Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (45 users) | |
|
| Numy South Africa. August 14 2011 01:11. Posts 7376 | Profile Blog # |
On August 13 2011 23:42 hugman wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 23:14 Senx wrote:
Thorin bases his entire article on the claim that CS:GO is supposed to replace 1.6, css or unite the fps scene, neither of these claims are correct..so its pointless to argue from that perspective.
In my eyes this is just another CS:CZ but made from another company with valves support. Its as if Valve doesnt trust themselves to create their own CS, so they let a different company do it.
He's nostalgic, delusional and seems to worship Minh Le while blaming everything bad in the world on Valve. Le sigh
Well CSS did kill PC fps games in America and really didn't help out the fps scene anywhere else. So him being rather paranoid seems a bit legit |
|
|
| Cedstick Canada. August 14 2011 01:12. Posts 2564 | Profile Blog # |
| Oh, do tell us how CSS killed the FPS. Please, do. I'd love to hear it. |
| | "What does Rivington do when he's not commentating?" "Drool." ~ Categorist | |
|
|
 xarthaz August 14 2011 01:14. Posts 1697 | Profile Blog # |
On August 13 2011 21:42 Neurosis wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 17:19 Zombo Joe wrote:
I don't get why people hate on Source. Nobody ever states any major reasons. Its all minor nitpicking.
Alright let me list some things. For one, character models are much bigger in source compared to 1.6. At the same time, levels also feel more enclosed. Corridors feel smaller, and just in general levels feel very wrong to someone that came from 1.6. The result of these two issues combined is an fps that makes aiming MUCH easier. That of course means the game takes far less skill, which in turn means getting really good is less rewarding, and then there is the issue of good players can't separate themselves because the skill cap is just too low. Perhaps an even bigger issue is the abysmal recoil system. Each gun in 1.6 was incredibly nuisanced and it took a very very long time to master the recoil of most automatics. As an example, bursting with the ak was an incredibly powerful technique for getting headshots at mid to long range and it was completely different than bursting with, say, the m4. At the same time learning how to properly pull down on the crosshair when you wanted to spray with the ak also took a long time to master and once again, it was completely different than spraying with any other weapon. With source there is basically none of this depth involved with aiming. Headshots feel faceroll and often times highly random, grenades are too powerful, character models too big, game speed too slow....the list goes on and on. You could sum my post up as an elitist that thinks Source doesn't take skill and you would be correct. That is the problem with Source, there is no depth or nuisance, at least compared to 1.6. I guess if you were to compare Source to something like call of doody then it probably seems like the most skillful and deep fps ever made. But, its just meh for someone that grew up playing the original CS religiously.
On August 13 2011 23:20 antelope591 wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 21:42 Neurosis wrote:
On August 13 2011 17:19 Zombo Joe wrote:
I don't get why people hate on Source. Nobody ever states any major reasons. Its all minor nitpicking.
Alright let me list some things. For one, character models are much bigger in source compared to 1.6. At the same time, levels also feel more enclosed. Corridors feel smaller, and just in general levels feel very wrong to someone that came from 1.6. The result of these two issues combined is an fps that makes aiming MUCH easier. That of course means the game takes far less skill, which in turn means getting really good is less rewarding, and then there is the issue of good players can't separate themselves because the skill cap is just too low. Perhaps an even bigger issue is the abysmal recoil system. Each gun in 1.6 was incredibly nuisanced and it took a very very long time to master the recoil of most automatics. As an example, bursting with the ak was an incredibly powerful technique for getting headshots at mid to long range and it was completely different than bursting with, say, the m4. At the same time learning how to properly pull down on the crosshair when you wanted to spray with the ak also took a long time to master and once again, it was completely different than spraying with any other weapon. With source there is basically none of this depth involved with aiming. Headshots feel faceroll and often times highly random, grenades are too powerful, character models too big, game speed too slow....the list goes on and on. You could sum my post up as an elitist that thinks Source doesn't take skill and you would be correct. That is the problem with Source, there is no depth or nuisance, at least compared to 1.6. I guess if you were to compare Source to something like call of doody then it probably seems like the most skillful and deep fps ever made. But, its just meh for someone that grew up playing the original CS religiously.
Pretty much sums it up...to someone who hasn't played cs these changes might not seem that huge but really the super lame nades/flashbangs in source was enough to ruin the game for me. Add in the other points and source was pretty much a complete dissapointment. I played cs for years in cal-m/p but quit source after about a month. Just not a fun game to play coming from 1.6
On August 13 2011 22:43 Quesa wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 21:42 Neurosis wrote:
On August 13 2011 17:19 Zombo Joe wrote:
I don't get why people hate on Source. Nobody ever states any major reasons. Its all minor nitpicking.
