>fuck your body is too long
Lets break this down one point at a time
>Is there any true way to measure one's skill in competitive gaming
Like I said before, depends on what your definiition of true skill is, and where you set the standards for skill, and how long a particular game needs to be around before you can declare a competitive scene is valid. No one could be great at every genre to a competitive level, or even in different games in the same genre, you just need to be aware of what skills you need to succeed playing a game, and go from there.
>or is the whole scene just muscle memory and plain old rote memorization of established situational strategies?
Is this not a true way to measure skill? To have the ability to have full control over your own muscles, memorize how much mouse movement you need to make a 25, 66, or even 160 degree turn in order to make that split second headshot, is this not a measure of skill? Is establishing the most optimized routes to strategic locations of importance, maximizing your chance of success, not a measure of skill? Is practicing for hours on in on these established strategies to a razor's edge not a measure of skill? I would say if you win when teams/individuals are on a, as much as allowed possible in the game environment, level playing field, you have superior skills at that time.
>Take counter strike for instance, where the main part of the 'skill' comes from simply memorizing map call-outs and flash/smoke grenade throwing positions/angles.
Same reasons as the point before, exploiting these positions the most efficient way possible and having a supreme level of awareness over your opponents means the difference between winning and losing. Never let your opponent out maneuver you in any way possible, or exploit any possible angle of attack to get an advantage over you. You will not win if you can't make these judgements, or utilize the tools at your disposal.
>The gun-play is very lacking, as it hardly functions as it should and the one in GO is watered down to hell.
The very definition of gun play is so fucking jank that no one on the planet has any idea what good gun play is, because its all based on an opinion. Granted, this comes from a faggot who came in 2nd and 5th place in two Global Offensive E-Sports tournaments, and I think that the gun play in that game is absolute horse shit. Only measuring it relative to how the environment of the gun play versus itself and other similar games. I can say that quake is the epitome of pure skill with gun play, because you need very well defined reaction timing to win, or I can say that Counter strike or Call of Duty this is just an example not my opinion where placement of your character and getting the first shot in is pure skill with gun play. I guarantee that playing Quake with gun play like a military simulator, or something like Arma 3 with gameplay like quake, would make both of them absolutly terrible to play, even less so for a competitive scene.
>There's also games like Starcraft and Street Fighter where muscle memory is key.
Real life sports is nothing but developing muscle memory. The real difference is these sports utilize the physical endurance aspect of a human, versus just mental fortitude, sleght of hand, and reaction timing with 99.99% of vidya.
>and the game becomes something where the winner isn't decided by who makes the right move, but by who makes the wrong move.
Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
>One fuck up is all it takes for someone to lose, even if they performed amiably prior to it.
If one fuck up IS all it takes to lose, either the game is extremely punishing on mistakes, or the mistake was so great that the player/team should not have made the mistake of that magnitude where they lose. Granted, no one is perfect with the ability to have repeatable zero flaws in their play, but exploiting your opponent because of their mistakes, is just utilizing your skill to take opportunities when they arise.