Good point, the league closure will surely affect much more the American scene rather than the European or any other region, it was almost a North-American league only, you have a full season there while the other regions had two events: combine and grand final.

New Achievement unlockt: "He has got the point award and others are sad whiners!!!!"
25 achievement points.

CGS would have failed with 1.6,quake and w3 aswell because they approached the whole thing with a wrong attitude.
By wrong attitude I mean their xenophobic behaviour, they wanted to be the only organization out there, and cut off their players from other organizations.
And another thing people seem to forget too often: VALVE didn't give them a choice, they HAD to pick css, even tho they would have probably picked it anyway.

actually, CGS was a good idea, but picking up games the community isn't following that much was a big mistake. And I've seen those games on TV, on Eurosport, I didn't even understand anything, it was badly filmed (bad hltv manager, I'll call him like that) and way too fast actions. I've played CSS and I just couldn't understand much to what was going on, so I don't need to imagine what my father understood when he watched that. CSS is just so ugly to me.. And CS 1.6 isn't too old imo, it still can be shown on TV.

"Picking up games the community isn't following that much was a big mistake".

This is where the CS players can't help themselves. DOA, PGR and FIFA are all used in multiple competitions. They all feature in the WCG, and FIFA is used heavily in the ESL Pro Series as well.

'Source is the second most popular FPS behind '1.6. The community might not be as big, but they still represent a huge percentage of the community, and the CGS picking it over the older, more established and competitive version was justified on a number on levels. If you're going to pick a game based on the size of the community then WoW should've been used instead of 1.6.

I don't play either CS by the way.

I know you don't play any of the CS but you always defended the poor CSS :P.
Anyway, FIFA and DOA are far from attracting as much people as CS 1.6 or WC3 do. And when you're trying to launch such project, don't take the second game, take the one almost every fans are following. And the CSS community started to grow thanks to the CGS, but hardcore gamers(1.6 players most of the time) were not interested in playing what is often called "a broken game" (quoted a coL player). CGS came with their ideas and tryed to impose it to the world, the world said no.

CSS couldn't grow because eSports can't sustain multiple games in the same genre. CS 1.6 was already there and stopped CSS from growing to the same level. While a lot of you guys think '1.6 is better it doesn't really matter. It's like saying the 100m is better than the 200m.

As I said the number of players isn't important. It doesn't matter if WC3, WoW or DotA have more players (than the CGS games picked) because they're unsuitable for mainstream television in the West. FIFA, PGR (now something else) and DOA are all the top game in their genre [I'm not going to get into an argument about whether PES is better or not].

Quake, or a death-match game would never be used if we only picked games on the size of their community, but it's probably the most exciting and well suited genre for TV ironically enough,

The decision to pick CSS over CS 1.6 was a good one in hindsight. If the CGS had picked 1.6 and kept their system then the league would be very small and competitive [and ESWC/WCG/ESL would all suffer], or it would be completely crap and people would moan about money being wasted on mediocre teams.

The '1.6 community can't have it both ways.Most of the whine is to do with the inflated ego of the '1.6 community, and how they expect everything on a plate. They didn't like the fact that CSS was chosen - even if it wasn't the CGS who made the choice (I'm pretty sure Valve made them choose CSS), and they made sure the CGS would suffer for it.

The goal they wanted to reach by picking the games they chose was to attract as many people as possible, either hardcore gamers or TV spectators (new fans). In my opinion the games they picked up weren't the best choice and that's why today they failed. If the hardcore/casual gamers are following a game instead of another it's because it's more attractive. So why wouldn't the TV spectators love it too? Now the VALVe issue is another debate. But the choice of games is the reason of CGS's death and that's all I wanted to say.