Alright let me list some things. For one, character models are much bigger in source compared to 1.6. At the same time, levels also feel more enclosed. Corridors feel smaller, and just in general levels feel very wrong to someone that came from 1.6. The result of these two issues combined is an fps that makes aiming MUCH easier. That of course means the game takes far less skill, which in turn means getting really good is less rewarding, and then there is the issue of good players can't separate themselves because the skill cap is just too low. Perhaps an even bigger issue is the abysmal recoil system. Each gun in 1.6 was incredibly nuisanced and it took a very very long time to master the recoil of most automatics. As an example, bursting with the ak was an incredibly powerful technique for getting headshots at mid to long range and it was completely different than bursting with, say, the m4. At the same time learning how to properly pull down on the crosshair when you wanted to spray with the ak also took a long time to master and once again, it was completely different than spraying with any other weapon. With source there is basically none of this depth involved with aiming. Headshots feel faceroll and often times highly random, grenades are too powerful, character models too big, game speed too slow....the list goes on and on. You could sum my post up as an elitist that thinks Source doesn't take skill and you would be correct. That is the problem with Source, there is no depth or nuisance, at least compared to 1.6. I guess if you were to compare Source to something like call of doody then it probably seems like the most skillful and deep fps ever made. But, its just meh for someone that grew up playing the original CS religiously.
To add to the point about levels, all of the 'realism' that's been added in CS:S detracts from the experience, at least in my view both as a player and a viewer. If you compare the difference between de_inferno, just about anyone who isn't in love with CS would tell you that CS:S is vastly superior, but it's just full of noise and clutter that changes everything about the game. Even as a CAL-IM scrub, I enjoyed the good wallbanging kill on Dust2 in B halls or through the CT spawn floor (one of my favorite scrims I held a guy in place for a second and he stopped to type 'wow nice' after he got out of the stream). On Nuke I would spam everything; another favorite memory was being in an impossible 1-4 situation, being stuck in lower, hearing a footstep directly over head and killing the guy in a totally random spot. In CS:S I can't tell where anything is based on sound, and I virtually have to be looking at the bomb to hear the defuse noise. As you said, the list is endless..
Look, Zombo is correct. Your arguments are a red herring, the differences are minor. It is a need to dichotomise the common elements of life in order to create justification for struggle.
The real loss in skill in CS took place long before 1.6. In the retail versions when bhopping and air accuracy were removed, thats when the dynamics of movement and map control really faded away. It is a huge change when you compare how it affects gameplay, and it was a massive change for the worse.
Last edit: 2011-08-14 01:17:38 |
| |
|
| Essbee Canada. August 14 2011 01:16. Posts 1324 | Profile # |
"New maps"
It was about time lol. |
| | #1 BaBy and Midas fan - StarCraft: Brood War |
|
|
| duckii Germany. August 14 2011 01:21. Posts 800 | Profile # |
On August 14 2011 00:56 mprs wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 12 2011 14:17 rabidch wrote:
On August 12 2011 14:13 rebuffering wrote:
HMM why not work on HL3, or episode 3, what the hell is going on, people who are playing CS 1.6, or CSS, probly dont really care anyways, so why waste time on this. Also, if its still on the source engine, then omg, i will cry, the engine is 7 years old, i dont get it.
who cares about the engine, a lot of people just want a good game
The source engine isn't "7 years old". It is constantly updated and improved by Valve. And I would have much preferred to see them go a different route for a 5v5 T vs CT game... maybe something closer to Tactical Ops. People who like 1.6 won't like any change. What is the point?
http://tactical-assault.com/
I hope it comes out some day 
played TO since the first beta.
---
Last edit: 2011-08-14 01:21:27 |
|
|
| BeMannerDuPenner Germany. August 14 2011 02:43. Posts 5146 | Profile Blog # |
On August 14 2011 01:21 duckii wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 00:56 mprs wrote:
On August 12 2011 14:17 rabidch wrote:
On August 12 2011 14:13 rebuffering wrote:
HMM why not work on HL3, or episode 3, what the hell is going on, people who are playing CS 1.6, or CSS, probly dont really care anyways, so why waste time on this. Also, if its still on the source engine, then omg, i will cry, the engine is 7 years old, i dont get it.
who cares about the engine, a lot of people just want a good game
The source engine isn't "7 years old". It is constantly updated and improved by Valve. And I would have much preferred to see them go a different route for a 5v5 T vs CT game... maybe something closer to Tactical Ops. People who like 1.6 won't like any change. What is the point?
I hope it comes out some day played TO since the first beta. ---
tac ops always was the cool action packed version of CS. playd it a shitton back then (beta till some time after the weird retail version) , even was in quite decent clans playing in leagues sponsored by game magazines where the prize was having your name printed.
personally its interesting , a new multiplayer shooter without COD bullshit could be nice. other then that dont care much. CS never had much appeal to me(too slooow and often "lame") and CSS in addition to that also had a very weird feel to it.
but it was funny to read that"Cldrn: Will Global Offensive make CS go?" arcticle. that guy sure is one butthurt elitist. not that im that much different when it comes to broodwar vs all other rts(including sc2) or quake vs newschool shit fps, still quite funny.
