Counter-Strike: Global Offensive Stays True to the Source

[SammiYin]

So this is just a tweaked version of CSS but using the same engine?
Wow, and Call of Duty gets a load of stick, at least they come out yearly.

You are under the impression yearly releases are a good thing?
Splitting the fanbase every year helps with what exactly?

But mainly CS games are dirt cheap, and you can get thousands of maps for free while CoD would require you to sell the house and atleast one kidney for that kind of content.

I'm just curious as to how this game is essentially branded an 8 year old "Update" because apparently, staying in the "good old days" is the best way to release games. I'm going to be honest and say I know very little about this actual game, but I can predict it being around £30, I doubt it will have single player except maybe some improved bot mode, and will have new weapons and abilities and maps.
Now let's take a look at the widely despised Call of duty series, which releases a new game yearly now, has a single player, a co op mode, and a multiplayer mode all rolled into one, with [admittedly you need to pay] map releases every couple of months. Yet these games are hated for "not mixing up the formula" and being safe with what works, when this is exactly what Valve have announced to be doing, yet they attract very little criticism? I'm just curious as to why this is.
[Especially since they've been in this mindset for about 8 years]

And don't get me started on how it's looking just as brown as every other shooter out there.

 

[karoliso]

So this is just a tweaked version of CSS but using the same engine?
Wow, and Call of Duty gets a load of stick, at least they come out yearly.

You are under the impression yearly releases are a good thing?
Splitting the fanbase every year helps with what exactly?

But mainly CS games are dirt cheap, and you can get thousands of maps for free while CoD would require you to sell the house and atleast one kidney for that kind of content.

I'm just curious as to how this game is essentially branded an 8 year old "Update" because apparently, staying in the "good old days" is the best way to release games. I'm going to be honest and say I know very little about this actual game, but I can predict it being around £30, I doubt it will have single player except maybe some improved bot mode, and will have new weapons and abilities and maps.
Now let's take a look at the widely despised Call of duty series, which releases a new game yearly now, has a single player, a co op mode, and a multiplayer mode all rolled into one, with [admittedly you need to pay] map releases every couple of months. Yet these games are hated for "not mixing up the formula" and being safe with what works, when this is exactly what Valve have announced to be doing, yet they attract very little criticism? I'm just curious as to why this is.
[Especially since they've been in this mindset for about 8 years]

And don't get me started on how it's looking just as brown as every other shooter out there.

Counter-Strike is focused more on skill and less on being casual-friendly. When I played CoD it reminded me a lot of Quake III Arena in the sense that it was an arcadey game. Counter-Strike chews up and spits out new players. Also, the fact that the CoD franchise churns out a new game yearly is indeed part of the problem. Valve games are meant to last for many years. Not to mention free updates and the strong community which produces a LOT of content.

 

[Woodsey]

Cross-platform play? Says who?

360 and PS3 gamers won't be able to play with each other, and the reason the 360 doesn't have cross-platform on Portal 2 is because MS won't allow Steamworks. Are you sure?

 

[HerbertTheHamster]

This is the fifth fucking time they remake the same game, I'm not surprised they wont make major changes.

Well why would they make it very different? The long time CS players will HATE it if it strays too far away, and there's no way it's gonna compete with Call of Duty or Battlefield (being that CS is a "...what?" from console gamers.. This is the smartest thing Valve could do. Making the game that the majority of its fans really want.

...for the fifth time. With less changes than COD

 

[Smooth Operator]

Yet these games are hated for "not mixing up the formula" and being safe with what works, when this is exactly what Valve have announced to be doing, yet they attract very little criticism? I'm just curious as to why this is.

Hmm, good question.
I guess the problem with CoD is it feels like a scam, they push out a "new" game absolutely every year at full price and with it kill the old game community, that gets split and pressured into dropping 60$ yet again, and then every new map is sold at $15, while locking down the game so those are your only options.

In contrast to CS, the last one was released in 2004, it came at half the triple A title price and the entire game is open to community content all of which is free.
So for about 30$ got you a steady 7 year community with a supply of maps that noone else rivals.

