lol at Quest for Glory
-
-
very very true statement. 1.6 is by far the best. even though i have both games, i play 1.6 way more. i give 5-6 years before source somehow took #1 spot in steam. i'll be frank with valve, no matter how pretty you make css, it will still suck. not many people have the $ to spend on for another machine anyways.
CS2? Wtf. I say it will never happen. Hands down. What can they possible think up of something that is somewhat relate to original CS?
CS changed the industry of first person shooters game and it will be top #1. rentless of how pretty other games are. i myself still have cs 1.0, 1.3 and 1.5 installed in my steam. i can never get too bored playing those old mods. it's great having LANS over my place.
long live cs, css can just take a dump somewhere.Comment
-
CS Source losing popularity to Battlefield and Quake 4 ? Haha no way Battlefield 2 is far too buggy and the patches for it are massive and yet seem to fix nothing. Where as Quake 4 hardly seems to have much players considering its a new game .Comment
-
The only thing I seen about CS2 was a interview way back on 05-24-2004.Does this mean we won't see a Counter-Strike 2?
http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=23362
"No, of course you will. We've started the rought planning for the next Counter-Strike, something we won't start the development of before we've all had a loooooong vacation."
Now Gabe is laughing until he's red like a wellcooked lobster in his face, he stands up and asks me if I want a soft drink. At least he needs to drink something, after our long conversation where he stood for the most talking.
GO gooseman GO!Comment
-
wow, I didn't even know people still played 1.6 LOL
I guess there are lots of stubborn people resistant to change out there...
The only older version of CS I would play is before they made it so you got fatigued when you could jump. I don't remember when they changed that. IMO, CS started to suck when it went retail.
But I am enjoying Source. I don't know why anyone would want to play 1.6 anymore. IMO, the gameplay is essentially the same, I don't notice the complaints people have with Source. I like the physics and the graphics. Why play an old game basically, what, built off the Quake 2 engine?
I don't get it.
If anything, I think it's sad that there are still more 1.6 players than Source players. It's more a testament to their stubborness and unwillingness to let go of the past.
just my 2 centsComment
-
Ok.
Every single person who has stated their preference of CS 1.6 over CS:S, has stated, in one way or another, that CS:S "sucks".
Yet you have not provided any evidence.
So, I ask, why.
Why does CS:S "Suck", and please, no "ZOMG ONLY TEH UB3R$$$COMPY CNA PL3Y!".
I could run CS:S on 256mb RAM and a ATi 8500. So STFU.Comment
-
Sava wrote..
If you didnt even know almost 4 times as many people play 1.6 than cs:s.
wow, I didn't even know people still played 1.6 LOL
I guess there are lots of stubborn people resistant to change out there...
The only older version of CS I would play is before they made it so you got fatigued when you could jump. I don't remember when they changed that. IMO, CS started to suck when it went retail.
But I am enjoying Source. I don't know why anyone would want to play 1.6 anymore. IMO, the gameplay is essentially the same, I don't notice the complaints people have with Source. I like the physics and the graphics. Why play an old game basically, what, built off the Quake 2 engine?
I don't get it.
If anything, I think it's sad that there are still more 1.6 players than Source players. It's more a testament to their stubborness and unwillingness to let go of the past.
just my 2 cents
You have no right to make retarded statements.Comment
-
CSS... where's the fun?
The hitboxes are way off. I'm not getting the shots on the enemy that I should be getting. Ever watched that hitbox video? Where the hitboxes are actually a few feet BEHIND the player? MMhmmm.
CS1.6 is for pro's. Anyways, all the n00bs are in CSS 'cause since HL2 is a new game, people buy it -- And well, they try CSS and... Nope.Comment
-
You're not aware that that video (and a few similar videos) are actually totally irrelevant? The best known video was made using horribly altered prediction values, and there have been a couple of updates which have helped things quite a bit. Also, videos have shown that even if you shoot at the hitboxes which are behind the players, the shots have no effect on the life of the player. Only if you shoot at the model does it count as a hit.
When I play, and when everyone who I know plays, hit registration is fine. There have been a couple of times when it seems strange, but those seem to be becoming less freqent, especially now that I play on a server which enforces your rates to be good (something that now that I am able to see the other players in the server's rates, seems to account for pretty much every problem).
Apart from the obvious map and model differences, 1.6 and Source seems the same to me, apart from the massive graphical update.Comment
-
1.6 is still king because of the system specs. there are always going to be more "old" PC's out there then new ones. i doubt HL2 will ever out sell HL1 and that's part of the reason source won't catch up to 1.6 (as far as the number of players)Comment
-
Edited by [user="216545"] @ [time="1136480337"]Sava wrote..
this guy is a fool. period!
But I am enjoying Source. I don't know why anyone would want to play 1.6 anymore. IMO, the gameplay is essentially the same, I don't notice the complaints people have with Source. I like the physics and the graphics. Why play an old game basically, what, built off the Quake 2 engine?
I don't get it.
If anything, I think it's sad that there are still more 1.6 players than Source players. It's more a testament to their stubborness and unwillingness to let go of the past.
just my 2 cents
reason why ppl don't play source as much is because the game is UNSTABLE!
hitbox has gone wrong.
them small items (exp. barrels, trash and etc) only gets in the way. for example d2 dd toward A has 2 barrels blocking the exit. not to mention why the hell would there be 2 sets of doors between that little hall? its basically a trap door for terrorists to get stuck. take that crap out.
people still play 1.6 because its a "complete" game. source has a many flaws and problems. how can people enjoy a game that isn't even 50% complete. source is still a beta people. just cause you can play online and blow people's head off doesn't mean the game itself is complete. as stated i give 5-6 more years before source even thinks about getting #1 spot.Comment
-
Finally someone speaks the truth of Counter-Strike "Source" (in reference to the article).Comment
-
Most people who play in public servers aren't masters of Counter-Strike. We can assume that MOST of the people who play Counter-Strike don't visit sites like CS-Nation. Do you really think that things such as "barrels, trash and etc" are why people aren't playing Source? No. It's because their computers can't run it.Comment
-
"I predict a Riot"Comment
-
Edited by [user="6035"] @ [time="1136486362"]
Anyone that thinks any game is losing players to Quake 4 is kindof clueless (I like Quake4 btw, but hardly anyone plays it), so I don't even have to read the rest of this article..
Ohw, and if CS:S can't pull most people away from CS 1.6, what makes people think CS2 (if we'll ever see that), that will most likely be a lot more different from 1.6 then CS:S is and will have even higher systemrequirements, can?
No, right now most people I think are still playing 1.6 over CS:S because of hardwarerequirements.. Most people still have crappy videocards like GF4's etc, offcourse they prefer to play 1.6 on that, I would too.. But in the end people will not keep on playing the almost 7 years old CS 1.6 forever, and they will not keep playing on crappy old hardware forever, unless offcourse they intend to never play any new(er) PC game ever again..Comment
Comment