counter strike: Any good or a noob shooter?

[40Hands]

So your saying its weak because it tries to involve at least a bit of realism?

 

[Smilin]

No, I'm saying it's weak because it lacks skill required by weapon variety and especially rapid movement. This is simply a side effect of it attempting realism.

 

[Smilin]

Oooh.

Someone just mentioned Tribes above.

Yeah I'll agree. Tribes is by FAR the most difficult to master. Back in the Q2 days all the guys who had been playing since Q1 moved over to tribes for the challenge. It has the largest percentage of elite players and is very unforgiving to newbies.

All you CS, UT and Q3 (my fav) players out there should check out Tribes Vengeance. You'll remember the @ss kicking for years to come.

 

[40Hands]

It's a different type of game. What it lacks in speed it makes up for in strategy. Flash, smoke, fragmentation grenades. Sounds play a HUGE part in the game. Good team communication. Plus I would say that it requires more overall aiming skill then quake/unreal. Head shots are the key to kicking ass. (no rocket launcher type area effect guns)


Edit: I will have to check out Tribes Vengeance, I am always up for a new FPS to play.

 

[Malladine]

Definately luck plays a role but cs:s is mainly skill driven. More so than mindless fps like ut and q3.

 

[Smilin]

Although the cone of fire type aiming in CS may be more realistic it takes far less skill. Any weapon in UT or Q3 that has splash damage is not a hitscan weapon. You'll need to lead your target.

The speed of movement in UT and Q3 also plays havok with hitscan weapons like the shock rifle, lightning gun or railgun. You're not going to be making an airborne shot at an also airborne target in CS. You're also not going to be making a shot at a kneeled down target. If you do it's a newb you're shooting at.

 

[40Hands]

The recoil effect in CS makes it harder for people who have played other FPS to get used to. "I was aiming at him but he didn't die!?!?! This game is the suxors" Its all about burst fire and steady mouse control. All depending on distance of course. Plus you cannot carry an entire arsenal on your person which makes it a little more challenging. I have played pretty much all the FPS out there and I still think CS type games require more skill.

 

[nCred]

CS takes a lot more tactics and aim, and it´s a hell of a lot more fun IMO.

 

[railer]

Well some of you guys actually make sense. I was just peeved at the one guy who claimed to have "never played" Q3 and then kicked a good players ass. He may have meant "haven't recently played" which is a very different statement. So.....guess I'll fire up CSS again. I'll be the first to admit I'm a noob at it. What server are we all going to? .

Should be a simple matter for one of you css guys to show me how much skill is involved. That doesn't mean kickinng my ass mercilessly either....
In q3, I know right off the bat whether someone is good or not, by the way they move, by how their mg tracks, etc. CSS should be the same once I pick up the finer points....?

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: Smilin
Although the cone of fire type aiming in CS may be more realistic it takes far less skill. Any weapon in UT or Q3 that has splash damage is not a hitscan weapon. You'll need to lead your target.

The speed of movement in UT and Q3 also plays havok with hitscan weapons like the shock rifle, lightning gun or railgun. You're not going to be making an airborne shot at an also airborne target in CS. You're also not going to be making a shot at a kneeled down target. If you do it's a newb you're shooting at.

LOL. Hitscan weapons make it easier, not harder. There are no hitscan weapons in games like CS:S, and there are big cones of fire, so it takes more skill with guns to hit anyone. Hitscan just means point and shoot. This is why I didn't get UT2k4. I played the demo and found it was just entirely too easy to kill anyone. I didn't have to hide, as soon as they were in my POV they were snuffed.