Now if we try to equalize, releasing CS every year for 30$, splitting the communities and pressuring people into a new purchase, removing community content, and releasing map packs with 1 new and 4 old maps at 15$ a pop... if Valve would try to pull that shit they would get torn asunder by the CS community.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

This is the fifth fucking time they remake the same game, I'm not surprised they wont make major changes.

Well why would they make it very different? The long time CS players will HATE it if it strays too far away, and there's no way it's gonna compete with Call of Duty or Battlefield (being that CS is a "...what?" from console gamers.. This is the smartest thing Valve could do. Making the game that the majority of its fans really want.

...for the fifth time. With less changes than COD

What are the other remakes? I'm only familiar with the original, CS:S and this one.

EDIT.
Oh wait, are you counting the Xbox versions as well?

 

[GiantRedButton]

Players on the 360, PS3, Mac, and PC will all be able to get matched with each other.

This, of all games. This won't end well for the two controller users.

Do you kn had heavy autoaim for console users and made the target reticule for pc player wobble and evade the target to try and balance the field. The escapist had an article a while ago why that was. Average Pc players where dominating the best console players.
Anyway valve already found a soution , they are going to support M and keyboard for ps3 (atleast thats the rumor)
ow if we can still just server browse and hop in? I like playing against people that outclass me to get better faster.

Yes but it will be nice to finally be able to end the argument of which platform is best for shooters with a live example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadowrun_%282007_video_game%29

Which can be played at a higher level without auto-aim was never up for debate.

Shadowrun had heavy autoaim for console users and made the target reticule for pc player wobble and evade the target to try and balance the field. The escapist had an article a while ago why that was. Average Pc players where dominating the best console players.
Anyway valve already found a soution , they are going to support M and keyboard for ps3 (atleast thats the rumor)

 

[GeorgW]

Not exactly surprising, but nice to have it confirmed.

Players on the 360, PS3, Mac, and PC will all be able to get matched with each other.

This, of all games. This won't end well for the two controller users.

Do you know if we can still just server browse and hop in? I like playing against people that outclass me to get better faster.

They'll support mouse and keyboard on consoles.

Cross-platform play? Says who?

360 and PS3 gamers won't be able to play with each other, and the reason the 360 doesn't have cross-platform on Portal 2 is because MS won't allow Steamworks. Are you sure?

Valve want to have cross platform on 360 and they're in negotiations now, but it's most likely not going to happen.

 

[Boysie]

Haha! cross platform play on a game that requires very precise aiming, accurate movement and fast twitch response.
I can see console players begging for a server filter to block PC players with their virtual cheatmode mouse and keyboard interface.

Actually that might be a good thing. If all the people who use hacks on CS now can get their kicks slaughtering controller users, they might not feel the need to cheat as badly.

 

[Korten12]

Cross-platform play? Says who?

360 and PS3 gamers won't be able to play with each other, and the reason the 360 doesn't have cross-platform on Portal 2 is because MS won't allow Steamworks. Are you sure?

PS3 players can play with pc and mac players, like in Portal 2. (for some reason the article writer also wrote: 360)

cross-platform play. Players on the 360, PS3, Mac, and PC will all be able to get matched with each other.

Players on 360 won't be able to play with any other platform due to it not having steam works.

 

[Zer_]

This is the fifth fucking time they remake the same game, I'm not surprised they wont make major changes.

Well why would they make it very different? The long time CS players will HATE it if it strays too far away, and there's no way it's gonna compete with Call of Duty or Battlefield (being that CS is a "...what?" from console gamers.. This is the smartest thing Valve could do. Making the game that the majority of its fans really want.

...for the fifth time. With less changes than COD

CS is actually a successful competitive game... CoD is not.

 

[Irridium]

So this is just a tweaked version of CSS but using the same engine?
Wow, and Call of Duty gets a load of stick, at least they come out yearly.

You are under the impression yearly releases are a good thing?
Splitting the fanbase every year helps with what exactly?

But mainly CS games are dirt cheap, and you can get thousands of maps for free while CoD would require you to sell the house and atleast one kidney for that kind of content.

