Counter-strike still wins?

Anyone else remembers Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis? One of the most unique and impressive games ever, but too complicated for kids who just like to run around and shoot rambo style. It was a far superior game to CS or COD.

I tip my hat to you, good sir. You have fine tastes.

ARMA II with ACE mode is supposedly really good but being a full time college student working part-time and sending resumes out looking for a coop... I don't have time to play 10 consecutive hours, if at all, sadly. :(
 
anyone who wants a hardcore, competitive fps should be playing quake live. it is the pinnacle.


also
fatality.png
 
QuakeLive is NOT the pinnacle of competitive play. Quakeworld is BY FAR the most competitive Quake game, with Quake 3 CPMA coming in behind it.

5v5 CSS is a different monster when it comes to competitive play. I don't think they can honestly be compared (even CTF).
 
Hmm, I honestly had no idea. I may have to reinstall it and check it out.

if you ever get into gungame mod for cs, try that, there should be different types of gungame types too. reverse, normal, deathmatch etc. (or wait the different gungame types might only be for source)
 
anyone who wants a hardcore, competitive fps should be playing quake live. it is the pinnacle.

QuakeLive is NOT the pinnacle of competitive play. Quakeworld is BY FAR the most competitive Quake game, with Quake 3 CPMA coming in behind it.

I can agree with either of you guys.... Quakeworld was sooooo freaking fast, very *hard*, but at the same time, Quake 3 had the best "feeling" character movement and physics of any FPS *EVER*....

best competitve FPS is either Quake 1 or 3., absolutely.... the best guys in those games will always be the best guys in any other game, more so than the CS or UT pros..... way more so...
 
I can agree with either of you guys.... Quakeworld was sooooo freaking fast, very *hard*, but at the same time, Quake 3 had the best "feeling" character movement and physics of any FPS *EVER*....

best competitve FPS is either Quake 1 or 3., absolutely.... the best guys in those games will always be the best guys in any other game, more so than the CS or UT pros..... way more so...

I don't see a Quake pro dominating in CS or a CS pro dominating in Quake(ESL/CEVO).
 
Hmm, I honestly had no idea. I may have to reinstall it and check it out.
DM in the CS games are not official, they are server side mods which are not made or supported by Valve. Never the less there are hundreds of populated DM servers for anyone to choose from.

anyone who wants a hardcore, competitive fps should be playing quake live. it is the pinnacle.
No doubt the Quake Arena games are awesome, but they are also primarily projectile based. Many players, including myself prefer hitscan based games instead.
 
No doubt the Quake Arena games are awesome, but they are also primarily projectile based. Many players, including myself prefer hitscan based games instead.

Why do you prefer hitscan?

I'm genuinely curious.
 
CS is simple game that is reason why it is still played. Although there were at least 10 game engines better than CS, the more the graphics and realism in the games goes up its not just about their demands for PC specs but also they lose gameplay. I used to play FPS when they were simple and easy to play and control. And you could play them on every computer. For another reason. Many people rather stay to play old games because they don't upgrade to new PCs just because of the new games. Most people are not the gamers as those on [H] and other OC/HW and gaming forums where majority is upgrading frequently.
 
No doubt the Quake Arena games are awesome, but they are also primarily projectile based. Many players, including myself prefer hitscan based games instead.

Not to drift OT into another genre (but keeping the ol' school nostalgic theme this thread has going)...

Back in the Descent multiplayer heydays, hitscan weapons were frowned upon by the pros - primarily because of the LAN-biased network code and internet connections being the lowest common denominator. But even with competitions over LAN, there was some scrutiny to the point that 1vs1 matches had players agreeing to ban certain hitscan (& spammable) weapons. It just made the matches that more exciting.

