bit-gamer.net

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive Preview

Comments 1 to 25 of 26

Reply
GravitySmacked 21st January 2012, 20:14 Quote
I'm sure they'll polish it up nicely before releasing it.
HorseFeathers 21st January 2012, 20:38 Quote
images aren't working?
ZERO <ibis> 21st January 2012, 21:19 Quote
Still though it is clear that it will be setup more like tf2 where there is a lot of limitations placed on server owners. What makes cs and css is the freedom in the control over the server. It is the gaming communities that make the game. Valve to me seems to have lost this idea and instead believe that it needs to cater to the mass click and go noobs that mainly just run wild and are not really interested in being part of any community.

It is the various server communities that keep games like cs alive and that is why these games years later still have so many players. I do not plan to host any servers for this game ever. What is great new is that with the release of cs:go valve may start to leave css alone and reopen a golden age of development where valve updates are not breaking our code randomly thought the year.
sheninat0r 22nd January 2012, 05:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZERO <ibis>
Still though it is clear that it will be setup more like tf2 where there is a lot of limitations placed on server owners. What makes cs and css is the freedom in the control over the server. It is the gaming communities that make the game. Valve to me seems to have lost this idea and instead believe that it needs to cater to the mass click and go noobs that mainly just run wild and are not really interested in being part of any community.

It is the various server communities that keep games like cs alive and that is why these games years later still have so many players. I do not plan to host any servers for this game ever. What is great new is that with the release of cs:go valve may start to leave css alone and reopen a golden age of development where valve updates are not breaking our code randomly thought the year.

Uh... what limitations are there on TF2 server owners? Have you looked at the server browser, ever? It's got tons of custom maps and game modes. Just because Valve added an eZ button to TF2, doesn't mean the hard way is gone.
ssj12 22nd January 2012, 06:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheninat0r
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZERO <ibis>
Still though it is clear that it will be setup more like tf2 where there is a lot of limitations placed on server owners. What makes cs and css is the freedom in the control over the server. It is the gaming communities that make the game. Valve to me seems to have lost this idea and instead believe that it needs to cater to the mass click and go noobs that mainly just run wild and are not really interested in being part of any community.

It is the various server communities that keep games like cs alive and that is why these games years later still have so many players. I do not plan to host any servers for this game ever. What is great new is that with the release of cs:go valve may start to leave css alone and reopen a golden age of development where valve updates are not breaking our code randomly thought the year.

Uh... what limitations are there on TF2 server owners? Have you looked at the server browser, ever? It's got tons of custom maps and game modes. Just because Valve added an eZ button to TF2, doesn't mean the hard way is gone.

Just ignore him. Zero says a lot of things he has no clue about. But he has a fun WC server.

Anyway, wtf is this article? omg an early beta is crap... did you not play RIFT's beta or SWTOR? The games had a ton of issues but are two of the best MMOs on the market. Complaining about a beta makes as much sense as writing an entire post in binary.
Aracos 22nd January 2012, 16:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssj12
Anyway, wtf is this article? omg an early beta is crap... did you not play RIFT's beta or SWTOR? The games had a ton of issues but are two of the best MMOs on the market. Complaining about a beta makes as much sense as writing an entire post in binary.

By that logic then it's pointless ever doing any previews at all, because they're still usually in Beta stage and will have issues.
MjFrosty 22nd January 2012, 19:03 Quote
Precisely, otherwise hardly anything would get fixed lol. I'm 50/50 on the new look. We don't really need another BF3/COD. I was a fairly big CS:Source player, but stepping further away from 1.5/1.6 is obviously going to fuel a bit of hatred from the long running players.

Especially the cross platform functionality, which whilst cute, IMO I can't see how anyone benefits from it. Guess I'll have to wait to find out, CS:Source has been due a revamp for some time now
azrael- 22nd January 2012, 19:30 Quote
I still find CS:CZ the best incarnation of the game. It fixed some of the annoyances/bugs of CS (1.6), while still maintaining that certain "feel" 1.6 had and CS:S completely lost.

Alas, I haven't been playing either game for more than 6 months now, as every bit of reg I had went out the window when I switched out my CRT with a TFT.
Jasio 22nd January 2012, 19:38 Quote
Having played CS:GO on and off for the past few months I can say that it's just an updated/polished version of CS more or less. The game play is still the same, fun, quick fast paced killing spree and switching over from CS:S is very fluid.

