Relying upon certain faults, in the mechanics of any game, simply to win is obviously not the right kind of skill that we're talking about: certainly, were one to discover the flaws that give advantage to a player, then that would be rather clever.
However, in a team-based game, skill is obviously important. A team requires strategy and if both teams are equally capable, which is as you've claimed, then the best strategy must therefore win. Isn't that the most logical conclusion?
No FPS is perfect. Counter-Strike has been around and was built upon an already fairly flawed engine ('Half-life'; 'Quake'), though I would say that one's reflexes combined with the ability to remain calm along with good hand to eye coordination improve one's chances of aiming at the correct spots and killing enemies with little use of ammunition.
Practice invariably causes one's skills to improve; one can no more discover and then compete in an international gaming tournament than they can discover and play a violin. There're exceptions, as with all things: some people remain rather useless--but can still enjoy the game, because it is a game after all--whilst some have a certain talent for it.
I wouldn't say that being a professional gamer is all that worth it anyway; your hardware is given to you, yes, but you're also required by contract to practice for a minimum number of hours per day. Many of these people end up growing to dislike the games they are paid to play, because they can't move onto something else unless it's asked that they learn how to become the best at that instead...
I'm interested in how 'cyber sports' evolve and such, but I'd much rather play a game I enjoyed for fun and then work on a game for fun (and hopefully profit) as opposed to agreeing to play a game, regardless of mood or anything like that, for hours and hours each day.
Even as a professional, those I've known to be sponsored by companies have needed other jobs to sustain themselves because their winning is not guaranteed at all. Free flights around the world? Okay. Being stuck indoors surrounded by buzzing computer hardware instead of getting the opportunity to explore the world you're traveling around? Doesn't seem so glamorous.
However, in a team-based game, skill is obviously important. A team requires strategy and if both teams are equally capable, which is as you've claimed, then the best strategy must therefore win. Isn't that the most logical conclusion?
No FPS is perfect. Counter-Strike has been around and was built upon an already fairly flawed engine ('Half-life'; 'Quake'), though I would say that one's reflexes combined with the ability to remain calm along with good hand to eye coordination improve one's chances of aiming at the correct spots and killing enemies with little use of ammunition.
Practice invariably causes one's skills to improve; one can no more discover and then compete in an international gaming tournament than they can discover and play a violin. There're exceptions, as with all things: some people remain rather useless--but can still enjoy the game, because it is a game after all--whilst some have a certain talent for it.
I wouldn't say that being a professional gamer is all that worth it anyway; your hardware is given to you, yes, but you're also required by contract to practice for a minimum number of hours per day. Many of these people end up growing to dislike the games they are paid to play, because they can't move onto something else unless it's asked that they learn how to become the best at that instead...
I'm interested in how 'cyber sports' evolve and such, but I'd much rather play a game I enjoyed for fun and then work on a game for fun (and hopefully profit) as opposed to agreeing to play a game, regardless of mood or anything like that, for hours and hours each day.
Even as a professional, those I've known to be sponsored by companies have needed other jobs to sustain themselves because their winning is not guaranteed at all. Free flights around the world? Okay. Being stuck indoors surrounded by buzzing computer hardware instead of getting the opportunity to explore the world you're traveling around? Doesn't seem so glamorous.
. 