CS:S requires skill to take your opponent out, and requires you to find a weapon you are comfortable with. Sure you could get lucky with a shot, I once killed 3 people with one bullet, best I've ever even seen. But there wouldn't be any good players if it were all luck. When I was in a clan, and we got challenged to scrims, we didn't lose a single one. Hell, the first one we did was the closest match we ever had. I was the last to die on my team 2 rounds in a row, but both rounds we won. I killed every single member of the other team. I've been doing that for years in different games, I play better when I'm alone against a team

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Its BS. Vets will never stop playing and thus memorize all the little quirks to the game play and level design. You pretty much cannot casually play the game, especially with the waiting period between death and a new round. Unless you have fun playing a game you're only playing 10% of the time you have it loaded...you need to be a really great CS player in order to live long enough to truly enjoy it.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: KruptosAngelos

Originally posted by: Smilin
Although the cone of fire type aiming in CS may be more realistic it takes far less skill. Any weapon in UT or Q3 that has splash damage is not a hitscan weapon. You'll need to lead your target.

The speed of movement in UT and Q3 also plays havok with hitscan weapons like the shock rifle, lightning gun or railgun. You're not going to be making an airborne shot at an also airborne target in CS. You're also not going to be making a shot at a kneeled down target. If you do it's a newb you're shooting at.

LOL. Hitscan weapons make it easier, not harder. There are no hitscan weapons in games like CS:S, and there are big cones of fire, so it takes more skill with guns to hit anyone. Hitscan just means point and shoot. This is why I didn't get UT2k4. I played the demo and found it was just entirely too easy to kill anyone. I didn't have to hide, as soon as they were in my POV they were snuffed.

CS:S requires skill to take your opponent out, and requires you to find a weapon you are comfortable with. Sure you could get lucky with a shot, I once killed 3 people with one bullet, best I've ever even seen. But there wouldn't be any good players if it were all luck. When I was in a clan, and we got challenged to scrims, we didn't lose a single one. Hell, the first one we did was the closest match we ever had. I was the last to die on my team 2 rounds in a row, but both rounds we won. I killed every single member of the other team. I've been doing that for years in different games, I play better when I'm alone against a team

No, hitscan weapons don't make it easier. Cone of fire weapons mean you have to: 1. Obtain a steady firing platform (aka quit moving, take a knee, lay down etc). 2. Hold that long enough for the cone to shrink. 3. Fire in controlled bursts.

You are confusing the fact that it takes less skill for your shot to go where you aim (with hitscans) with the fact it takes skill to aim where you want. If you miss with a CoF it's possibly due to luck and possibly due to lack of skill. If you miss with a hitscan, you lack skill. Period. It's like blackjack versus chess. In blackjack you can excercise skill to minimize luck. In chess there is no luck. All moves are deliberate.

Cone of fire weapons add randomness to where the shot lands. Randomness = Luck = no skill. Although it takes skill to minimize the randomness you are also removing the ability for your target to move and fire at you simultaneously. If someone is running they are harder to hit but you don't have to worry about them shooting at you. If they are truly threatening to shoot you then they are holding still. Follow?

I'm sure you've invested a lot of time mastering CS and I in no way mean to diminish your skill. I simply think it takes more skill to truly master UT and Q3 (and god help all of you trying to "master" tribes).

 

[40Hands]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Its BS. Vets will never stop playing and thus memorize all the little quirks to the game play and level design. You pretty much cannot casually play the game, especially with the waiting period between death and a new round. Unless you have fun playing a game you're only playing 10% of the time you have it loaded...you need to be a really great CS player in order to live long enough to truly enjoy it.

There are veteran players for all games.

 

[40Hands]

I think the aim argument is impossible to prove either way. So therefore is moot. (plus I like all the games we are talking about)

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: Smilin
No, hitscan weapons don't make it easier. Cone of fire weapons mean you have to: 1. Obtain a steady firing platform (aka quit moving, take a knee, lay down etc). 2. Hold that long enough for the cone to shrink. 3. Fire in controlled bursts.

You are confusing the fact that it takes less skill for your shot to go where you aim (with hitscans) with the fact it takes skill to aim where you want. If you miss with a CoF it's possibly due to luck and possibly due to lack of skill. If you miss with a hitscan, you lack skill. Period. It's like blackjack versus chess. In blackjack you can excercise skill to minimize luck. In chess there is no luck. All moves are deliberate.