Can't comment too much on the weapons though- they do feel quite 'fake' and the amount of fluidity at times seems to detract from more realistic games like BF3. But on the other hand, that's a different sort of game all together. For a quick rumble on a server, knock back a few rounds, CS:GO should keep folks entertained.
west 23rd January 2012, 00:41 Quote
1) "Fake/puff'd-up nerf" feeling weapons didn't stop people from liking the Halo squeals
2) [@ azrael] CS:CZ sucks
3) I think many will agree that there can be no sequel to 1.6 that will be as good, simply because avid fans of 1.6 generally wouldn't change a damn thing about it (including the crap graphics)
4) [@ssj12] An all binary article would be cool and appreciated by hard-core nerds who took the time to decode it.
5) Anyone who likes CS:S will buy this game and probably like it just as much as CS:S despite whatever issues it might have.
6) There will never be a game like 1.6 again. I think this is due to graphics being a main focus, take this article for instance - who the **** cares what a gun looks like? would you refuse to play poker because the suited cards looked stupid to you? (no) Video games should be about the game not about the graphics (but they are not anymore, are they?)
Mentai 23rd January 2012, 04:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by west
6) There will never be a game like 1.6 again. I think this is due to graphics being a main focus, take this article for instance - who the **** cares what a gun looks like? would you refuse to play poker because the suited cards looked stupid to you? (no) Video games should be about the game not about the graphics (but they are not anymore, are they?)

That implies at some point visuals didn't matter to video games. For its time 1.6 was decent graphically, yet they somehow managed to make a game you like, which invalidates your point. I agree that graphics shouldn't get in the way of gameplay, but I don't see how changing the art style on the guns has any negative effect on the gameplay design when the artists and sound engineers are probably completely different people to the level and balance designers. At the end of the day, if every individual in a dev team is doing their job well, there is no reason we can't have great graphics AND gameplay.
DriftCarl 23rd January 2012, 15:03 Quote
Graphics are not everything I agree, but graphics do add the WOW factor to games, If graphics wasnt important, then there would be no reason for HDTV, everyone appreciates better quality, weather it be games, tv or music.
I prefer CSS much more than CS 1.6.(not that I play either anymore or have done for several years). The reason I prefer it is as much graphics as gameplay. Graphics ARE important, if they wern't then we would still be running round levls like in wolfenstien.
I now prefer BF3 over any other shooter, the graphics are amazing, as is the gameplay. I may try CS:GO but as its on the source engine, its far far inferior to BF3, even if valve were working on a new engine, there is every chance that their new engine would not be as good as BF3 still.

However, there are groups of people that dont particualrly care much about graphics. They are perfectly fine playing the same game over and over year after year. Nothing at all wrong with that, they love the community and want to keep playing with the same group of people. This also explains why modern warfare keeps selling year after year despite the graphics being exactly the same and the gameplay being exactly the same.
As it is clear now, activision already knew this and probably instructed the studio not to make many major graphical or gameplay changes.
ssj12 23rd January 2012, 17:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aracos
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssj12
Anyway, wtf is this article? omg an early beta is crap... did you not play RIFT's beta or SWTOR? The games had a ton of issues but are two of the best MMOs on the market. Complaining about a beta makes as much sense as writing an entire post in binary.

By that logic then it's pointless ever doing any previews at all, because they're still usually in Beta stage and will have issues.

No, I was a game reviewer for VGChartz.com, I did previews all the time. The point is instead of complaining that a game isn't as smooth as older products or as smooth as your editorialized opinion believes it should, actually write about what it can become.

The entire point of a preview is to discuss the game as a whole and future promise of the title. Throwing in a suggestion or two if the author feels its necessary can be included. Still a paragraph or two of current issues on it is perfectly fine, but to condemn the entire thing because of the glitches in it at early stages is pointless.
pizan 23rd January 2012, 18:18 Quote
I could car less what the guns look like. I haven't played CS:S in a while , but can't you just get new skins for the weapons. I remember my knife was a karate chop and my awp a hand throwing a bullet.
azrael- 23rd January 2012, 21:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by west
1) "Fake/puff'd-up nerf" feeling weapons didn't stop people from liking the Halo squeals
2) [@ azrael] CS:CZ sucks
3) I think many will agree that there can be no sequel to 1.6 that will be as good, simply because avid fans of 1.6 generally wouldn't change a damn thing about it (including the crap graphics)
4) [@ssj12] An all binary article would be cool and appreciated by hard-core nerds who took the time to decode it.
5) Anyone who likes CS:S will buy this game and probably like it just as much as CS:S despite whatever issues it might have.
6) There will never be a game like 1.6 again. I think this is due to graphics being a main focus, take this article for instance - who the **** cares what a gun looks like? would you refuse to play poker because the suited cards looked stupid to you? (no) Video games should be about the game not about the graphics (but they are not anymore, are they?)
Thank you for sharing your profound insight. Needless to say we don't see eye to eye on this.
west 24th January 2012, 00:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mentai
That implies at some point visuals didn't matter to video games. For its time 1.6 was decent graphically, yet they somehow managed to make a game you like, which invalidates your point.

