Investigating the Effective Marketing Strategies from the Perspective of Counter-strike 2 and Valorant

Abstract

Esports clubs operate at the intersection of performance, media, and sponsorship markets, where marketing effectiveness is tightly coupled to on-server results and to the institutional design of each title’s ecosystem. This paper compares Counter-Strike 2 (CS2) and Valorant—two tactical FPS titles with contiguous audiences but divergent governance models—through a Porter’s five-forces audit and a synthesis of qualitative and quantitative indicators (e.g., audience peaks, engagement programs, loyalty metrics). This study finds rivalry is structurally high; barriers to entry are shaped less by code than by coordinated community, broadcast, and creator layers; buyer power is amplified by multi-screen habits; and supplier influence tracks stack ownership (client, storefront, events, IP). Effective, widely adopted strategies include influencer-led distribution, professionalized owned media, cross-platform IMC, and first-party data/loyalty systems (e.g., programs reporting thousands of sign-ups, >100 interactions per user, and meaningful per-member revenue). Ineffective approaches include undifferentiated advertising, weak merchandise design, and over-reliance on unstructured player channels. CS2’s open circuit rewards discovery-driven narratives and entrepreneurial partnerships, while Valorant’s publisher-run leagues favor polished, season-long storytelling and brand-safe inventory. Opportunities lie in AI-enabled segmentation and creative optimization, automated highlights, immersive/interactive formats, and direct-to-consumer subscriptions integrated with live-service economies. The study contributes title-specific, actionable implications for club marketers and outlines a framework for aligning channel mix, timing, and partner architecture with ecosystem governance.