CS: Source 2006 Predictions

[jojojohanson]

CSS is borked. Always has been, apparently always will be. THIS is why people don't play it. I better not flame too much though or cliffe will have to send me another email bitching at me. The hitboxes is are off, the game is useless. It's that simple. If I want hitboxes any worse than 1.6 I play BF2. I'm sure a lot of people do the same. 1.6 and BF2, it's all you need. The fact that they won't even acknowledge the problem led to it's demise. Sure looks purdy though!! duhhhhhhhhh...

[[CyW]-=BigBear=-]

jojojohanson wrote..

CSS is borked. Always has been, apparently always will be. THIS is why people don't play it. I better not flame too much though or cliffe will have to send me another email bitching at me. The hitboxes is are off, the game is useless. It's that simple. If I want hitboxes any worse than 1.6 I play BF2. I'm sure a lot of people do the same. 1.6 and BF2, it's all you need. The fact that they won't even acknowledge the problem led to it's demise. Sure looks purdy though!! duhhhhhhhhh...

Cliffe probably bitched at you because you are bitching about stuff that's simply not true (anymore) and he hates people spreading false information about his game..

[palehorse]

CS:S is teh Sweet



I still play 1.6 though :/

[Deletable_Man]

Grr Grr My Mod is much bigger than yooourrrs!! My mod can walk right through the door!



Just play whatever version you play and shut the hell up. |:



Personally, when I wanna play CS (rarely), I'll play 1.6, because it feels like CS to me. When I get tired of that 80 year old crap, I'll go play Source. Then when I remember how bad CS is in general (mostly its players), I'll go play Quake 4. That's how I do it and however whoever else does it, well good for them. >_>

[Que_?]

I play CS:S way more then I should. There are just too many bugs but somehow I just deal and play. Things I think they need to fix.



Defuse bug

POV

Shadows

Clipping

Tweaking the Gun

Flashbang

Players getting stuck

hostage AI

HDR lighting (shiny)

[evofytr]

[CyW]-=BigBear=- wrote..

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.

I never said CS:S would lose players to Q4. I said Q4, and other games like BF2, etc... are diversions for the casual Source player. My arguement was, if the number of people playing Source doesn't multiply soon (which it hasn't lately...) then people's attention will be drawn to other games- Q4 as an example, not as THE game they'd be leaving CS:S to play. It's just a guess though. Zips disagrees, and he probably has more of an ear to the community than I do.



Most of you are taking the article way too seriously anyway. It was supposed to be a stab at humor. =)



-Evo

[Pan the Goat God]

This just in, CSN announces Counter-Strike 2.

[sadisticflirt]

WASTE OF PAGE SPACE

[[CyW]-=BigBear=-]

evofytr wrote..

I never said CS:S would lose players to Q4. I said Q4, and other games like BF2, etc... are diversions for the casual Source player. My arguement was, if the number of people playing Source doesn't multiply soon (which it hasn't lately...) then people's attention will be drawn to other games- Q4 as an example, not as THE game they'd be leaving CS:S to play. It's just a guess though. Zips disagrees, and he probably has more of an ear to the community than I do.



Most of you are taking the article way too seriously anyway. It was supposed to be a stab at humor. =)



-Evo

Ok, but I don't see why CS:S player numbers have to multiply for CS:S to be a succes? CS:S already has a lot of players, and the numbers are still growing.. Tonight I saw there were almost 60.000 people playing CS:S, which was 40.000 not to long ago.. This indicates the CS:S community is still growing.. Maybe not as fast as some would like, but it is growing, and not losing players..



Like I said, I think it's still a matter of hardware for most people.. People are slowly upgrading their hardware.. It just takes time.. Don't forget CS:S is only just over a year old, so it's still relative new with still relative high systemrequirements to get any good average fps to make it fun to play.. With Valve making the game better with every update and/or added content, and people getting faster & faster hardware, I see no reason whatsoever why CS:S wouldn't be a continous succes in 2006..

[Sava]

If I had the choice between a game that was 6 years old, or a game that had some minor "hitbox" issues (that I don't even notice); well, I choose the new game. I tried playing 1.6 the other day... it was awful. The sound sucks, the graphics are terrible, the timing is all off, the physics are all weird. The only thing I like about 1.6 is knifing. That's it. Other than that, 1.6 is complete crap. It's an obsolete game engine. In game design, even a year or two is a long time. And original CS is over 6 years old now. It's time to let go guys. It was fun back in the day, but compared to Source, 1.6 just sucks.



I don't understand why you guys are so quick to flame me and others for liking Source. I post my thoughts and right away I get people saying I'm a fool, retard, etc... oh well, if you guys are that insecure about the game that you have to insult me, then fine, whatever. And your personal attacks just go to show that your arguments are weak and you guys don't have a leg to stand on.



