Apologies that this isn't really a "simple" single question or one with a simple answer, but I have to ask it. Some backstory:
I don't play VGC. Neither large tournaments nor the doubles format have ever appealed to me, whereas I adore the discussion that "balance" as an aim brings in OU Singles. But a lot of stand-up guys (not a lot of girls tho :B) I know DO play and are very into it! So well done them, and I take a polite interest.
ANYWAY I'm reading an article by a guy from my "local" league and he posted the teams he faced below, and I roll my eyes, because, well, Lando T + MKanga and a whole bunch of staples are everywhere (plus things like Raichu or Lapras or whatever but I'm already long aware that viability in singles is not the same as viability in doubles).
But then I catch myself. WTF me?? I just did the exact thing I give out to OU naysayers about when they claim OU is too restrictive/boring/overpowered/blah blah blah; the stuff people end up using is NOT the same as what's actually viable. Just because there's a bit of a hivemind does not mean the metagame is any of those things. So I felt bad about dismissing VGC... up to a point.
My questions are as follows (and are entirely opinion-based so "IMO"s are fine):
Is there a discrepancy between what being S, A or D in the viability tiers means between OU Singles and VGC? I.e. are things that are low-tiered in OU roughly as useful as low-tiered mons in VGC, or maybe is there a larger gap between A+ and S in one of those metagames?
How similarly does usage reflect usability in both metagames? Are people more/less prone to using (and/or succeeding with) gimmicks, or perhaps opportunity cost for not using S rank mons in particularly low/high in one?
Leaving aside the functional differences and provided support/popularity/official status of doubles versus singles, is it fair to say that OU singles is a superior metagame than VGC? If yes/no why? (I'm aware stating that may sound snotty. That's not the intent, but logically a metagame built with the idea of balance behind it has to be superior to one where balance isn't really directly supported, right? If not, then what's the point? If this logic is faulty please by all means question it. There is no other reason I phrased it that way.)
I'm really just looking for opinions from people who represent both your average Smogon user, but also people who have an interest in VGC, because I think you guys would have the least biased opinions. I mean, you can definitely play and be interested in a metagame without even liking it, (cough cough OU gen V Weather Wars) so I don't see any problems regarding bias there. Thanks guys :) If this is best asked in another place please tell me where.
