Cvar for Weapon Pricing; The CPL Comments

[omgomgz]

Keep in mind, this cvar may have already been thought of and implemented before the public outcry over the new system was heard.

Does this mean I can't claim that I made up the cvar and Valve stole it from me?

[Salamandra]

woah wrote..

"but in terms of "which game is played the most", the XFire table suggest that CS:S is the more popular"



Are you serious? Even now, on a Sunday night (when most students are off doing their homework), Counter-Strike 1.6 has more than double the amount of players Counter-Strike: Source has.



As of the time of posting this:

CS 1.6: 83,209+14,500 (Condition Zero)

CS:S: 46,036



On Saturday and Friday, Counter-Strike 1.6's numbers easily breach 200,000, while CS:S rarely breaches 50,000 (and, on the same note, a greater percentage of servers are host to CS:S's integrated bots).



http://www.steampowered.com/v/index.php?area=stats

Although it is still interesting to note the very different times on xfire and steam. On xfire, CS:S wins massively, while on steam, 1.6 wins massively. Now, obviously Steam counts everyone while xfire only counts people with xfire. But still, does this mean that people who play CS:S are more likely to get a program like xfire... 1.6 players have no friends? What? Why would there be such a disparity in the figures?



I don't actually personally know anyone who plays 1.6, while I know quite a few who player source. Either Steam's lying, or these 1.6 players are hiding in a corner whoring it.

[ph03nix(k)]

No.. only noobs use xfire.

[m4elite]

Salamandra wrote..

Although it is still interesting to note the very different times on xfire and steam. On xfire, CS:S wins massively, while on steam, 1.6 wins massively. Now, obviously Steam counts everyone while xfire only counts people with xfire. But still, does this mean that people who play CS:S are more likely to get a program like xfire... 1.6 players have no friends? What? Why would there be such a disparity in the figures?



I don't actually personally know anyone who plays 1.6, while I know quite a few who player source. Either Steam's lying, or these 1.6 players are hiding in a corner whoring it.

Heard of IRC, AIM or MSN?



Xfire is a piece of shit.

[Scanner]

m4elite wrote..

Heard of IRC, AIM or MSN?



Xfire is a piece of shit.

You know, I've kinda ignored most of the arguments up to this point, because they're just rehashes of old, unresolved arguments. But this has got to be one of the stranger comments out of you yet, m4elite. And that's saying something. But, lest someone accuse me of arguing my points like m4elite, I'll actually attempt to back my position up with logic instead of curse words.



IRC: Can't view in-game. Doesn't know anything about CS. Doesn't allow you to connect to games your friends are in. Doesn't even have the concept of friends.



AIM: Can't view in-game. Doesn't know anything about CS. Doesn't allow you to connect to games your friends are in. Can actually disrupt your game with popup windows, stealing the focus from the game.



MSN: See previous comments about AIM.



XFire: Can view in-game. Is CS-aware. Allows you to connect to games your friends are in. Won't steal focus from your game if you receive a message while playing, instead integrating its messages into your screen.



M4elite, I'm not saying XFire is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but your comment makes zero sense. I mean, come on--try to infuse a t least a little bit of plausibility into your trolling. I've been ignoring most of your obvious attempts already in this thread, but this one was just too funny to pass up. Please try harder next time, it's like shooting puppies in a barrel.

[m4elite]

Nobody uses xfire but "gamers" who uses aim/msn? friends family team and other assorted people.



Point Proven.



Thanks for your pointless, long winded reply.

[Agent 00Shoe]

These "cyber athlete" nerds are a fantastic source of entertainment!

[entRo]

_shifty wrote..

lol why does every post either flame down to "1.6 is better than source" or "competitive vs casual" players...honestly we are all a part of the same community...

No we're not. Competitive players have their community, and.. well, there isn't really any other CS community. There's sites like these, and pub clans where people just basically play exactly the same but wear a tag, and call it a team, but I don't think that constitutes a community. Even if it does, it's certainly not the same community that competitive players take part in.

[nfg]

So 3l337 baby!