Cone of fire weapons add randomness to where the shot lands. Randomness = Luck = no skill. Although it takes skill to minimize the randomness you are also removing the ability for your target to move and fire at you simultaneously. If someone is running they are harder to hit but you don't have to worry about them shooting at you. If they are truly threatening to shoot you then they are holding still. Follow?

I'm sure you've invested a lot of time mastering CS and I in no way mean to diminish your skill. I simply think it takes more skill to truly master UT and Q3 (and god help all of you trying to "master" tribes).

You aren't listening at all, and obviously haven't played the games. In Q3, the hitscan weapons don't even have recoil, YOU CAN'T MISS. If you suck at Q3, you have absolutely no chance at CS. CS requires quick aiming and control, much more than games like Q3. Q3 is all about point and shoot.

I did not spend a lot of time in CS, only played it a few months, don't even play it anymore. But I know enough to know CS takes much more skill than Q3. You noobs who haven't really played it just don't know that. If you are good at CS, you are great at Q3. If you suck at Q3, you suck even more at CS.

 

[PingSpike]

I like CS:S style games better anyway, the skill arguement is kind of moot I think. The games play differently, they both rely heavily on twitch instincts, but CS:S and other games that have things in common with that game (recoil, limited weapons loadout, movement accuracy penalties, RELOADING, etc) just play slower by nature. I always did pretty well in UT even though I was stuck on dialup back then, I'm good at the "defensive ballet" (aka bunny hopping + circle strafing) but CS:S punishes you. They require a different skillset though...Quake/UT its just pure twitch and very little tactical (know when to attack, and how to do it) CS:S I've noticed that the best way to beat the good players isn't to go toe to toe in a twitch match, its to find a way to shoot them in the back.

I find I like this style of game better as I've gotten older. I like rushing some one when they're reloading. I like being forced to think about more aspects before I make my move. And I like the real punishment for death. In Quake and games like it, when you died it was just a "oh sh|t, I lost my weapon" aspect. Not a big deal. Often times the guy with the top score died just as many times as he killed. In counterstrike when you die its like "fvck, I'm dead for two minutes or something". Dying actually sucks.

 

[Turkey22]

As a former mid level clanner in AQ2, CS, and NS (Natural selection), I've had a bit of experience with movement based fps and non (NS is movement based, but on another level).
I'm better at fast moving games so to me CS seems like it takes more skill. One reason is that when you leave it and try to come back it takes much longer than the faster games do to get reacclimated. I played primarily back in 1.4, and tried playing again when source came out. It feels totally different and is difficult to get a hang of the spread on guns. Quake was all about who can get into position first hopping around the map in unexpected places. All have different movement skills that give you an advantage in game that are learned through practice. Quake was strafe jumping, without it you didn't have a chance. CS is more subtle its more of a strafe pause, you basically have to pause for a moment just before you fire (awp, scout, m4, AK) and you become 100% accurate. It's just as difficult to master as strafe jumping and bunnyhopping (NS aliens).

Basically both take skills, but personally I find fast paced games easier.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: KruptosAngelos


You aren't listening at all,

Wrong.

and obviously haven't played the games.

Very wrong.

In Q3, the hitscan weapons don't even have recoil, YOU CAN'T MISS.

You can't miss IF YOU ARE AIMING CORRECTLY. I guarantee you would miss me A LOT. You're too used to firing from a fixed position at a barely moving target.

In CS you can miss even if you are aiming correctly. Therefore every hit involves a varying amount of LUCK. This means it's possible for a newbie to hit and a veteran to miss. This will NEVER happen in Q3 or UT. Let go of your fanboy mentality and think about that for a second.

If you suck at Q3, you have absolutely no chance at CS. CS requires quick aiming and control, much more than games like Q3. Q3 is all about point and shoot.

I did not spend a lot of time in CS, only played it a few months, don't even play it anymore. But I know enough to know CS takes much more skill than Q3. You noobs who haven't really played it just don't know that. If you are good at CS, you are great at Q3. If you suck at Q3, you suck even more at CS.