I was 9 years old when the original HalfLife was released (the time you refer to). When I started playing CS 1.6 the graphics did indeed, by anyone's standards at that time, suck. I liked the game despite the graphics.

I think you missed my point. You said 1.6 looks ok for its time and is an ok game, therefor my point is invalid.
I don't mean to say that if a game has decent graphics it cannot be good I'm just saying there is too much focus on graphics (IMO) when it comes to deciding if a game is good or not.

As pizan said, you can skin your weapons in counterstrike games (hopefully CS:GO will also allow this) so who cares what the guns look like? Why should this factor so much into the review?

As I counterstrike fan I would have liked to seen more content about the actual game play, are the same guns around? did they change ROF or recoil or spread or anything significant like that?

Also I don't agree with the idea that "CS:GO needs to at least match CS 1.6, if not surpass it."
CS:GO doesn't even have to be as good as source, people are still going to buy it and play it for the simple fact that it's newer (well that simple fact wont be good enough for me or others who are reading this but it will be for the majority of CS:Sers id wager)
keir 24th January 2012, 10:22 Quote
So is this still going to be free?
Dwarfer 25th January 2012, 17:13 Quote
If it's free then fair do's but I wouldn't pay anything for it!
Nature 25th January 2012, 22:45 Quote
Great summary, I hope Valve reads this article and takes it to heart.
Gradius 27th January 2012, 05:21 Quote
Yay! New cheaters here I go!
S1W1 29th January 2012, 12:36 Quote
As far as I'm concerned the old CS:S got as near to perfection as any game ever will. I still play it loads, all these years later it has lost none of its appeal. Valve can't hope to improve gameplay in my opinion- so I wish they would just give the old Counter-Strike a graphical revamp, add some new maps and a few new weapons and leave the gameplay EXACTLY as it is. Please?
azrael- 29th January 2012, 15:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by S1W1
As far as I'm concerned the old CS:S got as near to perfection as any game ever will. I still play it loads, all these years later it has lost none of its appeal. Valve can't hope to improve gameplay in my opinion- so I wish they would just give the old Counter-Strike a graphical revamp, add some new maps and a few new weapons and leave the gameplay EXACTLY as it is. Please?
See, the problem is, most die-hard CS fans (as in CS 1.6) would argue that CS:S is anything but perfect. I know plenty who won't touch CS:S with a 10 foot barge pole, myself included. For me, that certain "feeling" just isn't there in CS:S.
ssj12 30th January 2012, 05:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by azrael-
Quote:
Originally Posted by S1W1
As far as I'm concerned the old CS:S got as near to perfection as any game ever will. I still play it loads, all these years later it has lost none of its appeal. Valve can't hope to improve gameplay in my opinion- so I wish they would just give the old Counter-Strike a graphical revamp, add some new maps and a few new weapons and leave the gameplay EXACTLY as it is. Please?
See, the problem is, most die-hard CS fans (as in CS 1.6) would argue that CS:S is anything but perfect. I know plenty who won't touch CS:S with a 10 foot barge pole, myself included. For me, that certain "feeling" just isn't there in CS:S.

I play both, honestly while I am better at 1.6 than Source, the last major update fixed Source's hit box issues. I think Source can be quite fun and I do find the gameplay to be more fluid because of the graphics update (now EP2 engine). I just find the weapons slightly odd, but still with the more realistic push Source was going with, it isnt bad. Hopefully GO has better feeling weapons than Source.
lewish131 30th January 2012, 08:13 Quote
try deleting them, and then do it again :D
wodgah 31st January 2012, 12:40 Quote
Interesting read , so valve seem to have dropped the ball ? will be very interested to see if opinions change on this thru the beta.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums