I am asking these questions related to Counter-Strike out of curiosity. I myself play a little CS:S (still, SC2 FTW!).
1. If you only play CS 1.6, why so, and not CS:S? I heard CS 1.6 is more competitive, but I don't understand how, as CS:S seems to be exactly like CS 1.6 except for minor map changes and improved graphics.
2. Do you play other FPS games, such as COD or Halo? If so, do you prefer them over Counter-Strike? I think CS is a much better game, as it encourages teamwork and strategy much more than other FPS games.
3. How come other FPS games aren't as popular competitively as CS is? Is it because of the lack of strategy and teamwork, as I mentioned?
4. Is Valve going to make a new CS game? Do you think it should?
Answering these questions will make me become much more knowledgeable of the CS community and FPS in general. Thank you in advance!
I am asking these questions related to Counter-Strike out of curiosity. I myself play a little CS:S (still, SC2 FTW!).
1. If you only play CS 1.6, why so, and not CS:S? I heard CS 1.6 is more competitive, but I don't understand how, as CS:S seems to be exactly like CS 1.6 except for minor map changes and improved graphics.
2. Do you play other FPS games, such as COD or Halo? If so, do you prefer them over Counter-Strike? I think CS is a much better game, as it encourages teamwork and strategy much more than other FPS games.
3. How come other FPS games aren't as popular competitively as CS is? Is it because of the lack of strategy and teamwork, as I mentioned?
4. Is Valve going to make a new CS game? Do you think it should?
Answering these questions will make me become much more knowledgeable of the CS community and FPS in general. Thank you in advance!
Edit: Minor errors.
1. Shooting threw walls and other aspects of the game is defiantly different between these two versions. Go watch some old eoLithic videos to truly understand what teamwork can do when you can shoot through paper thin walls.
2. Yes. TF2 mostly...with some battlefield sprinkled in there.
3. CS has its roots in competitive play. It has been regarded as the most skill/teamwork based FPS for a long time. I think people love it still because they are familiar with it.
4. Probably. Not sure if it will succeed though!
CS has always been one of my favorite games to watch. The teamwork and dedication it takes to become the best is very inspiring. I see this through rose colored glasses though...since it was one of my first glimpses into competitive E-sports. (this and quake 3 ^^)
I am asking these questions related to Counter-Strike out of curiosity. I myself play a little CS:S (still, SC2 FTW!).
1. If you only play CS 1.6, why so, and not CS:S? I heard CS 1.6 is more competitive, but I don't understand how, as CS:S seems to be exactly like CS 1.6 except for minor map changes and improved graphics.
2. Do you play other FPS games, such as COD or Halo? If so, do you prefer them over Counter-Strike? I think CS is a much better game, as it encourages teamwork and strategy much more than other FPS games.
3. How come other FPS games aren't as popular competitively as CS is? Is it because of the lack of strategy and teamwork, as I mentioned?
4. Is Valve going to make a new CS game? Do you think it should?
Answering these questions will make me become much more knowledgeable of the CS community and FPS in general. Thank you in advance!
Edit: Minor errors.
1. I do not play 1.6 for those reasons, whilst graphics are among the least important things for me in a game, if I have a choice between pixellation and smooth nice graphics I know what I will go for. Also I started my CS life on Condition Zero, which is kind of inbetween the 1.6 and CS:S quality, was so happy when Source came along.
2. I play me some CoD4 every now and then, a lot of TF2 (as well as Crysis, Killing Floor and more). I would say I like CoD4 most as a true fps game, TF2 is purely for the lulz and relaxation due to the totally non serious nature of the game. CS:S is less serious and more fun for me, also I think is better suited to me. I don't really know how to say it but the player skins feel more rounded compared to the flatness of CoD, it's easier to be accurate and such. Maybe it's just because I played Condition Zero a hell of a lot when I was younger.
