can’t counter dominant agents or comps. Instead they’re forced to adapt, even if it means abandoning their strongest role or agent. This creates an unstable environment where dominance in one role, playstyle, or agent can quickly become irrelevant. Which is why the job security in Valorant is considerably worse compared to other top esports.
This volatility kills dynasties, ends rivalries, and prevents “GOAT” careers from forming. A team or player who dominates one patch can become considerably worse even irrelevant on the next patch . In turn leading to frequent roster changes that ultimately may not fit the next meta, or the meta after that and so on. In CS and LoL, talent can shine for years; in Valorant, it can disappear in months. Poor job security, untapped talent, and careers defined more by balance updates and recency bias instead of skill prohibits the scene from thriving.
This problem is only made worse by Riot's terrible competitive format. Best of threes are far too common for a momentum-heavy, upset-prone game like Valorant. Where three maps usually aren't enough to determine the better team. Combined with a narrow map pool (with bad maps), Bo3s cater towards favorable matchups and a little luck over complete skill and talent. A team could be stronger on five of the seven maps but still lose a series because the other two are in play. Best of fives should be far more common, instead of reserved exclusively for The lower Finals, and The Grand Finals.
International and regional slot limits at tournaments are far too restrictive and should be removed. They just punish regions with multiple elite teams instead of rewarding the best teams in the world, regardless of region. One unlucky loss in a game that caters to upsets and momentum can keep a championship-caliber roster out of the biggest events and sideline them for months. By the time they return, the meta has likely shifted again, forcing them to adapt once more. On top of that, scheduling for tier 1 matches is slow and disjointed, killing momentum, hype, and fan interest.
Such an unstable ecosystem is a nightmare for orgs and often a massive money pit. Many fall into an endless roster-change cycle: rebuilding for the current meta, struggling when it shifts, then overhauling again. Promising rosters and players rarely have enough time to build chemistry or get comfortable before being forced into new roles, playstyles, agents, maps, and comps, or being broken apart entirely. This makes it nearly impossible for teams to establish lasting identities unless they commit to simple extremes, like hyper aggressive play (PRX) or slow, methodical setups (FNC). Job stability is at extreme lows compared to other top esports, and the window for a dominant team or player is too short and too dependent on balance changes, making it nearly impossible for anyone to “define an era” the way they can in other titles.
All this instability is made worse by Riot’s PG-13 approach to esports. In trying to prevent toxicity, they strip away the raw emotion, the potential storylines, and stifle players from showing unfiltered personality. Stuff like that fuel rivalries, storylines, and gets fans to rally behind their team or players. Analysts often sound restricted when criticizing players, like they're walking on eggshells, careful not to cross that PG-13 line. Grudge matches rarely exist, rivalries feel artificial, and it feels like there just isn't that competitive desire to win like other esports.
It’s a stark contrast to CS2, where rivalries, grudges, and a touch of controlled toxicity drive narratives, and analysts offer blunt, unfiltered criticism. That honesty creates compelling arcs, like when a player gets roasted for months, then drops 30 kills and flips the storyline on its head. You can feel the stakes, appreciate the redemption, and choose who to root for, just like in traditional sports. The raw competitive edge gives fans something to rally behind, remember, and anticipate.c
Narratives and storylines are the backbone of esports, sports, and media. They keep fans glued to the screen, waiting to see what happens next. The most popular stories in competition revolve around questions like: Who’s the best? Can they build a dynasty? Who can dethrone them? Who’s the top player, and who’s closing in on that title? And of course, the greatest story of all, the underdog rising to the occasion against all odds. Valorant has no shortage of underdogs, but without long-term powerhouses, dynasties, or clear top dogs, these stories have no real foundation. Constant meta shifts and unpredictable parity keep resetting the hierarchy, making it hard to know who the true teams to beat are, and whether a big win was a genuine upset or just the product of an overrated opponent.
Discord