Counter-Strike Celebrates 25 Years of Tactical First-Person Shooter Excellence

[erek]

Nice

"But the core hook remained—tightly coordinated attack/defense scenarios demanding skill, strategy, and pinpoint shooting accuracy. Many of us grew up playing Counter Strike. The latest evolution arrived last September with Counter-Strike 2, ushering in a new engine, revamped graphics, and additional gameplay refinements. While initially met with some skepticism from hardcore fans, CS2 has been widely embraced, smashing records with over 1.5 million peak concurrent players. The key to Counter-Strike's enduring success has been its best-in-class core gameplay loop combined with Valve's commitment to evolve with the times. But just as crucial is the passionate global community that has embraced the series' high-skill cap and opportunities for creative strategies. Many have remained devoted for decades, fueling a robust professional esports scene. As it enters its 26th year, Counter-Strike's tactical multiplayer mayhem shows no signs of slowing down. Its unique blend of shooting fundamentals and cerebral team play has firmly cemented its place as one of the most influential games ever made."

Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/323746/...s-of-tactical-first-person-shooter-excellence

 

[KazeoHin]

"Tactical"????

CS is a head-clicker. It was never tactical.

That shouldn't diminish it, it sure is fun! but TACTICAL it is not.

 

[Mchart]

"Tactical"????

CS is a head-clicker. It was never tactical.

That shouldn't diminish it, it sure is fun! but TACTICAL it is not.

Sure is when you know the exact pixel to bounce the grenade off of to kill half the enemy team on dust2

 

[GoldenTiger]

"Tactical"????

CS is a head-clicker. It was never tactical.

That shouldn't diminish it, it sure is fun! but TACTICAL it is not.

I disagree. Map knowledge, timing, and teamwork wa always king. Yes, it is twitchy on the action, but that's not all there is to it.

 

[stefanakis1233]

"Tactical"????

CS is a head-clicker. It was never tactical.

That shouldn't diminish it, it sure is fun! but TACTICAL it is not.

If you try to go A on dust2 as a terrorist f.e. without tactical smokes, flashes and molis you are pretty much dead against a real team.
Every sport requires some tactics.. even football. Check the definition of tactic

 

[TFchris]

CS at the highest level is very tactical.

 

[Flogger23m]

I may give CS2 a try for nostalgia. But when I did that with CS GO it felt so dated. I know people want to play the same thing over and over again and that is fine, but I just don't see how people can still play something so dated. It isn't unlike CoD. You could tell Infinity Ward really wanted to do something better with MW 2019 but were kept back as it had to still be a CoD game. On top of Activision the gamers hated all the advancements it had and MW3 ended up being a big regression in gameplay.

 

[socK]

I may give CS2 a try for nostalgia. But when I did that with CS GO it felt so dated. I know people want to play the same thing over and over again and that is fine, but I just don't see how people can still play something so dated. It isn't unlike CoD. You could tell Infinity Ward really wanted to do something better with MW 2019 but were kept back as it had to still be a CoD game. On top of Activision the gamers hated all the advancements it had and MW3 ended up being a big regression in gameplay.

At the end of the day, people playing CS want CS and any changes to the formula get met with _extreme_ skepticism, for better or worse.

I don't agree it plays dated, though. It's kinda timeless. Part of the allure is that it's stupidly deep mechanically and you can chase getting better for an eternity, like Dota.

 

[Axman]

CS at the highest level is very tactical.

I started getting into professional gaming way back in the day, we had conference calls, PowerPoint presentations, if/then flowcharts for if someone died or an objective changed, map layouts with lettered points, jargon keys (this was before mics and voice coms and we had to type out commands. I don't really remember them but it would be like "efb a" "enemy flash bang at point A" and "emg om t sn tt" aka "enemy machine gun on the move to map location T sniper requested at overwatch point TT" basically WWII ship lamp signals meets 1337speak.

It was like a job usually the strategy meetings would take more time than the matches. There'd be multiple meetings a week because we all had different schedules and we had to hit the forums in our spare time to catch up and get everyone on the same page.

There was drama, of course, people would clash over who got to do what, prima donna shit, and then the eventual stress of saying, "You're not going to be on the next match. No, I'm sorry, you won't be on any more matches. You're still a part of the clan, but you're no longer on the roster. I'm sorry. Yes, we will reconsider you if you would like to reapply."

Of course there's also nothing quite like feeling you're proven, empirically, to be among the best of the best. My goal was typically to be in the top three players across both teams and even if we won, if I wasn't in the top three, I felt like I under-performed. There's no feeling quite like the feeling you get when you fucking dunked on another team, and even when we lost it was like, "fuckin-A, they earned it, what can we do better?"