3. I haven't played Halo but I was under the impression it had kind of taken over the competitive fps scene, that said these days I really only play CS:S deathmatch or Warcraft Server as opposed to the competitive normal modes. I agree CS defusal/rescue/VIP modes do require more teamwork than many other fps games though, so perhaps that is the reason.
4. I don't think they need to at the moment, CS:S is fine imo, that said if they can take it in a new direction and enhance it in a somewhat unique way then sure, I'm all for it.
i played cs:s when it came out and competitively but it never compared to 1.6 which i still play. Shooting through walls and team play are hard to beat.
The only other fps I consider decent are battlefield & planetside. Nothing else compares to the skill level needed in cs 1.6.
personally I find all the other games to cater to casual players. example, spawn times on cod/halo.
I have only played the updated cs:s a few times but god is it horrific. They need a new counterstrike but who knows if they can pull it off.
I am asking these questions related to Counter-Strike out of curiosity. I myself play a little CS:S (still, SC2 FTW!).
1. If you only play CS 1.6, why so, and not CS:S? I heard CS 1.6 is more competitive, but I don't understand how, as CS:S seems to be exactly like CS 1.6 except for minor map changes and improved graphics.
2. Do you play other FPS games, such as COD or Halo? If so, do you prefer them over Counter-Strike? I think CS is a much better game, as it encourages teamwork and strategy much more than other FPS games.
3. How come other FPS games aren't as popular competitively as CS is? Is it because of the lack of strategy and teamwork, as I mentioned?
4. Is Valve going to make a new CS game? Do you think it should?
Answering these questions will make me become much more knowledgeable of the CS community and FPS in general. Thank you in advance!
Edit: Minor errors.
1. I stuck with CS 1.6 over CSS just out of habit. Guns, maps, and graphics of CS 1.6 just felt more comfortable.
2. I play a bit of Halo. CoD campaign only. A bit of TF2 now and then. They're great games to take a step back from competitiveness and just shoot shit.
3. No other FPS is balanced for high level play, they don't encourage teamwork as much, and individual skill is lower as well. Halo is okay, but I don't like XBOX controller
4. I'm not sure if CS 1.6 and CSS are missing anything. They're fairly complete competitive FPS games, even their graphics are perfectly fine. Right now there is a split community between CSS and CS 1.6, and also a huge casual FPS community for CoD. If Valve makes a new FPS that could bring together all the old FPS communities, it could make FPS an esport.
I am asking these questions related to Counter-Strike out of curiosity. I myself play a little CS:S (still, SC2 FTW!).
1. If you only play CS 1.6, why so, and not CS:S? I heard CS 1.6 is more competitive, but I don't understand how, as CS:S seems to be exactly like CS 1.6 except for minor map changes and improved graphics.
2. Do you play other FPS games, such as COD or Halo? If so, do you prefer them over Counter-Strike? I think CS is a much better game, as it encourages teamwork and strategy much more than other FPS games.
3. How come other FPS games aren't as popular competitively as CS is? Is it because of the lack of strategy and teamwork, as I mentioned?
4. Is Valve going to make a new CS game? Do you think it should?
Answering these questions will make me become much more knowledgeable of the CS community and FPS in general. Thank you in advance!
Edit: Minor errors.
1. played both, so can't really answer that question... 2. i play or played (or at least tried) pretty much every more or less famous fps that is out there - halo, battlefield, ut, cod, quake, hldm, tf, shattered horizon, bc, and so many more...i played also some competitive and semicompetitive and yeah, i prefer other fps over cs/css nowadays for quite a lot of different reasons 3. i don't really know how you messure the popularity of competitive games...but i can tell you that neither cs/css is the lonesome king of competitive fps nor is the reason why it is one of the games that is played by a wider audience, that other fps "lack of strategy and teamwork" - so sorry if idon't answer that question correctly but i think the question is wrong 4. i can guarantee you, that valve is working on a new fps to at least keep their community. so, answer to this is - yes
1. I played cs 1.6 competitively for years and even though I have source and play it occasionally in pubs I could never really play it competitively because it just feels like an inferior game. The mechanics and the feel of the game just felt like a dumbed down more randomized version of 1.6. It's hard to describe all the differences without typing a whole essay so ill just give you a link to this ss which sums it up pretty well. + Show Spoiler +
http://img833.imageshack.us/i/sourceisbad.jpg/
2. I've played other fps games but only casually, actually just recently bought Black Ops and I'm having fun pubbing in it but again wouldn't want to play it competitively, the gameplay is just too cluttered compared to 1.6.