Last edit: 2011-08-14 02:45:57 |
| | life of lively to live to life of full life thx to shield battery |
|
|
| p T r United States. August 14 2011 03:01. Posts 78 | Profile # |
I just hope that the new CS won't try to be anything else other than good ol' CS.  |
|
|
| hugman Sweden. August 14 2011 04:34. Posts 4591 | Profile # |
On August 14 2011 01:21 duckii wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 00:56 mprs wrote:
On August 12 2011 14:17 rabidch wrote:
On August 12 2011 14:13 rebuffering wrote:
HMM why not work on HL3, or episode 3, what the hell is going on, people who are playing CS 1.6, or CSS, probly dont really care anyways, so why waste time on this. Also, if its still on the source engine, then omg, i will cry, the engine is 7 years old, i dont get it.
who cares about the engine, a lot of people just want a good game
The source engine isn't "7 years old". It is constantly updated and improved by Valve. And I would have much preferred to see them go a different route for a 5v5 T vs CT game... maybe something closer to Tactical Ops. People who like 1.6 won't like any change. What is the point?
I hope it comes out some day played TO since the first beta. ---
TacOps 1.6 was the shit =)
The mp5 was so awesome, 3 shots ding ding ding
Using grenades on barrels to fly 100 ft into the air
Ahh... |
|
|
| samd United States. August 14 2011 04:38. Posts 77 | Profile # |
Reminder to ask Hidden Path (the developers of the game), why no 1.6 pros were consulted. Not consulting the more competitive community when trying to make a competitive game = genius?
http://www.hiddenpath.com/contact/ |
| |
|
| duckii Germany. August 14 2011 04:45. Posts 800 | Profile # |
On August 14 2011 02:43 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 01:21 duckii wrote:
On August 14 2011 00:56 mprs wrote:
On August 12 2011 14:17 rabidch wrote:
On August 12 2011 14:13 rebuffering wrote:
HMM why not work on HL3, or episode 3, what the hell is going on, people who are playing CS 1.6, or CSS, probly dont really care anyways, so why waste time on this. Also, if its still on the source engine, then omg, i will cry, the engine is 7 years old, i dont get it.
who cares about the engine, a lot of people just want a good game
The source engine isn't "7 years old". It is constantly updated and improved by Valve. And I would have much preferred to see them go a different route for a 5v5 T vs CT game... maybe something closer to Tactical Ops. People who like 1.6 won't like any change. What is the point?
I hope it comes out some day played TO since the first beta. ---
tac ops always was the cool action packed version of CS. playd it a shitton back then (beta till some time after the weird retail version) , even was in quite decent clans playing in leagues sponsored by game magazines where the prize was having your name printed. personally its interesting , a new multiplayer shooter without COD bullshit could be nice. other then that dont care much. CS never had much appeal to me(too slooow and often "lame") and CSS in addition to that also had a very weird feel to it. but it was funny to read that"Cldrn: Will Global Offensive make CS go?" arcticle. that guy sure is one butthurt elitist. not that im that much different when it comes to broodwar vs all other rts(including sc2) or quake vs newschool shit fps, still quite funny.
Not to derail this thread any further, but that was the true GSL right ;D (Damn mTx roofcampers)
Good times...
I will def check CS GO out though. cs was fun to play with some friends in a smaller scale.
|
|
|
| usernamegl United States. August 14 2011 04:51. Posts 22 | Profile # |
On August 14 2011 01:12 Cedstick wrote:
Oh, do tell us how CSS killed the FPS. Please, do. I'd love to hear it.
He said PC FPS. It definitely hurt the CS scene by splitting the community. |
|
|
| maartendq Belgium. August 14 2011 04:57. Posts 1241 | Profile Blog # |
On August 14 2011 04:51 usernamegl wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 01:12 Cedstick wrote:
Oh, do tell us how CSS killed the FPS. Please, do. I'd love to hear it.
He said PC FPS. It definitely hurt the CS scene by splitting the community.
COD? Battlefield? Those game ring a bell? |
| | I named him Waggleton P. Tallylicker... |
|
|
| samd United States. August 14 2011 05:21. Posts 77 | Profile # |
On August 14 2011 04:57 maartendq wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 04:51 usernamegl wrote:
On August 14 2011 01:12 Cedstick wrote:
Oh, do tell us how CSS killed the FPS. Please, do. I'd love to hear it.
He said PC FPS. It definitely hurt the CS scene by splitting the community.