I would have stuck to it but there was a lull in the early aughts and the prizes dried up, the league organizers started infighting, and it all went amateur hour. I actually blame the concept of E-sports because it was better when we were just playing for bragging rights. Obviously all that's changed since but I let it go and I'm fine with that.

 

[AlphaQup]

"Tactical"????

CS is a head-clicker. It was never tactical.

That shouldn't diminish it, it sure is fun! but TACTICAL it is not.

Sorry, this comment comes off as ignorant.

You wouldn't say the above if you were remotely familiar with the professional level of play, and the tactics, flow charting/decision trees the pros memorize, on top of the INSANE level of map knowledge required to play at that level or near it.

That's not even taking the mind games I to the equation, or the importance of a solid IGL (In Game Leader, the one calling the strats and playa based off his limited information).

 

[KazeoHin]

Sorry, this comment comes off as ignorant.

You wouldn't say the above if you were remotely familiar with the professional level of play, and the tactics, flow charting/decision trees the pros memorize, on top of the INSANE level of map knowledge required to play at that level or near it.

That's not even taking the mind games I to the equation, or the importance of a solid IGL (In Game Leader, the one calling the strats and playa based off his limited information).

Sure is when you know the exact pixel to bounce the grenade off of to kill half the enemy team on dust2

I disagree. Map knowledge, timing, and teamwork wa always king. Yes, it is twitchy on the action, but that's not all there is to it.

If you try to go A on dust2 as a terrorist f.e. without tactical smokes, flashes and molis you are pretty much dead against a real team.
Every sport requires some tactics.. even football. Check the definition of tactic

CS at the highest level is very tactical.

I mean, at a high-level of play, any competitive action requires strategy, planning and skill. Unreal Tournament is very tactical. Would you call it a "Tactical Shooter"?

Rocket League requires incredible strategy and teamwork, planning, would you call it a "Tactical Car Soccer" game?

I just find calling a game about clicking heads and B-hopping "tactical" is like calling TrackMania a "driving simulator". It's technically driving, and it's technically simulating, so it fits!

 

[socK]

I just find calling a game about clicking heads and B-hopping ...

I'm gonna be honest homie, it sounds like you don't understand CS in the slightest

 

[AlphaQup]

I mean, at a high-level of play, any competitive action requires strategy, planning and skill. Unreal Tournament is very tactical. Would you call it a "Tactical Shooter"?

Rocket League requires incredible strategy and teamwork, planning, would you call it a "Tactical Car Soccer" game?

I just find calling a game about clicking heads and B-hopping "tactical" is like calling TrackMania a "driving simulator". It's technically driving, and it's technically simulating, so it fits!

It's odd, you seem to understand how complex these games are (funny enough, 3 that I've suck a TON of time into and have played at a high level), but want to reduce them down to their Steam-level genres. In your mind does Tactical = a realistic military-type simulator?

Your definition of tactical would be beneficial here.

 

[KazeoHin]

I'm gonna be honest homie, it sounds like you don't understand CS in the slightest

I stopped playing back in CS:S and didn't play at the top level (or anywhere close, really)

Is modern CS2 a squad-based, slow-paced combat simulator akin to early Ranbow Six or ARMA?

 

[KazeoHin]

It's odd, you seem to understand how complex these games are (funny enough, 3 that I've suck a TON of time into and have played at a high level), but want to reduce them down to their Steam-level genres. In your mind does Tactical = a realistic military-type simulator?

Your definition of tactical would be beneficial here.

I was poking fun at calling a game like CS "Tactical". and the definition of 'Tactical' is beneficial! as I stated above, you can make washing the dishes 'Tactical' if you broaden the definition to 'involves some level of tactics'. When I think of calling something a 'Tactical Shooter' I think "shooter that's gameplay is first and foremost tactical, all other aspects are secondary to that tactical aspect, and the tactical aspect is front-and centre moreso than other games that are not described as tactical" I think early Rainbow six, ARMA, even PUBG is more 'Tactical' as in those games, how fast you can click on a head is nowhere NEAR as important as where your approaching from, what cover do you have, what is the condition of your team, what is your supply level? can you afford to engage and take losses even if you win?

so "it requires strategy to win" doesn't make any game MORE tactical than say, Quake or UT, or even more tactical than mario kart or Magic The Gathering, or any game that requires strategy to win.

 

[TFchris]

I stopped playing back in CS:S and didn't play at the top level (or anywhere close, really)

Is modern CS2 a squad-based, slow-paced combat simulator akin to early Ranbow Six or ARMA?

