Poll Update!

[KGarcia]

Know this, I am the BDS of North America and lockhart is my turtle.

[Thortok2000]

Edited by [user="152360"] @ [time="1081488931"]

I've had enough debating about this.



First of all, 'pro mode', no matter what the changes are, is stupid. Reasons have been given, but it basically boils down to 'pro mode' won't be pro mode, because everyone will play it anyway.



So to suggest the changes for 'pro mode' would be to suggest the changes for all of CS, pubs, low-level scrims, and, of course, the pros.



The closest thing to 'pro mode' would be to allow server-side variables for more things, such as recoil. Which would make the pubs even more varied and separated. And guess what the leagues and pros, and even the majority of the pubs would do? Use the default values. No league is going to support a 'pro' mode.



So leaving 'pro mode' out of it, there's two major issues. The jumping slowdown, and the recoil randomness.



As far as the jumping slowdown, I can see this being nerfed, but not removed. Something should be in place to penalize the people who don't like to touch the ground, because jumping too much is just plain ridiculous.



As for the recoil, I strongly believe that if interp and hitboxes were fixed, the recoil, while still being random of course, would be much less 'random' than it is now.



So here, to make it easy to read:



A) Pro mode is pointless. The pros play the same game as we do.



B) Infinite jumping is ludicrous. Increase the amount of jumping if and only if you really feel you need to, but punish the people who jump 'too much'. While it may or may not increase the 'skill level' of the game to have more jumping, it's still ludicrous.



C) The interp and hitboxes are most likely causing the majority of the randomness, and should be fixed first, before any recoil suggestions come into play. Recoil may or may not still be a problem afterwards, you can argue about that as much as you want, until you're blue in the face, but interp and hitboxes must be addressed first.



I also feel that gamers that are able to adapt to the 'randomness' and still get headshots are more skilled than those that want the randomness to go away so they can get kills other than by luck.



And, on another note, I doubt I'd ever get a single kill on a 3D player or a SK player. Not a single one. Ever. Even with the 'randomness'. Not unless I was camping and they didn't know I was there, or something, which I doubt would even happen.

[GeOTek]

im EXTREMELY shocked as to how many people think games like ut etc are skilled games.ive explained this so many times......games like that are based off of strafing,and how good at strafing can you get?Since the aim is alwways dead on,that makes it a very "user friendly" game,And much easier to master,i mean,the gun shoots where you point,and is just as accuate no matter if your moving in the air or doin a back flip,sure this game play is fun,but as far as different levels in players,there isnt that much,but there isnt much room for improvment,think about it.

[Tycho]

I'm certainly not a fan of promode but I am a big supporter of slightly reducing the randomness to about 1.3 levels. As far as jumping goes I would much rather have it the way it is now and no bunny hopping idiots, but it would be nice to be able to jump once without the slowdown we currently have.

[Andeh]

Tycho wrote..

I'm certainly not a fan of promode but I am a big supporter of slightly reducing the randomness to about 1.3 levels. As far as jumping goes I would much rather have it the way it is now and no bunny hopping idiots, but it would be nice to be able to jump once without the slowdown we currently have.

thats exactly how I feel.

[ioCS,undertaker]

Like the bots say, no more aztec today plz :)



You can remove the sound effects, remove or add some new rocks, boxes; change the timing of teams to arrive certain areas etc. but you cannot radicaly change de_aztec. The main problem is it's so simple and random for league play. Skill of one awper can dominate the whole match. There is not much options about strategy. Usually, result of the matches are decided by either side had dominated the game most as being cts. Team getting score 10-2 beats the other getting 9-3. So... Leave it the same as it is. Aztec is hated by most of the teams, and it will in the future. Save your efforts for new league-play maps, like mill, fire and comrade.

[David Johnston]

lockhart wrote..

I don't know much about soccer (european football) but would you say Dave that Real Madrid is the best team in the world right now? But if Man. U played them (I don't even know if they ever play) who would win? Predictability and randomness aren't the same thing. Whichever of those two teams plays better on that day will win the game.

I don't care about soccer a bit, it was merely an example. You're right - technically, predictability and randomness are entirely different, but I couldn't think of more appropriate words at the time to describe the crazy stuff in my head.

[I2o[G]uE TacT-X]

i just want valve to fix all hundreds of bugs in steam. i don't know why it takes them so damn long. screw pro cs and just start working on cs2 (if they havn't started already) on the source engine.

[helloworld]

Ok, CS aside from grenades are all hitscan weapons with pseudo random spray. How on earth are you saying that requires more skill. If you take a mediocre player and add him into the fray with a excellent player the odds of him scoring a kill are still fairly high. The fact is between the chance of him getting the drop on the player, the damage a bullet does and the situational effects he will, unless he cannot aim be able to take him down on what is more or less a bit of luck. Games like UT and q3 are not about strafing, that is the most foolish thing I have ever heard. they are about the ability to predict and call targets, train and enemy, resource control and herding. A decent player will be decimated by a excellent player on an order of magnitude that you wouldn't belive. First off these games use non hitscan weapons for a majority of their weaponry. that means not only do you have to have aim, but you have to be able to predict and guide your enemy into a shot. Sure you can get some splash damage but splash damage is about as useful as a legshot with a glock in CS, just a drop in the bucket and only useful against a horrible player. You try predicting the arc of a players jump and timing it to your distance and the travel of a rocket so you contact a player mid air or on land and tell me that was easier then getting a shot in during a CS game. now add to that the fact that you are falling at an arc. The weapons diversity and their range of uses, speed of the player and overall action in combat adds an insane level of complexity to a fight. now add in level navigation and tricks (in Q3 strafe jumping, massive air control and using splash weapons as movement devices), resource control and channeling an opponent and it gets worse. All of these are raw basics of what it takes. I've heard of amazing quake players being amazing CS players, but it seldom works in the reverse as well. CS skill is much simpler and quicker to acquire.



Strafing is the only skill in those games? I really hope that was a joke. At high level play strafing only keeps you alive for an extra shot, it is who knows what weapon to use for the job and his ability to use the weapon that will pull out. Also, you want to know how good you can get at strafing? Get Defrag for quake3 and watch what some twitch monkeys can do with a rocket launcher and "strafing", it will put your entire argument to shame.

[ioCS,undertaker]

About randomness issue of CS, i'd like to write a few words.



As chances of a 1v1 fight, it's true that cs is random more than any popular fps game, especially the dm ones. Cause playfield is smaller, you have less zone to aim and at the same time, you move slover, you and your opponent has limited skills to escape from being shot. That makes the most important factors of killing your opponent: 1- experience, 2- timing, 3- luck and lastly the skill to aim. Most of the time you kill your opponent just because you are in the right place at the right time.



But for match-play it's a bit different than 1v1. In the last CPL, SK, the champion had defeated NoA twice. Was it because SK players had better aiming, better timing, better experience, more luck or simply because they have a better teamplay, gained by lots of training?

[emazing]

Counter-Strike wasn't made to be realistic. I have a video interview from GNU (www.gamers.nu) with Jess Cliffe of Valve who created Counter-Strike. He stated that he sacraficed realism for fun. Not everyone would be forced to play this new mode. Maybe some changes as harsh as those mentioned about pro mode wouldn't need to be made, but a pro mode would be very practical. Little league soccer and pro soccer have very different rules as goes for any sport. The new changes would just allow the skill gap in the community to close.

[David Johnston]

emazing wrote..

Counter-Strike wasn't made to be realistic. I have a video interview from GNU (www.gamers.nu) with Jess Cliffe of Valve who created Counter-Strike. He stated that he sacraficed realism for fun.

The problem is, with the huge audience that CS has, some people want it to be ultra-realistic, some want it to be unrealistic, and when you hit a compromise, both sides rebel because it's not what they wanted. The purpose of the game is for entertainment - it's not a historical document nor is it a comedy. It's a sport.



If CS had to cater for the exact desire of every player, we'd all be playing on our own.

[Julio Caesar]

WHERE THE HELL ARE MY DAMN CARROTS!?!?!?!?!??!!?1/1/1/1

[Gameshot911]

David Johnston wrote..

The problem is, with the huge audience that CS has, some people want it to be ultra-realistic, some want it to be unrealistic, and when you hit a compromise, both sides rebel because it's not what they wanted. The purpose of the game is for entertainment - it's not a historical document nor is it a comedy. It's a sport.



If CS had to cater for the exact desire of every player, we'd all be playing on our own.

A very wise post indeed. However you forgot the people who are happy with the way the game is. Its a large number...but they dont scream and moan like everyone else so you dont see them that often.



Anywho i was told once by a very smart man that you only have a true compromise if both sides are unhappy, but the solution is livable

[Pharlap]

emazing wrote..

Jess Cliffe of Valve who created Counter-Strike.

for shame.

gooseman had more to do with the creation of CS than "cliffe" did.

an dcliffe only joined with valve recently, mainly because cliffe looks like his motivation is money.



cliffe didnt create CS, and he wasnt working at valve when it was created (1999). valve acquired CS from cliffe and gooseman because it was a good "business opportunity", and im sure gooseman and cliffe didnt think it was a bad idea to get a bit of cash from valve. now those scum at valve have bought all rights to cs, and call it their own.