CPL Announces 2006 Season Team Game

[GeOTek]

Edited by [user="44043"] @ [time="1124266676"]

Something isnt right about this. Something seems illogical. Its practically the same game, cs 1.6 or cs:s, they are CS players, i guess they think if they use source thats somehow seperate from all the "1.6 players" thus loosing popularity; when to me its all CS. But who would rather spectate old hl1 engine cs over cs on the source engine. The Better looking game would draw in more non-cser/gamer spectators and more interest in the "sport" as it is looking more realisitic in a visual sense and ofcourse something sponsors can sell thier products on.

[magey`]

Its a different game, CS source is still NOT ready for competition play imo and the CS 1.6 graphics are fine. Nothing wrong with them, if it isnt broke why fix it? There are FAR more 1.6 players than there are source. It doesnt matter how good the game looks, if the gameplay is crap then it isnt realy an exciting game to watch. From my perspective, 1.6 is alot more fun to watch because it requires alot more skill than source as well as it being a more "serious" and refined game.

[xlokix]

CS 1.6 is more fun because it's built on an engine that was used for a fast paced deathmatch game.

[|azure|]

Edited by [user="173815"] @ [time="1124271781"]

magey` wrote..

Its a different game, CS source is still NOT ready for competition play imo and the CS 1.6 graphics are fine. Nothing wrong with them, if it isnt broke why fix it? There are FAR more 1.6 players than there are source. It doesnt matter how good the game looks, if the gameplay is crap then it isnt realy an exciting game to watch. From my perspective, 1.6 is alot more fun to watch because it requires alot more skill than source as well as it being a more "serious" and refined game.

A few months ago I would have agreed with you, but CS:S has come a long way. I have no issues with it anymore at all. Hitboxes, registration etc. is great now. About the only thing I could complain about is the shotgun and smg's are a bit too good. (not all the smgs'..) Valve needs to make these cheaper guns perform on par with the price. People seem to be able to pick up the game and in a few days do reasonably well. Maybe they need to tweak on how the guns behave a little, but thats about it. A competitive/pro team should be able to overcome that kind of thing with planning and strategy. And isn't that what really separates the big boys from the noobs?

Its time to move on cpl. Not a good move for the overall progression of online gameing and the CPL in general.

Really doesn't matter how many people play these old games if you ask me. What? Are you going to continue playing HL1 CS even after virtual reality and holographic gaming comes to fruition? MOVE ON PEOPLE!

Sooner or later you won't have a choice....

[[CyW]-=BigBear=-]

magey` wrote..

the CS 1.6 graphics are fine. Nothing wrong with them, if it isnt broke why fix it?

I hope that was a joke..

[.syL]

Edited by [user="296793"] @ [time="1124284428"]

there is an interesting mp3 interview with Angel Munoz up on gotfrag. btw, he confirmed my suspicion...1.6 is actually growing in numbers and 1.6 players aren't really switching over.



This shows one thing...gameplay will always succeed over graphics, and from the looks of it, sponsors prefer a game with a hugh community over a game with good graphics, because cpl and escw never had problems getting sponsors, even though the cpl 1.6 tournament at summer was nothing more than an afterthought.



/edit

What angel said about sponsors is interesting. Sponsors actually seem to like sponsoring 1.6, because there they can advertise to an audience that doesn't already HAVE a kick ass system. If you think about it, it makes sense. Spectators in esports are still mostly made up of the people who play the game as well, so people who would spectate a cs:s game are the ones already playing the game, and therefor having a decent system.

[Salamandra]

Edited by [user="328364"] @ [time="1124302444"]

I play CS:S, have a decent system... but it could be a lot better. A player of 1.6 is probably less likely to buy a new computer because anything can run 1.6 easily, while I would like my computer to be better, because then I could CS:S better. Not that pro teams playing CS:S on a particular graphics card is going to pursuade me to buy it, though.



Gameplay doesn't *always* succeed over graphics. And just because a game is more popular, doesn't necessarily mean it's better. A Quake/Unreal-style game wouldn't be as popular as CS, even if it was better. Just because 1.6 is three times more popular than CS:S, doesn't mean the gameplay is three times better.



I don't really know where the 1.6 players come from. I don't know one 1.6 player, while I know many CS:S players. While, sure, I do know some CS:S players through CS:S, I know at least 8 CS:S players who I met through normal ways, while no 1.6 players.

[GeOTek]

Edited by [user="44043"] @ [time="1124312803"]

magey` wrote..

Its a different game, CS source is still NOT ready for competition play imo and the CS 1.6 graphics are fine. Nothing wrong with them, if it isnt broke why fix it? There are FAR more 1.6 players than there are source. It doesnt matter how good the game looks, if the gameplay is crap then it isnt realy an exciting game to watch. From my perspective, 1.6 is alot more fun to watch because it requires alot more skill than source as well as it being a more "serious" and refined game.