I'm having fun playing Source. If you guys like your 6 year old game, that's fine. I'm going to enjoy the constant updates and fixes to Source, the new content, etc. I don't care if "the pro's" play 1.6. Personally, I hate clans and "competitive" CS. All I do is get together with my friends on LAN's and we play on pubs. So what? It's fun. That's what gaming is about. FUN. Not pretending we're e-cool and trying to actually compete for something. And how many of you guys have won anything in any tournaments? Yeah... didn't think so. Most of the servers I play at are full of good players. I don't see too many n00bs running around. I've even met a lot of cool people at LAN parties from playing at the pub servers that are located around where I live (Chicago area).



Okay. Now feel free to flame me because I think your favorite version of CS sucks! :/

[m4elite]

Thank god we have the answer to a question nobody asked.



cs:s is crap, undebateable.

[DarkLite]

And no-one has given any actual evidence so far that CS:S is inferior to CS 1.6.



Logically, CS:S wins then.



And no, the hitboxes were fixed a while back, and the computer specs? F--K off. I could run CS:S on a ATi 8500.

[^Liquid Dreams^]

CS:S is nothing like 1.6, all we wanted was 1.6 on source but no we get 1 or 2 models, few good maps, bugs galore, hit boxes seemok tome when i play i can reach 26/3 with scout only on DUST as CT.



i just dont like the feelof source cs to 1.6 cs it feels to differant



here my comp spec:



AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ (Manchester)

gfx card GF6 6600GT 128mb AGP.

gfx drivers: 81.95_forceware_winxp2k_english_whql.exe.

2 gig ram (1 gig sticks Kingston).

power supply (PurePower 460W Blue Light Series).

motherboard is ABIT model UL8 (ULI M1689).

bios Phoenix Technologies Ltd, version 6.00 PG, Date 10/26/2005.



SOURCE sucks if you are old timer on cs 1.6, now on other hand if you was noob then went to source you wouldnt notice all the differances.



plust the ambients and footsteps sound to low compared to cs 1.6, that i hate alot.



stupid buy menus are new style no old styple list option in menu options annoy me too.

[Splatula]

Arguments for 1.6:

-Runs on any system built all the way back to 1998.

-It's what the "Pro's" play. (The Pro 1.6'ers anyhow - Just because you are a Pro softball player, does not mean you can walk into the World Series and be considered a pro baseball player)

-Finally actually runs decently after a decade of patches

-Everyone knows how to tweak it to their benefit

-Everyone knows the maps, and the spam maps for that matter.

-The knowledge required to kick ass totally in 1.6 is much more than CS:S at this stage. Between the weapons analysis, the hitbox and materials analysis and map breakdowns, there is just way more info out there for people to absorb and perfect their game.



Arguments For CS:S

-It's Pretty. This alone isn't descriptive enough to make people realize... when you can see your enemy better, and your controls are smoother, it's easier to kill. That's why a 1.6 player who casually plays CSS find that they can't compete in the same league as veteran CSS players when they get in there. You have to play like a few months straight CSS to get the FEEL down properly. Remember all the work you put into 1.6? It's back almost to square 1 with CSS.

-Weapons balance. The weapons are virtually the same. There are some minor differences regarding the rate of fire and peoples perception of where hitboxes are. Hitboxes aren't that different... that is if you take the time to tweak out your system, the graphics and the rates are very important things to tweak.

-Superior sound. Most people don't realize that when you use integrated sound instead of an add-in hardware based soundcard, you are losing like 20-30fps. CSS has excellent sound, providing you have your system set up properly. You have to make certain your sound profile is set to the correct speakers/headphones that you are using. If you don't have a hardware based sound solution, your best bet for FPS is to lower the sound quality to low... and if you're playing on low quality sounds, there is a lot your will miss.



Personally, I think CSS will do better when people take the time and effort to a) learn the game b)make it better by participating in the community. That's right, you have no one to blame but yourselves. Especially if you are stuck with an old computer. The rest of you - TWEAK TWEAK TWEAK. If CSS isn't running well on your "newer" computer - you have an issue with that machine. An issue that needs to be resolved, or sooner or later it will creep up on you in some other game.

[Softy's 24/7 Fraggin]

i agree, the quiet foot steps (in cs:s) are not to my liking. it seems to make less of a difference to my score (in cs:s) if i am wearing phones or not compared to 1.6.



i started playing CS back when there were only CS maps and you could kill hostages with flash-nades.



aside from the foot steps issue my main beef with cs:s is the "slippery" feeling of the players movement compared to the tight arcade feeling of 1.6