If you only spent a few months playing any of these games I doubt you are very good. Do you even know how to plasma climb in Q3? What is the best weapon to use against a railgun at distance (besides another railgun of course)? You probably think a circle strafe or a rocketjump is an advanced technique.

It doesn't sound to me like you've really mastered a 3d shooter. Was half-life the first one you ever played multiplayer?

The Tribes, UT and Q3 guys may all argue about who is best but all of us agree without a doubt who the pussy is. Sucks to be you


edit: saw a quote above.. And I like the real punishment for death. In Quake and games like it, when you died it was just a "oh sh|t, I lost my weapon" aspect. Not a big deal.

For a newbie this is 100% true. In quake if you die you get a new life. For a veteran it's devastating. You have just lost control of the map. A seasoned opponent now has control and timing over all items. The next time you meet he will be armed to the teeth, you'll have possible a single powerful weapon but the armor you seek will be gone. It's going to stay that way for a long time too. I think CS is easier in that regard. When you die the next time you spawn the game is even again. In quake you'll have to wait 20 minutes for the next map to load. It's a veteran thing. Hopefully you understand.

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: Smilin
If you only spent a few months playing any of these games I doubt you are very good. Do you even know how to plasma climb in Q3? What is the best weapon to use against a railgun at distance (besides another railgun of course)? You probably think a circle strafe or a rocketjump is an advanced technique.

It doesn't sound to me like you've really mastered a 3d shooter. Was half-life the first one you ever played multiplayer?

The Tribes, UT and Q3 guys may all argue about who is best but all of us agree without a doubt who the pussy is. Sucks to be you

Let me try to stay in order here:

1. Took a day to figure out plasma climbing.
2. Rocketjumping is pretty retarded IMO, never needed it to beat anyone.
3. Played HL1 a day, same with CS. Didn't like either of them. HL2 and CS:S didn't really change my view on that.
4. I doubt any of you have as much experience between all the games as I do. I played UT for years, beat CAL teams in CS:S, and Tribes just plain sucks as a game.

You can disagree with me all you want, but obviously you don't play any good games if you are still playing Q3.

 

[Malladine]

Originally posted by: Smilin
I think CS is easier in that regard. When you die the next time you spawn the game is even again. In quake you'll have to wait 20 minutes for the next map to load. It's a veteran thing. Hopefully you understand.

Well this sorta shows how little you've played CS. The game is not even unless you've killed a crap load of enemies to earn extra $. Even then you don't receive as much as if you'd won the round. The winners of a round usually end up with superior weaponry (M4 instead of MP50, AWP instead of Mac10) not to mention nades and armour.

Besides this, what you mention sounds more like irritating imbalance than enjoyable gameplay...

The simple fact is CS and other tactical shooters (CoD etc) require all the skills necessary for UT and Q3 and more - battlefield tactics, grenades, pistol expertise when ooa, when to back off when to attack. I'm sure that's not all either.

 

[Last Rezort]

People that are good can dominate a game like nothing else.
Its much diffrent from q3 which is your prob. takes some time.
Yes it takes skill but it takes a while to build it.
Personaly, as you fast pace fps's its my fave

 

[Last Rezort]

Originally posted by: KruptosAngelos
Your poll is worthless. UT and Q3 do not require skill. I played a guy who was really good at Q3, could beat anyone else in my college class no sweat. I on the other hand play skillfull games. I played against him in Q3 and beat him. I never played Q3. Brought him into one of my games, and PWNED HIS ASS. UT and Q3 are easy.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: Smilin
edit: saw a quote above.. And I like the real punishment for death. In Quake and games like it, when you died it was just a "oh sh|t, I lost my weapon" aspect. Not a big deal.

For a newbie this is 100% true. In quake if you die you get a new life. For a veteran it's devastating. You have just lost control of the map. A seasoned opponent now has control and timing over all items. The next time you meet he will be armed to the teeth, you'll have possible a single powerful weapon but the armor you seek will be gone. It's going to stay that way for a long time too. I think CS is easier in that regard. When you die the next time you spawn the game is even again. In quake you'll have to wait 20 minutes for the next map to load. It's a veteran thing. Hopefully you understand.