Descent I's hitscan option right out of the box was the vulcan cannon, which functioned more like 'hey, I'm over here." Then Descent II came out, and the gauss cannon was instantly popularized because of its hitscan and stun capability. In D2 you could actually kill someone at a very long distance in just a few seconds. It was instantly popularized with the hit-&-run tacticians. D2's only saving grace was that you could (narrowly) survive it anyway, so still a great many shrugged it off. Then Descent III came along and added the railgun, which again popularized the idea of insta-gibbing at distance. At this point, alot of the old-school Descent'ers felt the franchise had completely sold out to another crowd, and most of them moved on to other things like Tribes or Team Fortress. I know D3 still had a fan following, but I felt its player-base wasn't quite as colorful as the D1/2 one. Then again, D3 had some other major design flaws outside the goofy weapon choices.

Looking back on it, I still feel we were justified in hating on hitscan stuff. There's something to be said about a multiplayer game were you have some chance of dodging incoming fire. Not that I'm hating on CS:S or tactical shooters, but if the spinfusor in Tribes had been replaced with a railgun...
 
Looking back on it, I still feel we were justified in hating on hitscan stuff. There's something to be said about a multiplayer game were you have some chance of dodging incoming fire. Not that I'm hating on CS:S or tactical shooters, but if the spinfusor in Tribes had been replaced with a railgun...

Man that brought back memories. In Q2 - Rocket Arena 2, most servers I played in either banned the chaingun, or considered it bad form. Back in the old days of Counter-Strike when movement speed was faster (and less realistic) dodging did play into it somewhat, even in a hitscan game.

But nothing gives you the feeling of skill in Quake of perfectly dodging rocket after rocket and taking down your opponent.

As for the OP, I think Counter-Strike has one of the best "gun feels" and movement feel of any FPS. It just feels solid and 'right.'
 
As for the OP, I think Counter-Strike has one of the best "gun feels" and movement feel of any FPS. It just feels solid and 'right.'

I think you nailed it. I compare all other FPS games to CS. Many feel "stiff" and cumbersome compared to the fluidity and simplicity of CS. It does "just feel right." It may also have to do with the fact I logged considerably more hours on CS than any other FPS. :rolleyes:
 
CS is like poker. Takes a minute to learn, and a lifetime to master.
 
and I still dont understand how the heck they dont make CS2/3. It would instantly be the #1 best selling game EVER on steam. I'll even go so far as to say that it would beat the next 3 games COMBINED.
 
Why do you prefer hitscan?
Personal preference - I prefer to aim where the opponent is now, rather than where he will be x seconds from now. Due to this preference I simply am better at hitscan games. I'm a scrub in quake/UT but I hold my own with competitive CS. It's probably mental, some players tend to fit the groove of one style of gameplay better than the other.
 
I dont think it has anything to do with hardware. If a multiplayer game has that near perfect formula it will never get old.
 
I dont think it has anything to do with hardware. If a multiplayer game has that near perfect formula it will never get old.

Exactly. That's why games like CS and SC are still popular.
 
and I still dont understand how the heck they dont make CS2/3. It would instantly be the #1 best selling game EVER on steam. I'll even go so far as to say that it would beat the next 3 games COMBINED.

I've wondered that also. I guess they are waiting for Half-life 3 to make the next generation Counter-strike.
 
Nothing better, the modding community is amazing. There are mini game servers, rpg surf servers, zombie mod servers, and etc.



edit


and I still dont understand how the heck they dont make CS2/3. It would instantly be the #1 best selling game EVER on steam. I'll even go so far as to say that it would beat the next 3 games COMBINED.


The reason is the modding community, the games is based on that. Everytime valve messes with the source engine just slightly a lot of mods break and servers break and so on. They like it just the way it is where the release a couple of updates once in a while and modders don't freak the fuck out.
 
or how cheap people are.. or how people are unwilling to change... i could come up with a bunch of different reasons.. but most people are just unwilling to change.. i mean shit i preferred RTCW:ET over BF2 even though BF2 was a far superior game. i just wasn't willing to spend the money nor try playing a new game..

I think this is the biggest reason for the popularity of the game. You can run it on anything and few people are willing to change and move on. For whatever reason the PC community is full of people like that. You had tons of people who wouldn't move on from Windows 98SE, Windows 2000, then Windows XP, etc. You had people who wouldn't move on past UT99 and panned UT2003 & UT2004. It may come from the lack of drive to upgrade or it may come from their nostalgia. It's hard to say but for whatever the reason, there is a serious lack of change in much of the gaming community.