3. Most of those other games are made with too much extra junk and realism and randomness to really work competitively, and on top of that when they release a new game every 6 months it makes it hard to have a scene build up before everyone switches to the next thing.
I haven't played since a rather unproductive LAN in the fall of 2007, I only played with one group of guys off and on for five years and I was quite tired of them after they refused to practice for the event. I didn't expect to win, just.. would have been nice to make it out of the first round because our best player hadn't gone for a knife in a 1v1 with 10 seconds left on the bomb in the pistol round..
1) I dislike just about everything about CS:S, from the maps and mechanics such as shooting through walls as mentioned to the way the guns work. CS is very much a blank canvas with no pretense for realism, from patch to patch the complaints were always when anything didn't work exactly as expected.
2) Not really. I played CoD1 and CoD4, didn't care for either much. I thought TF2 was brilliantly designed, but I abhor capture the flag, pubbing and never felt the desire to get into scrimming it. I really loathe the direction FPS games are going, from perks and ranks to gimmicky abilities.
3) The blank canvas thing. CS is not forcing an ultra-realistic environment with tons of variables. The simplicity of the models and maps is its strength.
4) There doesn't seem to be much money in appealing to the hard core crowd in any genre, the money is in the casual, gimmicky stuff. Valve seems to be tweaking CS:S to be more like CoD and TF2, not more like CS.
As an aside, while I have adored CS 1.5 and 1.6 since the fall of 2002, I have never, ever understood its appeal outside of team play, the unmodified experience at any rate. There was never anything more painful to me than a server with default settings (5 minute rounds primarily) on the popular maps (cs_assault and de_dust).
1. I play CS 1.6 because I don't have a machine capable of running Source .
2. I've been trying Quake Live as well and I'm getting merked in that game. I prefer CS.
3. I dunno. I thought Quake had a big following too. My guess is that CS has the best foundation set for a competitive FPS, whereas most others have too many gimmicks or fundamental flaws to basic/advanced gameplay. Skill gaps are also very noticeable, which is important for a competitive FPS.
Also, for (important) differences between Source and 1.6, I highly recommend Jonathan Menard's videos; he breaks elements down pretty well. You can start here:
I am asking these questions related to Counter-Strike out of curiosity. I myself play a little CS:S (still, SC2 FTW!).
1. If you only play CS 1.6, why so, and not CS:S? I heard CS 1.6 is more competitive, but I don't understand how, as CS:S seems to be exactly like CS 1.6 except for minor map changes and improved graphics.
2. Do you play other FPS games, such as COD or Halo? If so, do you prefer them over Counter-Strike? I think CS is a much better game, as it encourages teamwork and strategy much more than other FPS games.
3. How come other FPS games aren't as popular competitively as CS is? Is it because of the lack of strategy and teamwork, as I mentioned?
4. Is Valve going to make a new CS game? Do you think it should?
Answering these questions will make me become much more knowledgeable of the CS community and FPS in general. Thank you in advance!
Edit: Minor errors.
1. CS1.6 requires more skill, flashes smokes and nades are all part of strategy (eg; nades deal damage through walls, flashes only work if you see them and smokes are different to source in color and stuff). Also you can shoot through walls and there aren't as many details (such as in source there are trees and all sorts of stuff to make it real)
2. I play Quake Live, QL requires much more strategy than CS/CSS (excluding clan arena since it's too fast paced for CS), but it is a 1v1 Duel game where Quake Dominates the FPS genre as the most skillful FPS game.