As someone who played CS since 1.5, it's a pretty different game in CSGO/CS2. Bhopping is no longer a thing unless you're on a community server dedicated to Bhopping with air acceleration on. So people don't fly across 100 tic servers like in CSS or CS 1.6. It's a much more slow paced 5v5 game where it requires learning of smoke set ups for site execution, flashing, timing, enemy utility counting, giving up rounds for economy adjustment, C4 bomb placement, foot step monitoring, playing the clock, map control etc

At the highest level, the ability to instantly click heads is bare minimum.

You're probably still thinking about 25 vs 25 servers back in the early 2000's in de_dust lol

 

[Unabomber]

It seemed as if the vast majority of players in the original CounterStrike cheated in some way, shape, or form, whether it were due to aimbots or wallhacking. You couldn't poke your head around a corner and not have it instantly annihilated due to a combination of the wallhacking and aimbots...

The consensus was "everyone cheats. Only the bad ones get caught!"

There was quite a hue and a cry once Valve Anti Cheat (VAC) was implemented, with a lot of people screaming about it being unfair.

I honestly tried to enjoy CounterStrike to supplement my Team Fortress Classic gaming, but after a couple of days of the above, I simply stuck with TFC.

 

[Axman]

You wouldn't say the above if you were remotely familiar with the professional level of play, and the tactics, flow charting/decision trees the pros memorize, on top of the INSANE level of map knowledge required to play at that level or near it.

Oh this knocked some memories loose.

I remember one time we got 3-4 guys show up on our servers and they all joined the forum at the same time, and they were really good. Good enough to consider giving them clan invites. But then one guy did something that I'd only ever seen done before in a match and I remembered it because he used it to kill me...

So we sent some of our guys into their forum and one of their guys bragged about moles in our clan. We invited their best guy into our clan and gave him some old/bogus info and sure enough, it ended up on their forum somehow.

We had all these grand plans of sending them false strategies to lure them into a trap match but in testing couldn't really find anything that wasn't totally obvious that would actually work and decided it was a waste of time.

 

[KazeoHin]

As someone who played CS since 1.5, it's a pretty different game in CSGO/CS2. Bhopping is no longer a thing unless you're on a community server dedicated to Bhopping with air acceleration on. So people don't fly across 100 tic servers like in CSS or CS 1.6. It's a much more slow paced 5v5 game where it requires learning of smoke set ups for site execution, flashing, timing, enemy utility counting, giving up rounds for economy adjustment, C4 bomb placement, foot step monitoring, playing the clock, map control etc

At the highest level, the ability to instantly click heads is bare minimum.

You're probably still thinking about 25 vs 25 servers back in the early 2000's in de_dust lol

Well I'll be damned it sounds like it's changed quite a bit!

 

[Tengis]

I may give CS2 a try for nostalgia. But when I did that with CS GO it felt so dated.

I honestly cant even fathom how people still play CS. I was hardcore into CS back in the day from the time it was just a mod up until maybe a year after CS Source was released. I was pretty damn good and attempted to go to tournaments and such but none of my friends were ever good enough.

I tried to jump back in a few times over the years and it really is... just.... so.... dated. Everything about the game just feels clunky.

 

[AlphaQup]

Oh this knocked some memories loose.

I remember one time we got 3-4 guys show up on our servers and they all joined the forum at the same time, and they were really good. Good enough to consider giving them clan invites. But then one guy did something that I'd only ever seen done before in a match and I remembered it because he used it to kill me...

So we sent some of our guys into their forum and one of their guys bragged about moles in our clan. We invited their best guy into our clan and gave him some old/bogus info and sure enough, it ended up on their forum somehow.

We had all these grand plans of sending them false strategies to lure them into a trap match but in testing couldn't really find anything that wasn't totally obvious that would actually work and decided it was a waste of time.

Man, clan forums were the shit back in the 1.5/1.6 days! PUG scrums against other clans, setting random weeknights aside for CS scrums, it was a blast.

Lemmings of the Outback (LOTO) was one of my favorites, they had a 24/7 cs_assault and a few other servers I lived on. Idk, I do miss that community aspect of CS which has long been forgotten.

Well I'll be damned it sounds like it's changed quite a bit!

Yes, yes it has.... kind of like many of us have been saying...

 

[GoldenTiger]

24/7 cs_assault

That was always my favorite map... /sheds a tear

 

[Mazzspeed]

I honestly cant even fathom how people still play CS. I was hardcore into CS back in the day from the time it was just a mod up until maybe a year after CS Source was released. I was pretty damn good and attempted to go to tournaments and such but none of my friends were ever good enough.

I tried to jump back in a few times over the years and it really is... just.... so.... dated. Everything about the game just feels clunky.

I'm nothing more than a casual gamer, but I have to say I really like CS2. However the days of Counter-Strike running on a potato are over...

 

[TFchris]

That was always my favorite map... /sheds a tear

Ah yes! Hostage maps were always fun. Terrible for competitive games but fun (if you were T) lol

 

[socK]

I'm nothing more than a casual gamer, but I have to say I really like CS2. However the days of Counter-Strike running on a potato are over...

History repeats

I'm pretty sure I remember there being whining 500 years ago because 1.5 or 1.6 made some archways curvier and the 7 extra polygons made potatoes of the era ugly cry

 

[Armenius]

CS at the highest level is very tactical.

Crouch walking for 5 minutes and then standing around doing nothing until the final seconds is tactical? I've watched so-called "professional" Counter-Strike matches and I've never been so bored out of my mind. I'd rather watch golf.

Ah yes! Hostage maps were always fun. Terrible for competitive games but fun (if you were T) lol

Hostage maps were my favorite, and I always played CT on those maps. Ts always used the same tactics, so they were so predictable, but those that didn't resulted in some of my favorite matches. cs_office, cs_italy, and cs_militia were among my favorite maps. cs_assault was was horribly balanced and favored the Ts.

Anybody remember assassination maps? Now those were interesting. It changed up the gameplay dynamic in fun ways. Absolutely loved as_tundra.

History repeats

I'm pretty sure I remember there being whining 500 years ago because 1.5 or 1.6 made some archways curvier and the 7 extra polygons made potatoes of the era ugly cry

1.6 wasn't much more demanding than 1.5, but I think that had more to do with having Steam needing to be run. People were bitching about the Steam requirement more than anything. From what I can recall, though, people actually like CS:Source.

 

[TFchris]

Crouch walking for 5 minutes and then standing around doing nothing until the final seconds is tactical? I've watched so-called "professional" Counter-Strike matches and I've never been so bored out of my mind. I'd rather watch golf.

Hostage maps were my favorite, and I always played CT on those maps. Ts always used the same tactics, so they were so predictable, but those that didn't resulted in some of my favorite matches. cs_office, cs_italy, and cs_militia were among my favorite maps. cs_assault was was horribly balanced and favored the Ts.

Anybody remember assassination maps? Now those were interesting. It changed up the gameplay dynamic in fun ways. Absolutely loved as_tundra.

1.6 wasn't much more demanding than 1.5, but I think that had more to do with having Steam needing to be run. People were bitching about the Steam requirement more than anything. From what I can recall, though, people actually like CS:Source.

To each their own I guess. Counter Strike is top 3 most watched esport in the world, so it'll be fine. All I can say is, "if you know, you know".

 

[Furious_Styles]

To each their own I guess. Counter Strike is top 3 most watched esport in the world, so it'll be fine. All I can say is, "if you know, you know".

CS is much better as a spectator than something like BR games. Much simpler and limited to a small amount of players. Also not a bunch of visual spam with abilities like in OW.

 

[BravO)))]

I was poking fun at calling a game like CS "Tactical". and the definition of 'Tactical' is beneficial! as I stated above, you can make washing the dishes 'Tactical' if you broaden the definition to 'involves some level of tactics'. When I think of calling something a 'Tactical Shooter' I think "shooter that's gameplay is first and foremost tactical, all other aspects are secondary to that tactical aspect, and the tactical aspect is front-and centre moreso than other games that are not described as tactical" I think early Rainbow six, ARMA, even PUBG is more 'Tactical' as in those games, how fast you can click on a head is nowhere NEAR as important as where your approaching from, what cover do you have, what is the condition of your team, what is your supply level? can you afford to engage and take losses even if you win?

so "it requires strategy to win" doesn't make any game MORE tactical than say, Quake or UT, or even more tactical than mario kart or Magic The Gathering, or any game that requires strategy to win.

You have no idea what you are talking about lol.

 

[socK]

CS is much better as a spectator than something like BR games. Much simpler and limited to a small amount of players. Also not a bunch of visual spam with abilities like in OW.

CS has come a long way in spectator friendliness

Production values are so much higher now, I think it helps the game a lot. It's super easy to miss key moments, or something happens at the other site and whoever is driving spectator misses it.

The game really needs stuff like instant replays.

 

[Flogger23m]

In your mind does Tactical = a realistic military-type simulator?

That is what a tactical shooter is. Rainbow Six, R6 Rogue Spear, Raven Shield, SWAT 3/4, ArmA 1/2/3, The Regiment, Ready or Not, Ghost Recon 1, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 1/2 on PC are examples.