Its been awhile since I've played straight deathmatch, mainly since I started to find it boring when I began team games. So you should take my opinions as they relate to teamplay games, not deathmatch. I haven't played DM in years.

I did play DM back in Duke Nuken 3D/Blood days. I know about map control, its easier to stay on top than it is to get on top. A good map design rarely allows a player to control the entire thing...giving you a chance. But once you're up there its as much about denying weapons and armor to the other players as it is about killing them. Its actually not much fun, because the losers are helpless and the leader is godlike. So you're right on that.

But again, I only play teamplay games now and CS:S doesn't really even have a DM mod, unless you're playing some trash custom map. And in teamplay games, like UT CTF (which I played exclusively in my UT days) death is hardly a punishment. You respawn at your base and snag one of the available weapon stays. You actually get rewarded for death, provided you don't care about points. "Your flag has been stolen!" Suicide. Respawn in base with full health, snag the weapon stay weapon you'd previously used all the ammo up on...its full again.

Its not the same dynamic in team games. CS:S gives back a punishment for death, making players value their lives instead of running around like a bunch of kill crazed nuts. The waiting is a real punishment. You can run and gun and maybe get a kill or two...but then its time for another piss break. And you're not helping the team when you're dead. Even when you've only got a pistol you can draw fire, try to flank them, do something! I like to be forced to think about situations. To know that at any minute I might get clipped and its over. I can't just charge in and kill them, because I'd probably be wounded so bad I would be useless for the next firefight. (no health packs) They're different games that require different skill sets.

 

[railer]

Kruptos is like the Gurck of the gaming forum.....

(I've done it all, I'm better than everyone, you all suck, etc, etc, etc)

 

[abaez]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: KruptosAngelos


You aren't listening at all,

Wrong.

and obviously haven't played the games.

Very wrong.

In Q3, the hitscan weapons don't even have recoil, YOU CAN'T MISS.

You can't miss IF YOU ARE AIMING CORRECTLY. I guarantee you would miss me A LOT. You're too used to firing from a fixed position at a barely moving target.

In CS you can miss even if you are aiming correctly. Therefore every hit involves a varying amount of LUCK. This means it's possible for a newbie to hit and a veteran to miss. This will NEVER happen in Q3 or UT. Let go of your fanboy mentality and think about that for a second.

If you suck at Q3, you have absolutely no chance at CS. CS requires quick aiming and control, much more than games like Q3. Q3 is all about point and shoot.

I did not spend a lot of time in CS, only played it a few months, don't even play it anymore. But I know enough to know CS takes much more skill than Q3. You noobs who haven't really played it just don't know that. If you are good at CS, you are great at Q3. If you suck at Q3, you suck even more at CS.

If you only spent a few months playing any of these games I doubt you are very good. Do you even know how to plasma climb in Q3? What is the best weapon to use against a railgun at distance (besides another railgun of course)? You probably think a circle strafe or a rocketjump is an advanced technique.

It doesn't sound to me like you've really mastered a 3d shooter. Was half-life the first one you ever played multiplayer?

The Tribes, UT and Q3 guys may all argue about who is best but all of us agree without a doubt who the pussy is. Sucks to be you


edit: saw a quote above.. And I like the real punishment for death. In Quake and games like it, when you died it was just a "oh sh|t, I lost my weapon" aspect. Not a big deal.

For a newbie this is 100% true. In quake if you die you get a new life. For a veteran it's devastating. You have just lost control of the map. A seasoned opponent now has control and timing over all items. The next time you meet he will be armed to the teeth, you'll have possible a single powerful weapon but the armor you seek will be gone. It's going to stay that way for a long time too. I think CS is easier in that regard. When you die the next time you spawn the game is even again. In quake you'll have to wait 20 minutes for the next map to load. It's a veteran thing. