Condition Delay

[Gpig]

When I play aztec I always play on the CT side because on the T side it seems like everyone is looking the other way when a CT comes through the door, across the bridge, from the water, etc. I've even been in servers where I'm like "One is on our side of the bridge!" and they ignored me. CT side you can find several safe places.

[-:Nighthawk:-]

zimzap wrote...

America's Army will just rape up CZ it looks about the same and it took MUCH less time.



Counter Strike is not going to be the leader in only gaming much longer. Do you honestly think a FREE and good game will not win?

Well, to be honest, until we all play it, we won't know whether it's the greatest thing since sliced bread or not. My opinion, judging from the screenshots, is that it might get close to as popular as SoF2 is. Sure, it's free, and that will draw a lot of people toward it. But reading from how they're trying to design it, as a realistic experience... well, in reality, you don't get to run around with your M4A1 and take on a squad of 10 enemies every 4 minutes. No, you spend a lot of time waiting around, coordinating things, doing recon, and at the end of it all have a final, very quick confrontation.



America's Army. Realistic? Yes. Pretty looking? Yes. The perfect balance of strategy and realism vs. insane arcade action? I rather doubt it. Afterall, they're not creating this FREE game to please all the CS fans out there, or to try to become the #1 online game.



You ever stop and consider that perhaps motivations influence the feel of a game? They're doing it to "show people what the army is like"... in other words, make young guys think the army is cool, and recruit them later. And I honestly have no problem with that, the army is a great place for many people to get their lives on track, and do something produc... er, destructive, but in a controlled sense, heh. :) But it's not the kind of intent in a game that will lead to it displacing CS.

The games should be made to need good computers and if you don't have a top of the line one, YOU UPGRADE! They shouldn't make them game crappy for the poor people.

Yes... certainly the bulk majority of CS players should be screwed over and be unable to play the new game (thus dropping its popularity massively) so that you with your arrogant rich elitist attitude can be satisfied. I've got good hardware in my computer, but I try not to act like an ass about it, or think that everyone needs to cater to me. I guess thinking of the majority of others is not a concern for some people.



BTW, did you not read the earlier released information saying that CS:CZ would run on low or high end computers, and it would simply lower detail levels to make the game playable for slower computers? It won't be a Doom III, but it'll look good on good hardware, and be playable on regular hardware. Something for everyone.

narby wrote...

...The general feeling of "safety''...

Yeah, I know exactly what you mean. Granted, I never feel too afraid on Vertigo, though you were mentioning some paranoia causing aspects. But yes... there's definitely "safe zones" in every map, though many you'd never stay in. I do like the fact that for the most part, safe zones also put you at a different kind of additional risk. Take Aztec, for instance, since that has been discussed some. I generally feel much safer as a CT on that map. If you go to the CT bridge room, you don't really worry about enemies from behind, or even from the right for a while. Or, I can run up the stairs, out the double doors, and the only way I have to expect enemies for a bit is just through those double doors. (Though as time goes on though, longer routes make for more potential threats.) But there's an added fear in that my team is very divided, with some trying to cover water in various places, some trying to hold the bridge, and the rest working on the double doors. So there's that added intensity of, while you know where it will come from, you might get outnumbered very quickly in a firefight.



So yeah, some safety zones are definitely good, and some very dangerous zones are good as well. Balance between the two is probably quite a task as a mapper.



One thing I would disagree with though, you said that more complex maps (ie Torn) required greater teamplay than more simple maps (ie Dust). I've found that, the more routes you have, the more teams tend to split up, and the more you run across just individual enemies, who are easy to pick off one by one. So, from my perspective, it makes it more deathmatchy, always having to watch your back. Teamwork would probably help greatly, but in my experience with such maps (survivor comes to mind), teamwork is not what's won or lost the game -- it's been the individual skill of one or two people. Dunno if that makes any sense, but it's how it seems to me, anyway.

Added @ [time="1025727114"]

Dang... heh, oops... didn't seem like that long when I was slamming it out on my keyboard, lol! Sorry... :)

[uber]

CZ is gonna be a single player add-on to CS and personally I don't care much for that. I'm only eager to try the new guns and see if they can put back some balance in the game.