CS:S and 1.6 have both been gaining public players over the last year, and usually a small percentage of both of those new players go onto join the rank of "zomg cyberathlete"



And just to clear something up, the steam status page does not count bots from BOTH games, so those are real people you are seeing.



But really if you put it into context, behind 1.6; Source is the most played online FPS game(going by various sources) only when put next to it's older brother it starts to look a bit weak in the knees.



And I am glad Valve are trying to take CS: S into it's own game and stop trying to be a carbon copy of 1.6, leave the skill aspect as it is(I.E. great 1.6 players will still be great CS:S players) and try and add some new flavor to the mix.

[m4elite]

Ever seen xxx and xxx:state of the union? Good, neither have I..

But if you looked into it, the first movie has a set of actors, and the next has a different set... so what they have now done is play off the elders success by keeping the name but having a completely different style/feel to the movie.



That is not what a true sequel should be about.

But that is what cs:s is.

[Bokuho]

Funnily enough, when they first launched Source, the idea for it was that it was just a direct port of 1.6, just with the updated graphics and physics.



Then Valve decided they couldn't be bothered to make the CS2 they'd be planning, so they just started fucking with Source instead. Laziness wins.

[woah]

But really if you put it into context, behind 1.6; Source is the most played online FPS game(going by various sources) only when put next to it's older brother it starts to look a bit weak in the knees.

...Uhh, What? What "sources" do you speak of?



Really, don't even try to argue this. Valve would have no reason to alter the player counts on the Status page to favor CS 1.6. This would be against their ongoing incentives to lure the massive Counter-Strike 1.6 community into buying their advertised products. Actually, what surprises me is that Valve doesn't adjust the player statistics to favor Counter-Strike: Source in player numbers, especially given how embarrassing the gap between Counter-Strike 1.6 and Counter-Strike Source is ( right now there are 181,595 people playing 1.6, and a mere 31,838 playing Source. That's six times as many people playing 1.6 over Source. If you're so skeptical, do a server refresh ).



And assuming that you're using that Xfire tool as your basis for these so called other, more accurate "sources", not that many people need Xfire to coordinate their online gaming; most CS players probably don't even know what it is, or let alone care what it is. I've never used it, and I don't even know of anyone else who has.

[ukHazard]

Woah... those sources are probably things like actually refreshing the server list in steam. There are always thousands playing CSS, even discounting bots. Quake3 at its peak would get about ONE thousand people playing.



Also, my earlier point about "ignoramuses" is proving to be true. CS is still massively more popular than CSS, and that may not change in the next say two years, if at all, but still people will rag on CSS blindly just because they don't like it.

[Scanner]

ukHazard wrote..

but still people will rag on CSS blindly just because they don't like it.

I'll go farther than that. People will rag on CS:S blindly just because it's different. They won't even try it, or if they do, they will only try it for an hour to discover that it feels different and takes some getting used to. Whoah, I used to own at 1.6, but now I'm having to come up the learning curve again. Do I perservere, or do I fall back to what I'm good at and say it's "better" just because I'm better when I play it?



A lot of the kiddies that play this game have severe ego problems. Yeah, it was frustrating for me when I started playing CS:S, but I decided to stick with it and get better. Put your ego on the shelf for a while and ignore anyone calling you a noob, cause they're ignorant fucks, and get better. CS:S is just as enjoyable as 1.6. They've got a common theme, but they're different games, and they're both fun.

[DevgruSeal H.E]

Scanner wrote..

I'll go farther than that. People will rag on CS:S blindly just because it's different. They won't even try it, or if they do, they will only try it for an hour to discover that it feels different and takes some getting used to. Whoah, I used to own at 1.6, but now I'm having to come up the learning curve again. Do I perservere, or do I fall back to what I'm good at and say it's "better" just because I'm better when I play it?



A lot of the kiddies that play this game have severe ego problems. Yeah, it was frustrating for me when I started playing CS:S, but I decided to stick with it and get better. Put your ego on the shelf for a while and ignore anyone calling you a noob, cause they're ignorant fucks, and get better. CS:S is just as enjoyable as 1.6. They've got a common theme, but they're different games, and they're both fun.

THANK YOU! A post that makes sense.