You really missed my point...they are both CS. I dont see why the fact that more people are playing 1.6 or joining 1.6 has any relevance to what cpl should use. Just because more and more people are playing 1.6 doesnt mean that source is becoming less popular, more people are playing source too, again they are the SAME GAME. Its safe to say that CS is growing in numbers. In a general aspect those with older mediocre computers which is the majority of online gamers still play older cs; Which explains 1.6's numbers over source's, doesnt mean its better or better for the cpl.



About sponsors deal. All 1.6 players i know dont care about thier computer upgrade, hence why they still play cs on around 6 year old engine. While on the otherhand all the source players i know are always buying all the new stuff as it comes out, well involved in the computer consumer ambience. The bests cards out today cant run source at its full capabilities or with flawless 100 fps. So Angels arguement in my opinion is lackluster.

[Blad3]

I don't really know where the 1.6 players come from. I don't know one 1.6 player, while I know many CS:S players.

Counter-Strike 92,083 43,196 4.168 billion

Counter-Strike: Source 42,861 20,997 1.285 billion



i think that's where they come from, could just be me though.

[Salamandra]

Edited by [user="328364"] @ [time="1124318996"]

Wow, congratulations on totally missing the point.



Maybe you should read what I said again, I know that the players are there, but it's just strange that so many play it, while I know absolutely no one that does. Strange that I know so many more that play CS:S, considering that it's one third as popular.



Besides, you actually didn't explain what even you said you did. You didn't say where they came from at all. All you showed was the number of people playing it, not where they came from.

[-:Nighthawk:-]

I come from Salem, Oregon. There's one CS1.6 player for you.



That said, the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" comment above was laughable. In the instance used above, it's akin to claiming that because your 386 still works, you shouldn't upgrade. It simply doesn't make any sense. Computer graphics is a field that is ever-changing, and always improving -- a trend I'd think we should be encouraging generally speaking.



So as such I own CS:S, and it's a fine game, but I do prefer the older version over it in terms of what I personally play. Some of us old-timers are stuck in our ways... what can I say?

[Dragonfight5]

First of all, CPL's sponsors couldn't even field good fps for source during their last tournament. Don't say its bad, as they used 6800 GTs and top of the line intel processors. The only reason you think source is more popular and know more source players are because most of the 1.6 players are competitive players. They only play clan wars in their own private servers against other clans. All of them (including me) think public servers are just a waste of time.



If you guys have actually watched high tier clans face each other in 1.6, they implement many team elements that are not possible in cs:s. Also cs:s is far less skill based. Play both games and become good in both of them and you will easily see that 1.6 needs a lot more skill.

[entRo]

Personally, CS 1.6 is much more enjoyable to both play and watch. CS:S may have much nicer graphics, but that doesn't make the gameplay interesting. Yes, they're both CS, but 1.6 seems to take a lot more skill and precision. Watching a 1.6 match really shows who's good and who isn't, but in Source, it seems like bullets are just dissapearing into a void and alot of it is random luck.

[Salamandra]

Edited by [user="328364"] @ [time="1124324028"]

Well done Nighthawk. Although I don't really know you, so you still don't count :P



I can't be bothered to become good at 1.6... because then I would inevitably become worse at CS:S (unless I carried on playing CS:S the same amount ontop of 1.6)... but CS:S still requires a lot of skill, as is apparant by a few people on a server I frequent having a 3+ ratio, me having a 1.66 ratio, and some having a 0.2 ratio. The game isn't horrifically altered by lucky shots & etc.



Although... from videos (I did play CS in 1.3 or something, but not enough or seriously for it really to count), it seems a hell of a lot easier to kill people. Recoil seems to take effect far less, and just spraying in their direction tends to kill them very quickly. Whereas on CS:S, it always misses, and the person not spraying, but taking their time (or doing it very quickly, whatever) & bursting (or just going for a headshot) gets the kill (although sometimes the spraying person just gets a headshot by luck, although it's not usual). Not sure about this, since my play on CS 1.6 is non-existant, but... it just seems a hell of a lot easier to spray and kill them in 1.6.



Besides, there's other games which are more skill-based than CS. Although I don't know any team games which are.

[-:Nighthawk:-]

Well, you know, you could come get to know me better...

Dragonfight5 wrote..

The only reason you think source is more popular and know more source players are because most of the 1.6 players are competitive players. They only play clan wars in their own private servers against other clans. All of them (including me) think public servers are just a waste of time.

Ahahaha, so at the time I'm writing this, the bulk majority of these 66,109 players playing CS1.6 right now are only playing in clan wars in private servers against other clans? And all of those pubs that are on my server list for CS1.6 are populated by... chimps?



Harsh reality check: most people for any version of CS play in pubs. Hate to break it to you, but as many competitive players as any version of CS has, they're still the minority of overall players. I enjoy both clan matches and pub play, so there's an example of someone who doesn't share your closed-minded "my view is the only view" perspective on CS.



Sorry to flame a bit, but yeah... let's be real here.