3. Other FPS games aren't as successful probably because CS is the original FPS game that defined the fps genre with crosshairs and real military style gameplay.
4. Valve might not be working on it or might be, but it's called Tactical Intervention, being developed by the original CS developer.
1. I played since 1.3 but I do not play in a team (never looked for teams tbh) so take my opinion with a grain of salt. I prefer CS:S over 1.6 as there are more server for it where I am from and 5v5 scrims for cs 1.6 arent as active as cs:s on gotgames.com.au servers.
2. I never played HALO, I play BF2 and Bad Company 2 but I do not think that those games can be very competitive due to poor hit mechanics and jets/vehicles. I played MW 1 and 2. Do not like those games, specially black ops, it seems to be based solely on super-fast run around action with quick respawn timers and the whole run run run jump prone and shoot your opponents thing is a little offputting (at least for me). I also play TF2, its pretty fun and there are quiet alot of different teams competing.
3. I probably would have to say it is because that for its time in 2000s it was THE game to play (besides quake/ut), I used to spend my weekends at netcafes in Melbourne, there were about 40-60 PCs with speakers and EVERY SINGLE pc had counter-strike, I tell you, it is something to hear CS being played at full blast in a room with 40+ pc's.
1. I've played Counter-Strike since 1.3. While 1.6 came with some disappointment to the community, it eventually took over as the dominant version of the game. When there was talk about CS:S, the community was excited, but upon release, the game had more flaws and errors than anyone could care for. The largest complaint about 1.6 on release was hit boxes. CS:S likewise, had unbelievably terrible hit boxes. The whole feel of the game felt off, compared to the crisp clean feel of 1.6. Another major problem I have with CS:S is the fact that it split the gaming community. Professional CS players were forced to transition to the new version of the game or lose sponsors. Then, after literally years of disappointed pro-gamers playing CS:Source, they returned to play 1.6 competitively once more, however, the community scene was so dissolved compared to what it used to be. CS:S is built upon a glitchy environment that might seem pretty, but lacks the clean cut simplistic environment needed for professional play.
2. Yes, I play other FPS, including: Quake, TFC, TF2, COD4, L4D2, DoD, DoD:S. No, as far as competitive play goes for FPS, CS 1.6 will always be the pinnacle of FPS games. I have yet to play a FPS game that is as difficult or interesting as competitive CS is. It's actually very disappointing how easy it is for someone who's good at CS to be god like at any of these other terrible versions of FPS, especially the COD4 series. I play Black Ops for a week and top frag with 10:1 kd ratios like it's no bodies business. The skill cap between CS and other FPS is frightening.
3. Competitive CS is built off of teamwork, intelligence, strategy, and experience. Other FPS games have low skill caps, allowing players with far less skill to be able to participate on a closer level to the better players. Things like kill-streaks, ridiculous weapon add ons, etc. all push for a unbalanced type of game play. If you wanted to be great at CS, you needed to put in time/effort/practice. If you want to be good at other FPS (mostly referring to COD BO/MW2) simply set up the right "class" to play. One of the other important differences among CS and other FPS is the economy system. You're not simply given a weapon, you have to earn it. This concept makes for very very interesting strategies.
4. Valve had talked about making a new version of counter-strike, specifically to satisfy the competitive CS 1.6 players that were disappointed with CS:Source. They planned to call it Counter-Strike Online. The community became upset with waiting and tried to produce their own version, aka, CS Pro Mod. It failed miserably. The truth is, the longer Valve waits, the less likely this game is to ever come out, and second, the less chance it would be likely to succeed with the community. There was a new game being produced by the same person who created Counter-Strike called Tactical Intervention, but last I heard this game was in beta, and that was two years ago.
