AFAIK is it a consensus within sport that randomness should be reduced? League of Legends has little RNG, Dota has more, but both games use Rng smoothing algorithms (details for Dota, LoL).
The basic principle is that in the case of randomness, the random chance can easily determine the outcome of a game (instead of player skills), which is not acceptable for professional games and tournaments. Quoting the articles I linked above:
In general, randomness is rejected by the competitive game because it can decide on loss and loss without reflecting the actual level of qualification.
In the league, a single action can determine the outcome of a track or even the game. For this reason, randomness in the game is a sensitive issue. While it can be satisfactory to land a big critical hit on your opponent, it can be frustrating or worse to be a victim of a “happy” crit: a random event can cause an experienced player to hit even one less experienced player loses even though the skillful player made a better game. In a casual game, the decision to include randomness can be a breeze if it makes the game more fun. However, the decision to include randomness in esports has the potential to make or break a professional player's career or determine the outcome of a tournament. As a result, many game developers take measures to reduce the impact of randomness in their games.
Seems reasonable, but … I don't understand, there just seem to be too many counterexamples! Pokemon is insanely random, but Pokemon, as far as I know, is played competitively. More traditionally, poker and bridge seem to be one of the most obvious counterexamples. These games seem to show that it's not that pro-play demands little to no randomness?
When and why does it make sense to reduce the randomness of games that should be played competitively?
For the sake of completeness, I have to include two more opinions on the subject that I have heard / read.
First, someone on Discord told me that poker is not really comparable to LoL because it is less popular (I was amazed to learn that LoL tournaments have tens of millions of viewers while poker only has hundreds of thousands) and that poker is a game of chance . This is why randomness works in poker – randomness in games turns it into gambling, which in itself is a problem.
Second, Extra Credits made a video on the subject saying that randomness can work for competitive games (and IIUC implied that the claim that competitive games need to have little to no randomness is wrong), but the tournament format must be adjusted – instead of eliminating them individually, they should do the tournaments in round robin. But doesn't this create new problems because – correct me if I'm wrong – most people, both players and spectators, don't find Round Robin overly boring?