I'm just curious as to how this game is essentially branded an 8 year old "Update" because apparently, staying in the "good old days" is the best way to release games. I'm going to be honest and say I know very little about this actual game, but I can predict it being around £30, I doubt it will have single player except maybe some improved bot mode, and will have new weapons and abilities and maps.
Now let's take a look at the widely despised Call of duty series, which releases a new game yearly now, has a single player, a co op mode, and a multiplayer mode all rolled into one, with [admittedly you need to pay] map releases every couple of months. Yet these games are hated for "not mixing up the formula" and being safe with what works, when this is exactly what Valve have announced to be doing, yet they attract very little criticism? I'm just curious as to why this is.
[Especially since they've been in this mindset for about 8 years]

And don't get me started on how it's looking just as brown as every other shooter out there.

Valve attracts little criticism because, unlike all other developes/publishers, Valve has built up LOADS of goodwill with everyone. Valve has given loads of people reasons to like and trust them, which is why people do.

Also, the game is being released on the Xbox Live Arcade and Playstation Network, so it'll be $15 USD, or at most $20. It'll not be priced the same as a full new release. More like a stand-alone expansion, much like Mount and Blade Warband.

 

[Hitokiri_Gensai]

Im really hoping this will be good. Source was fun to play, but the challange of 1.6 had been taken out of it. Im really hoping this will be the fix for Sources GIANT hit boxes and semi broken physics.

 

[vehystrix]

I hope this thing will have the old look-and-feel of the 1.6 game, none of that fake rubbery huge hitbox source shit.
Come to think of it, All source games have had this problem (except the portal games since there the weird physics fit perfectly) which made me like none of them. (HL1 > HL2, CS1.6 > CS:S, etc.) So I really do hope they come with a sufficiently big update to the engine itself to fix it. Not only this, but they better make it challenging, raw and twitchy again, which was a great quality of the 1.6 lost in the Source port.

Either way, I probably won't be getting this game because I'm still kicking arse in 1.6 with my small band of oldskool server-regulars, and the occasional random guest who inevitably gets slaughtered.

 

[stefanbertramlee]

Cross platform play?

Awesome cakes, consoles will probally get owned though.

 

[SammiYin]

Hmm, good question.
I guess the problem with CoD is it feels like a scam, they push out a "new" game absolutely every year at full price and with it kill the old game community, that gets split and pressured into dropping 60$ yet again, and then every new map is sold at $15, while locking down the game so those are your only options.

In contrast to CS, the last one was released in 2004, it came at half the triple A title price and the entire game is open to community content all of which is free.
So for about 30$ got you a steady 7 year community with a supply of maps that noone else rivals.

Now if we try to equalize, releasing CS every year for 30$, splitting the communities and pressuring people into a new purchase, removing community content, and releasing map packs with 1 new and 4 old maps at 15$ a pop... if Valve would try to pull that shit they would get torn asunder by the CS community.

Valve attracts little criticism because, unlike all other developes/publishers, Valve has built up LOADS of goodwill with everyone. Valve has given loads of people reasons to like and trust them, which is why people do.

Also, the game is being released on the Xbox Live Arcade and Playstation Network, so it'll be $15 USD, or at most $20. It'll not be priced the same as a full new release. More like a stand-alone expansion, much like Mount and Blade Warband.

You both make good points, so I shall let the matter drop...this once. But I won't be impressed if we get another release about a year after the next one. And if it's going at a much cheaper price than that will put it in a different league to the cod and Ea sports updates, but it'll still be playing the same ball game.

I'm not hating on this game, I just go by the motto "If it isn't broke, why bother re-releasing it?" This applies to all games and companies, not just the ones I "don't really like"

 

[Scott Bullock]

Cross-platform play? Says who?

360 and PS3 gamers won't be able to play with each other, and the reason the 360 doesn't have cross-platform on Portal 2 is because MS won't allow Steamworks. Are you sure?

PS3 players can play with pc and mac players, like in Portal 2. (for some reason the article writer also wrote: 360)

cross-platform play. Players on the 360, PS3, Mac, and PC will all be able to get matched with each other.

Players on 360 won't be able to play with any other platform due to it not having steam works.

According to what I was told by a Valve employee at PAX, the 360 will be able to play with the other platforms. If that isn't the case, than either he got it wrong or he knows something you don't.