CS always has been a regular old shooter that does not attempt to replicate or require any semblance of real word tactics in regards to shooting gameplay.

I was poking fun at calling a game like CS "Tactical". and the definition of 'Tactical' is beneficial! as I stated above, you can make washing the dishes 'Tactical'

Exactly. Some people say if it requires communication it is tactical. By that definition everything can be tactical. Walking and meeting up with friends at the mall? Tactical shopping. Learning how to time your skidding and when to use mushroom boosts? Well then Mario Kart is a tactical racer.

so "it requires strategy to win" doesn't make any game MORE tactical than say, Quake or UT, or even more tactical than mario kart or Magic The Gathering, or any game that requires strategy to win.

Yup. Almost every game can be studied down to timing, or when exactly to press what button, or how to react when something else happened.

I honestly cant even fathom how people still play CS. I was hardcore into CS back in the day from the time it was just a mod up until maybe a year after CS Source was released. I was pretty damn good and attempted to go to tournaments and such but none of my friends were ever good enough.

I tried to jump back in a few times over the years and it really is... just.... so.... dated. Everything about the game just feels clunky.

I don't disagree. I don't like "e-sports" and whatnot because I think they hold games back and tend to be freemium (which means shitty skins and whatnot). Of course different people like different things. But if it was up to me, I would make all freemium and e-sports games disappear.

 

[Safe and Effective]

I got my first IT job playing CS with friends who ran a server from their data center at a healthcare facility. I barely knew what a computer was but I learned fast and on the job. We would play for hours on the clock after I got the job lol. Those were the days.

 

[BravO)))]

That is what a tactical shooter is. Rainbow Six, R6 Rogue Spear, Raven Shield, SWAT 3/4, ArmA 1/2/3, The Regiment, Ready or Not, Ghost Recon 1, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 1/2 on PC are examples.

CS always has been a regular old shooter that does not attempt to replicate or require any semblance of real word tactics in regards to shooting gameplay.



Exactly. Some people say if it requires communication it is tactical. By that definition everything can be tactical. Walking and meeting up with friends at the mall? Tactical shopping. Learning how to time your skidding and when to use mushroom boosts? Well then Mario Kart is a tactical racer.



Yup. Almost every game can be studied down to timing, or when exactly to press what button, or how to react when something else happened.



I don't disagree. I don't like "e-sports" and whatnot because I think they hold games back and tend to be freemium (which means shitty skins and whatnot). Of course different people like different things. But if it was up to me, I would make all freemium and e-sports games disappear.

What? I think the CS you guys played, were community servers, never playing or understanding the competitive scene. When your competition is preprogrammed, it can give you an illusion of being tactical, when in all reality, it could be rewarding bad tactics that otherwise human players would punish.

 

[Axman]

Exactly. Some people say if it requires communication it is tactical. By that definition everything can be tactical. Walking and meeting up with friends at the mall? Tactical shopping. Learning how to time your skidding and when to use mushroom boosts? Well then Mario Kart is a tactical racer.

Tactical = tip of the spear. Strategic = haft of the spear.

In order for CS to be strategic, you would have to start with no electricity, no PC room, no PC, no game, no Internet, nothing. Part of the game would be in how fast you could assemble an Internet-connected gaming room with a gaming PC and your score would depend on that.

In order for CS to not be tactical, it would remove every element of what shooters use and reduce it to clicking on a head. Just count the number of clicks on heads, that player would be the best.

That doesn't describe CS, that describes Banana.

CS is a tactical, or tactics-based shooter. Even shooters on rails give you a hint of tactics.

 

[Flogger23m]

In order for CS to not be tactical, it would remove every element of what shooters use and reduce it to clicking on a head. Just count the number of clicks on heads, that player would be the best.

By that logic every game is a tactical game then. If every game is a tactical game, why is the word "tactical" being put in there in the first place? You don't create a sub-term if it applies to every type of game.

Getting back to reality, if you want a PvP style tactical shooter look into Squad or Red Orchestra/Rising Storm. They certainly won't be as popular as more mainstream games though.

 

[TFchris]

CS is much better as a spectator than something like BR games. Much simpler and limited to a small amount of players. Also not a bunch of visual spam with abilities like in OW.

Agreed. It's a very straight forward game, unlike Valorant or OW as you mentioned. It's a easy game to understand, difficult to master. Reminds me of chess to a certain degree.

 

[Axman]

By that logic every game is a tactical game then.

No, Banana exists. And there are some games that are entirely strategic. Civilization is a strategic series; you don't control an individual combatant.

Communication is also not key to tactics. John Wick mostly acted on his own.