As for the delay, it's quite evident that creating addictive bot play is more chanlenging than what Valve originally anticipated.

[dagz]

last it was q2 then late summer now its "november" now where in months no more quarter 2 or 3 or nothing so its good in a way.

[zimzap]

"BTW, did you not read the earlier released information saying that CS:CZ would run on low or high end computers, and it would simply lower detail levels to make the game playable for slower computers? It won't be a Doom III, but it'll look good on good hardware, and be playable on regular hardware. Something for everyone."



So they are releasing a game that will be ancient soon after its released. A good computer is not that expensive and to make a game weaker to help the poor is useless. I have two computers that I use mainly and one is top of the line 6K with all the stuff and there is my other one that is 2K average. I get 99fps on both which shows you can get an average comp for only 2K and that is nothing.



If you can't afford to upgrade, they have tons of games made for your crap computers.

[RockSteady]

yet again zim, you prove yourself to be worthless. lol. 6k.

[zimzap]

I think 3 moniters is enough for now. How about you?

[narby]

It's funny how you seem to think everyone on earth can afford to spend 2k and that all new games should cater soley for the rich and privileged.



Don't take this the wrong way but you appear to have your head jammed up your ass.

[SinaC]

The Village Idiot wrote..

ummm.... u can hold off 5 n00bs from one spot maybe...

What is your defition of n00bs?

[zimzap]

narby wrote..

It's funny how you seem to think everyone on earth can afford to spend 2k and that all new games should cater soley for the rich and privileged.



Don't take this the wrong way but you appear to have your head jammed up your ass.

I know they can't and thats sad. Some people just aren't smart and have crap jobs and others just dont for someother reason. I never said that everyone should be able to afford a 2K comp because I know there are many VERY stupid and poor people. A 2k comp is very cheap considering how much a good one costs. What I said is if you can't afford it, don't play the game and I mean it. We don't need anymore trash.

[Eagle25]

Edited by [user="26788"] @ [time="1025754274"]

whats the point of associating stupid and poor?

some people try very hard to succeed but fail don't just think that the rich are those who work hard and the poor are all lazy.

it may just prove your own stupidity.

a 2k comp IS cheap COMPARED to a 6k comp, but that doesn't mean that 2k isn't much.



and ffs to think black and white like that how old are you

6...?

[I suck]

zimzap wrote..

I know they can't and thats sad. Some people just aren't smart and have crap jobs and others just dont for someother reason. I never said that everyone should be able to afford a 2K comp because I know there are many VERY stupid and poor people. A 2k comp is very cheap considering how much a good one costs. What I said is if you can't afford it, don't play the game and I mean it. We don't need anymore trash.

zimzap stop being an ass, it does not mean that if you have a GeForce 3 means EVERYONE has a GeForce 3. I for instance, stick to my AMD 733 and my TNT2 and CS plays fine and for any FPS i ever played for that matter.



zimzap, i understand u are probably quite rich if u can keep ugrading if something new appears but for some this is not the case....my friend runs a LAN-gaming pub and if he has to keep on upgrading all his 35 P111 500 Mhz comps with new processers and video cards, his gonna go broke !!!



Hence, it is actually wise on the developers part not to keep upping their min specs otherwise net cafes can simply go bankrupt.



zap, you do the math, imagine paying 1000 bucks just to upgrade EVERY SINGLE comp in my friend's pub, and considering his daily earnings ( he charges only 1 buck per hour on weekdays ), I dont he will have the dough to upgrade EVERYTHING.



So zap to hell with you and your money spending ways !!!!

[blarg]

ummm, I think cs-cz is going to be good, but delaying it an other 4 months wont make it much better

[Eagle25]

actually they are probly gonna find loads a bugs etc (or i hope so)

and fix em, so it may just be that much bug free



i dont mind the wait, provided it can improve the game

[zimzap]

"Some people just aren't smart and have crap jobs and others just dont for someother reason."



Did I say that everyone is stupid? Most people are news flash. A reason could be just wanting to buy something else did I sy everyone was stupid?