Final thoughts: I long for their to be another FPS that's on the same level as Counter-Strike, but I don't see it happening again. Right now, gaming companies are producing games that everyone has a chance to be somewhat good at, and they could really careless as far as the competitive scene is concerned. Lets take a peek at some of the more recent FPS games that fail to meet basic requirements for play:
They release MW2 without servers, letting hackers literally take over the entire online play. It was almost impossible to join a game and not see 1-2 players aimbotting/wall hacking. The absence of servers led to an inability to establish a community, and thus the game failed for the competitive scene.
Now Black Ops: PC gamers were promised servers, however, you can't group up and join a server as a party. Once again, crippling the ability for competitive players to establish some form of community. Some servers had special requirements, like barebone weapons, or no noob tube, etc. But the interface doesn't allow you to change classes while in an actual game. You must disconnect, fix your class, and reconnect, while hoping your slot hasn't been taken, and hoping you can still locate the server, because until the game was patched, you couldn't even join through friends.
Left4Dead2: Worst match making system in the history of games. It was unbelievably laggy. Nearly impossible to fill up an actual 8 man party. No servers. The software for functional/coherent microphone usage was hardly there. The sad part is, it's actually a great/fun game to play, if you can actually manage to form up a team, pray for decent latency, and somehow get the microphones to function properly.
TF2: My biggest problem with this game is that it manipulates users into purchasing items/weapons/hats... in order to be better then others, or look cooler. Since when did team oriented games became about who has the most actual money? It's a bit depressing to see that this game, from what I've heard from the majority of players, is basically about getting hats.
I don't mean to sound like a troll, but you should never ask a counter strike player whether or not they prefer 1.6 or source. I've been playing CS for over 10 years, competitively for around 5, and there is never a definite answer for that question. Those who play 1.6 will argue that source has terrible hitboxes and is completely random and an easier version of the game. Those who play source will argue that 1.6 is stupid because you can shoot and grenade people through solid walls and is more about who can do more damage through a three foot thick stone wall rather than legitimately kill someone. Coming from a competitive standpoint, the question 1.6 or source hardly ever comes down to source has better graphics so I will play that game.
I personally play source, and I tend to not play any other FPS on the computer so it won't affect my muscle memory that is necessary in competitive play.
From what I've heard CS:S has stronger roots in NA then in Europe and Asia. The euro scene has been dominating the 1.6 scene for as long as i can remember but there are some good NA teams to. I've only played Source competitively but I prefer to watch 1.6. Even tho the grapichs are outdated it still produces the moste epic games.
1. CS:S was a joke on release. Buggy hit boxes, broken physics (getting killed by flying debris was retarded) and a lower skill cap (wall banging people is an art).
2. I played competitive Natural Selection (another half life mod sort of like a CS/SC hybrid) and TF1 UT Quake 3. All the new Halo/CoD games are garbage for competitive play compared to those classics. Seriously, any FPS specifically designed around having a joystick as your primary means of aiming is retarded.
3. CS came out at a time when Lans were popular. It was cheap, had low system reqs and great gameplay/replayability all rolled into one. That couple with a high skill cap and great teamwork and competitive scenes made for a very popular game.
4. If valve made a game that was as good as CS1.5 (not 1.6) and had support for the community I'd definately play.
1. 2. No 3. The wallshooting and perfect precision when aiming makes it a natural arena for the pros imo. 4. Probably, something along the lines of cs 1.6 with better graphics or some FPSMMO
1. If you only play CS 1.6, why so, and not CS:S? I heard CS 1.6 is more competitive, but I don't understand how, as CS:S seems to be exactly like CS 1.6 except for minor map changes and improved graphics.
Ive played both Competitively CS 1.6 with teams (1st~, GB, ECO), CS:S (ECO, VG) all pretty much top teams at one point, so I believe I have some understanding of both games or atleast a good opinion... CS 1.6 flowed a lot better, the game felt crisper, faster and the hitboxes were bang on most of the time depending on lag. As for source, the game felt slower, not because of better graphics just in general it didnt have the same netcode or feel as CS 1.6. I finished my CS days off with source, because at the time more tournaments were switching over; not sure now adays I know teams still play 1.6 and source, i guess it depends on what big name tournaments happen and what they choose? I remember WCG had qualifiers one year in 1.6 and the grand finals were in source... or vice versa cant remember.. but that was messed up.