I'm the exact opposite. I prefer change and do whatever I can to get it. New piece of hardware comes out? I must have it. New keyboard and mouse? I'll buy them if they are interesting. New version of Windows? I'll get going as soon as I can get my hands on the beta. New games? I'm on it. Rarely can a game keep me coming back for more year after year. Eventually I'll find another game that captures my attention and that will be it. And for every extreme, one way or the other there are probably 100 people who are somewhere in the middle.

Counterstrike has never changed and I've never understood how it can keep getting new players and keep the attention span of old players. I played it shortly after the source version came out hoping it had changed since I stopped playing in 2000 or so. It hadn't. It's the same game I played back in 1999 for the most part and it just doesn't appeal to me in the slightest. Though if I had to attribute the continued success of CS:S to anything I think it almost represents a golden age of PC gaming for many. After PC gamers tire of the CoD hackers and the lame console ports, they go back to their old stand buys. I'd wager there are a lot more games people go back to than just CS, but CS is one tracked by Steam. Additionally the advantage CS:S has over other classics is the readily available nature of CS:S via Steam download. Especially since many people paid for it upwards of a decade prior or got it with the Orange Box.

PC gamers are a fickle bunch and more than that, I think they are often a nostalgic bunch. I'm sure there are more reasons than those I've highlighted, but for whatever reason CS has been placed on a pedestal and it's the game for all military themed shooters to beat, just as UT2004 is the game for all arena shooters to beat.
 
Both CS and CS:S have a strong competitive community. They have fun server mods to play (surfing is fun as hell when I want a break from playing at a competitive level). The way the game mechanics and economy break down make it kind of addicting. It's simple but effective. You start out with so much money (non-16k servers), and you get money for killing the enemy, bomb objectives, and for those who like CS maps, hostage objectives. If you get killed there is a penalty. You loose your guns, money, and have to sit the rest of the round out. So there is where strategy comes into play. Your opponent(s) will still have their better weapons, and you will most likely be stuck with a pistol or SMG.

Also there is no instant gratification such as BS health regeneration; one of the few games that still has a health bar if you will (it's actually hit points, but they are one in the same). Also not being able to instantly re-spawn unless you play in a server running the DM mod.
 
Both CS and CS:S have a strong competitive community. They have fun server mods to play (surfing is fun as hell when I want a break from playing at a competitive level). The way the game mechanics and economy break down make it kind of addicting. It's simple but effective. You start out with so much money (non-16k servers), and you get money for killing the enemy, bomb objectives, and for those who like CS maps, hostage objectives. If you get killed there is a penalty. You loose your guns, money, and have to sit the rest of the round out. So there is where strategy comes into play. Your opponent(s) will still have their better weapons, and you will most likely be stuck with a pistol or SMG.

Also there is no instant gratification such as BS health regeneration; one of the few games that still has a health bar if you will (it's actually hit points, but they are one in the same). Also not being able to instantly re-spawn unless you play in a server running the DM mod.

Wow, you've highlighted most of the reasons why I hate CS. I hate the buy system, I hate sitting the round out, and I hate always getting shafted by not having access to decent weapons while everyone else does. I think everyone being the same, and having the same access to weapons makes for more competitive play. No one has a clear advantage over anyone else. Winning or losing is up to skill and skill alone.
 
Wow, you've highlighted most of the reasons why I hate CS. I hate the buy system, I hate sitting the round out, and I hate always getting shafted by not having access to decent weapons while everyone else does. I think everyone being the same, and having the same access to weapons makes for more competitive play. No one has a clear advantage over anyone else. Winning or losing is up to skill and skill alone.

Play in a pub that gives 16k. There you have access to everything. Hate sitting out in a round? Look for a DM server.

You think CS or CS:S is not competitive enough? Grab a one month ESEA($7 i am sure you can afford it) and see how basic level CS:S/CS competitive play functions. This is assuming you have never really tried CS/CS:S competitively before.
 
