Sugarcane Video Walkthrough for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

[Shawn Zipay]

Today marks the last video walk through for the four maps that were released in last week's update to the Counter-Strike: Global Offensive beta.

The final video is Sugarcane and it seems to look quite familiar, wouldn't you say?

The map, despite its near identical layout to a portion of the Hard Rain campaign from Left 4 Dead 2, plays quite well. It offers up a good central area for firefights, and offers up more vertical shootouts than other maps so far.

Don't yet see the resemblance to Hard Rain? Perhaps these will offer up a better comparison:

http://imgur.com/eQcrs & http://imgur.com/SvPSd
http://imgur.com/RLWCJ & http://imgur.com/QlrF5

[SupaDupaNoodle]

From all these videos you have posted, I can safely say that this new game is just MW, and a far cry from CS. Rather than an evolution of a classic game, Valve (like other publishers) has decided to insult the intelligence of CS fans in particular, and gamers in general, by producing what amounts to a premium-priced cheap knock-off of MW, a game that is, like Pokemon, pogs and yoyos in the physical world, just a passing fad. What we need from a new CS is neither Modern Warfare with Cliffe's voice for radio commands, nor L4D without zombies.

What we need from a new CS is new gameplay elements more akin to what Gooseman has been doing with his Tactical Intervention. Nothing new has been added to CS since the tactical shield. This demolition mode is basically Valve copying MW's style. Why doesn't Valve actually innovate? Why waste time and energy on creating a L4D/MW2 mishmash when it would be far more rewarding for both developers and players if the famous VIP mode from as_oilrig has so much potential?

Counterstrike is not MW. It was not supposed to be, and it shouldn't try to be. Most FPS-gamers today are in a fit of obsession with hyperactive-style gameplay, tiny maps, gaining XP, instant respawns, three-shot-anywhere insta-kills, what appears to be built in autoaim, and extra abilities which magically fall from the sky. This is not reflective of "modern combat" in any way, shape, or form.

Counter-Strike attempting to copy these elements is going to be why Global Offensive will be one gigantic flop. Modern Warfare didn't try to copy CS, instead it presented a dumbed-down version of CS for impatient, skill-lacking, know-it-all teenagers who were easily distracted by shiny things. If it had tried to make a CS clone with better graphics, it would have failed (like the partial failure of CSS).

When I first heard about GO, I was happy to see CS being revived. It is a franchise with much potential, a strong brand, and a loyal following. My PC is now too old to play the newest generation of games (though I haven't tried to anyway), and I will not be upgrading as long as CS1.6, BF2 and a handful of other games (yes, including MW1 and MW2) have running servers.

CS:GO if it had been executed properly would have strongly tempted me to upgrade, such is my love of CS. Sadly, this MW clone will shine only for a few fleeting moments after its release, under the vacuous glow of obsequiously fawning establishment reviewers of the now dilapidated gaming commentariat. Within a year, it will inevitably join the other rotting carcasses of tried-but-couldn't games, lying forgotten in the wake of the continuing march forward of that juggernaut, CS1.6.

Behold CS:GO, a perfect example of industry bandwagonning, and another nail in the coffin of the gaming industry.

[Shawn Zipay]

Re: Sugarcane Video Walkthrough for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Are you focusing solely on the Arsenal Demolition videos? Because the classic Counter-Strike modes are still included and play almost identically to how they used to. Aresenal is an added/optional mode, one based off of the popular Gungame mod from previous games.

[SupaDupaNoodle]

No, no. I mean the game as a whole. I don't think there's much point in re-releasing the old CS with a new set of textures every decade. It's just shoddy; we need innovation, not revision.

[Shawn Zipay]

Re: Sugarcane Video Walkthrough for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

But as soon as something gets changed, the entire community throws a hissy fit. How can they innovate when the community at large doesn't want them to?

[SupaDupaNoodle]

Re: Sugarcane Video Walkthrough for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Of course there are complaints, but that is often when something that works is changed. Like for example say they took out the AWP completely without keeping that a server-side option. The majority would complain, and rightly so in my opinion. Very few would complain if they actually added something. But the current quest for "balance" (what exactly does that even mean?) for the two teams, and the palpable fear of rocking the boat, smacks only of laziness on the part of Valve and other developers. Games are meant to be fun, and CS1.6 is still played so much today because of precisely that. CS:GO's firmly imposed "balance" is just rigidly boring.

[Stev0esque]

Re: Sugarcane Video Walkthrough for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Wow... Have never heard such an alarming amount of alarmis- Oh wait, there are the battlelog forums...

[Shawn Zipay]

Re: Sugarcane Video Walkthrough for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Of course there are complaints, but that is often when something that works is changed. Like for example say they took out the AWP completely without keeping that a server-side option. The majority would complain, and rightly so in my opinion. Very few would complain if they actually added something. But the current quest for "balance" (what exactly does that even mean?) for the two teams, and the palpable fear of rocking the boat, smacks only of laziness on the part of Valve and other developers. Games are meant to be fun, and CS1.6 is still played so much today because of precisely that. CS:GO's firmly imposed "balance" is just rigidly boring.

CS1.6 is played as much as it is for a few reasons. 1. Many gamers, especially those in foreign countries just cannot upgrade to a machine that can adequately run CS:Source, at least not with the billion FPS that some gamers apparently feel like they need. 2. CSS does not feel or play the same as 1.6. CS:GO attempts to bring the two worlds together, gathering feedback from both CS:Source and 1.6 pro gamers to give the improved visuals of a Source game while feeling like the older games.

This fact alone is what kept many 1.6 gamers from moving on to CS:Source for the longest time. They couldn't adjust, so they went back to 1.6, something they were more familiar with.

And... they have added things.

They've added the new Arsenal modes, as mentioned. They're looking to add in some zombie mod that's popular with earlier CS games as an officially supported inclusion post-release. They've added in new weapons for both teams. They've added in new, specialized maps for the new mode.

So you say they should add things and that "very few would complain" if they actually added something. But that's exactly what they did and people (including you) are complaining about it? I don't get it.

[SupaDupaNoodle]

Arsenal mode is GunGame Mod but institutionalised by Valve. I don't need CS:GO for that, I can play GunGame Mod on CS1.6, or even *shudder* BlackOps. A similar Valve-"blessed" version of Zombie mod just goes along the same track. How is this innovation? It isn't "adding" anything, simply including stuff that's already out there, of course with better graphics.

Is this the best one of the most profitable games companies with their glorious "cabals" of programmers can come up with? I'm severely unimpressed.

And I am highly skeptical of the whole "we are taking your feedback" business - principally because I don't believe a word of it.

We need new mechanics to make a fun and interesting game which deserves to take on and further the mantle of CS, and which will unite the CS-community and attract new players. This MW-clone fails to achieve that, I am afraid to say.