2. Do you play other FPS games, such as COD or Halo? If so, do you prefer them over Counter-Strike? I think CS is a much better game, as it encourages teamwork and strategy much more than other FPS games.
Yes I played COD and halo, not competitively, but more just for fun. Both games compared to CS are slow; HALO for sure is slow and COD just doesnt have the same teamwork imo.
3. How come other FPS games aren't as popular competitively as CS is? Is it because of the lack of strategy and teamwork, as I mentioned?
Umm HALO is very very competive most likely more then CS if not on par with it; as MLG and other big name companies have held numerous HALO tournaments. Peronsonally though HALO is a console game, and CS is a PC game; both are different. CS i find allowed more teamwork, it was if you get killed your team is down instantly etc. In halo i guess you respawn etc.
4. Is Valve going to make a new CS game? Do you think it should?
No i doubt they will, the closest new game that looks to be like CS was COD MW2; or perhaps Crysis 2 when that comes out?
Answering these questions will make me become much more knowledgeable of the CS community and FPS in general. Thank you in advance!
I am asking these questions related to Counter-Strike out of curiosity. I myself play a little CS:S (still, SC2 FTW!).
1. If you only play CS 1.6, why so, and not CS:S? I heard CS 1.6 is more competitive, but I don't understand how, as CS:S seems to be exactly like CS 1.6 except for minor map changes and improved graphics.
I played CSS first, then tried to get into 1.6 when I heard all the 8 year veterans bitching and moaning about Source.....but, tbh, they are just being nostalgiac. The "hitboxes are terrible" argument was only true for about the first year of release, the random recoil patterns got mostly fixed a couple years ago, and pretty much any other argument is just people that have played the same game for 10 years refusing to change just out of principle. CSS is a very solid competitive game, and if the 1.6'ers would wake up a realize their game is completely 100% never going to go anywhere, the whole FPS community would be a lot better off.
2. Do you play other FPS games, such as COD or Halo? If so, do you prefer them over Counter-Strike? I think CS is a much better game, as it encourages teamwork and strategy much more than other FPS games.
I LOVE Quake Live/Q3. Best FPS ever made, imo. I got into it really heavy right after the beta came out and got pretty decent, up to a point where I could compete with some of the heavy hitters in CTF. It is ridiculously skill-based, however, and a single amazing player can completely take over a game, unlike CS, where teamwork is generally more important. Plus the QL competitive scene revolves around duel......which is 1 v 1, lol. It is so fun to play though, nothing like completely taking over a pub server and putting up 20:1 k/d ratios on CTF.
3. How come other FPS games aren't as popular competitively as CS is? Is it because of the lack of strategy and teamwork, as I mentioned?
Because they are easy and balanced around horrible players. Coming from a CS/Quake background, I have yet to find a PC FPS that I couldn't flat-out dominate right out of the gate. MNC, for example, its a good game, but completely balanced around players being terrible. I can snipe and put up 40:1 scores on most maps, just because people are terrible. I've faced level 80 snipers and such and completely destroyed them. Another example, BFBC2. I can't drive any vehicles for crap. I have(had) no decent weapons unlocked. I barely knew how the game worked, and definitely didn't know any of the maps. I basically lived at the top of the stats sheet, especially if I snipe or go behind enemy line/rambo. Seriously, NOONE can snipe in that game. I'll get lazy and some guy will get an easy sniper kill on me, and I can come back to the exact same spot, and just walk out and kill him, and then kill him again and again as they try to knock me of my perch. So sad.
4. Is Valve going to make a new CS game? Do you think it should?
Answering these questions will make me become much more knowledgeable of the CS community and FPS in general. Thank you in advance!
Edit: Minor errors.
Hopefully. And hopefully they'll finally make Episode 3 too. But that won't happen any time soon.
EPT
.