Wow, you've highlighted most of the reasons why I hate CS. I hate the buy system, I hate sitting the round out, and I hate always getting shafted by not having access to decent weapons while everyone else does. I think everyone being the same, and having the same access to weapons makes for more competitive play. No one has a clear advantage over anyone else. Winning or losing is up to skill and skill alone.

The buy system introduces more strategy into a competitive match - should we go for an early mp5 buy and be money fk'ed if we lose? Should we save another round for AWPs or go to AK47/M4? From a pub standpoint, it isn't as interesting. But competitively, good/great management of the team's buying can make or break a match.

It also allows for those great moments where you win a pistol round against poor odds.

I still remember a scrim against CK3, WAY back in the day. Those guys used desert eagles like assault rifles and absolutely stomped us, and we were pretty good, leading a few leagues at the time.
 
Play in a pub that gives 16k. There you have access to everything. Hate sitting out in a round? Look for a DM server.

You think CS or CS:S is not competitive enough? Grab a one month ESEA($7 i am sure you can afford it) and see how basic level CS:S/CS competitive play functions. This is assuming you have never really tried CS/CS:S competitively before.

I just prefer arena shooters like UT2004 to CS:S. I always did and probably always will.

The buy system introduces more strategy into a competitive match - should we go for an early mp5 buy and be money fk'ed if we lose? Should we save another round for AWPs or go to AK47/M4? From a pub standpoint, it isn't as interesting. But competitively, good/great management of the team's buying can make or break a match.

It also allows for those great moments where you win a pistol round against poor odds.

I still remember a scrim against CK3, WAY back in the day. Those guys used desert eagles like assault rifles and absolutely stomped us, and we were pretty good, leading a few leagues at the time.

I just never cared for it. I've had similar moments in CoD or other games where I'm out of ammunition for everything but the pistol because I lived so long. So I understand the satisfaction of winning against better armed opponents, but I hate getting forced into that all the time because of the game's mechanics.
 
To this day no other game feels as good, the feeling of the guns, the hitbox, the gratification you get from a good headshot, etc.

:)
 
To this day no other game feels as good, the feeling of the guns, the hitbox, the gratification you get from a good headshot, etc.

:)

I've never understood statements like that either. The hitboxes were bad as I recall and the weapons were off balance and never felt right comparatively to one another. No game has ever done that very well really.
 
To this day no other game feels as good, the feeling of the guns, the hitbox, the gratification you get from a good headshot, etc.

:)

I haven't played Counter-Strike, bu in my humble opinion MW2 (PC version) has a really awesome feel to it in the ways you described. Movement/guns/aiming/shooting just feel really smooth and precise to me, like I'm in complete control. Plus the game makes headshots etc extra rewarding by recognizing them with specific bonuses and accolades. Just my $0.02 :)
 
While I'm *LONG* bored of Counter-Strike and have no intention of picking it back up - the game had variety. CoD and other similar shooters all seem to be focused on getting close and unloading with the fastest or strongest weapon you have over and over. Either that or you snipe from afar. You really only have 2 options.
In CS you could play lots of different ways with each weapon, and there were no unlocks and ranks, so you could play it more casually, too.
 
I absolutely adored CS when I played in high school and college - the intense team focus and reasonably quick rounds were great, along with the balancing between weapons and talents. It's a really fleshed out multiplayer shooter that can be as competitive or as casual as you want it to be, and it'll run on pretty well any machine.
 
Last edited:
I haven't played Counter-Strike, bu in my humble opinion MW2 (PC version) has a really awesome feel to it in the ways you described. Movement/guns/aiming/shooting just feel really smooth and precise to me, like I'm in complete control. Plus the game makes headshots etc extra rewarding by recognizing them with specific bonuses and accolades. Just my $0.02 :)

Well Call of Duty games have no realistic physics model with regard to bullets as we know it. Not like Crysis, Battlefield Bad Company 2, etc. They use a system of muzzle rise to simulate recoil and throw off shots. This is extremely easy to compensate for and leads to the "rail gun" criticisms of the game. These are really justified, though recoil / muzzle rise is actually fairly close to how the real weapons behave, the lack of physics makes them accurate over extremely long distances. The maps are also too small to really make use of the sniper rifles etc. That's why you can pretty much get sniped with anything in those games from virtually any place on the map.