COD? Battlefield? Those game ring a bell?
what do those have to do with the CS community? |
| |
|
 Klogon MURICA. August 14 2011 07:24. Posts 15806 | Profile Blog # |
On August 14 2011 04:57 maartendq wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 04:51 usernamegl wrote:
On August 14 2011 01:12 Cedstick wrote:
Oh, do tell us how CSS killed the FPS. Please, do. I'd love to hear it.
He said PC FPS. It definitely hurt the CS scene by splitting the community.
COD? Battlefield? Those game ring a bell?
Compared to what CS used to be, those are nothing. |
|
|
| Rareware Canada. August 14 2011 07:28. Posts 339 | Profile # |
On August 14 2011 07:24 Klogon wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 04:57 maartendq wrote:
On August 14 2011 04:51 usernamegl wrote:
On August 14 2011 01:12 Cedstick wrote:
Oh, do tell us how CSS killed the FPS. Please, do. I'd love to hear it.
He said PC FPS. It definitely hurt the CS scene by splitting the community.
COD? Battlefield? Those game ring a bell?
Compared to what CS used to be, those are nothing.
BF isn't anything like CS. It's not meant to e competitive, it's meant to be a large open FPS where you fight on a battlefield... |
| |
|
| Zombo Joe Canada. August 14 2011 08:33. Posts 850 | Profile # |
I don't understand complaining about the recoil system in CS:S when all the guns have at least 5 times more recoil than the of guns in modern FPS's lol.
It just seems like a bitter divide between brothers in the case of 1.6 vs Source. |
| |
|
| Stijx United States. August 14 2011 08:35. Posts 786 | Profile Blog # |
| *Crosses Fingers* "Please don't ruin an amazing franchise, please please" |
| |
|
| samd United States. August 14 2011 08:37. Posts 77 | Profile # |
On August 14 2011 08:33 Zombo Joe wrote:
I don't understand complaining about the recoil system in CS:S when all the guns have at least 5 times more recoil than the of guns in modern FPS's lol.
It just seems like a bitter divide between brothers in the case of 1.6 vs Source.
Zombo, a lot of it stems from Valve's attitude toward the competitive community when they designed source. They literally invited ZERO 1.6 pros when they were designing Source. So when source came out, top players obviously were pissed that they were ignored, and didn't like it from the start. The rest of the players listened to the top players who went around saying it sucked in interviews, and word spread fast that the united 1.6 communities view toward source was that it was bad. Now once again, Valve invited ZERO 1.6 players when designing this new CS, so once again the community is going to be split.
Compare this w/ Blizzard who invited tons of BW pros when designing both wc3 and sc2. The respect towards the competitive community is nonexistent by Valve. |
| |
|
| LeafBlower United States. August 14 2011 08:41. Posts 96 | Profile # |
On August 14 2011 08:33 Zombo Joe wrote:
I don't understand complaining about the recoil system in CS:S when all the guns have at least 5 times more recoil than the of guns in modern FPS's lol.
It just seems like a bitter divide between brothers in the case of 1.6 vs Source.
Compared to 1.6, Source is way more sluggish and "random". Watch any clip from a pro game and you'll see so many headshots that arent even near the actual head. In 1.6 the recoil had a much higher potential of control and methods that produced the same result of spray everytime. |
|
|
| xarthaz August 14 2011 08:42. Posts 1697 | Profile Blog # |
On August 14 2011 05:21 samd wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 04:57 maartendq wrote:
On August 14 2011 04:51 usernamegl wrote:
On August 14 2011 01:12 Cedstick wrote:
Oh, do tell us how CSS killed the FPS. Please, do. I'd love to hear it.
He said PC FPS. It definitely hurt the CS scene by splitting the community.
COD? Battlefield? Those game ring a bell?
what do those have to do with the CS community?
On August 14 2011 07:24 Klogon wrote:
Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 04:57 maartendq wrote:
On August 14 2011 04:51 usernamegl wrote:
On August 14 2011 01:12 Cedstick wrote:
Oh, do tell us how CSS killed the FPS. Please, do. I'd love to hear it.
He said PC FPS. It definitely hurt the CS scene by splitting the community.
COD? Battlefield? Those game ring a bell?
Compared to what CS used to be, those are nothing.
BF and CoD did the same thing to the FPS scene that CS did beforehand - that is they slowed down the game, gave big penalties for shooting while moving, incorporated recoil to dumb down aiming, encouraged prone and crouched combat. They have the same idea as CS does. That is, changing the genre of FPS games from the hardcore high learning curve to a lower learning curve beginner friendly game. Remember, while CS players often beat their chests and use elitist talking points to show difference of their game over the "no skill" CoD and BF, CS itself ironically had the same goal as these games do.
In a sense, they took what CS had achieved, and they polished and further reformed it to what modern tactical shooters are known as.Last edit: 2011-08-14 08:43:27 |
| |
|
| Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 100 200 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 Next | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