Don't get me wrong, I rather enjoy the Call of Duty series, but that's because it's the closest thing to an arena shooter I can get at this point. I also like the variety of weapons, though they aren't appropriately balanced vs. one another. A G36 should have the same damage as an M4 carbine, etc. Yet, they don't. CS:S has similar albeit somewhat different flaws with the guns as I recall but I do not recall what they are as it has been more than 2 years since I've touched the game and I wasn't that devout a CS:S player at any point in my life. I hadn't played CS regularly since the late 1990's early 2000's.
 
I hate the buy system as well. It's ridiculous really. You want me to stop terrorists? Give me what I need to do it. Like you'd go out there with only a pistol.

I tried to play a regular game of Counter Strike a couple of years ago and when I got in the game it was like I was in a solid room with no where to go. I didn't know what to do so I shot the floor and it broke away. So I kept shooting my way out until I ran into another guy shooting and he killed me. I said, "WTF!" And I left. Just give me the game it was intended to be and stop with the crap.
 
I hate the buy system as well. It's ridiculous really. You want me to stop terrorists? Give me what I need to do it. Like you'd go out there with only a pistol.

I tried to play a regular game of Counter Strike a couple of years ago and when I got in the game it was like I was in a solid room with no where to go. I didn't know what to do so I shot the floor and it broke away. So I kept shooting my way out until I ran into another guy shooting and he killed me. I said, "WTF!" And I left. Just give me the game it was intended to be and stop with the crap.
 
Nothing with the same feel as CS ever came out. I don't really think you can attribute CS's continued popularity to nostalgia when there really aren't any alternatives that give the same experience. Almost all modern shooters these days have a similar feel to them. I'm a big fan of the battlefield series, and I hate the CoD series, but the newer battlefields and the newer CoDs do share a similar feel. If you compare either of them to CS, they feel quite different. If you never liked the way CS felt then you really cant understand why people keep going back to it.

I think I said the word feel enough to try and explain it. The difficulty in managing recoil and movement combined with how quickly a player can be killed makes it very rewarding and challenging to get it right. I'd compare it to a golfer working on his swing. There is also emphasis on using the level's geometry to it's fullest. A player who knows a map really well will know where he is visible from at any given time, and since being seen for only a split second can be fatal, this gives them a huge advantage. There's a lot of depth in even the simplest parts of the game.

If a new game came out that had half the depth that CS had, I'd be all over it. Even if you compared BF2 with BC2 in relation to CS, the feel of the guns and movement in BF2 wasn't that close to CS, but it was a hell of a lot closer than BC2 (and in my opinion, just about right for a game with BF2's scale). The trend lately has been to move away from the CS style and that's why I still need to go back to CS:S for that experience.

My biggest criticism of CS is how few good maps came out since release. There are a few, like the cpl maps, season, contra, and russka, but really that's about it for good competitive maps. I'm not including all of the random gun game maps, there's a lot of those.
 
I don't see the "depth" in CS. I never have. I see just as much depth and more in BFBC2 than CS.
 
Well Call of Duty games have no realistic physics model with regard to bullets as we know it. Not like Crysis, Battlefield Bad Company 2, etc. They use a system of muzzle rise to simulate recoil and throw off shots. This is extremely easy to compensate for and leads to the "rail gun" criticisms of the game. These are really justified, though recoil / muzzle rise is actually fairly close to how the real weapons behave, the lack of physics makes them accurate over extremely long distances. The maps are also too small to really make use of the sniper rifles etc. That's why you can pretty much get sniped with anything in those games from virtually any place on the map.

Yeah, I wasn't really speaking from a technical standpoint, just my personal experience of how the game feels to me. It is true that you can use a lot of the guns to carefully take potshots from across the map, but some definitely have more spread than others aside from recoil. I love it when some guy is unloading at me from across the map with an inaccurate gun, bullets fly all around me, and I drop in one burst from my ACR. Call me cheap but it never gets old :D
 
Back
Top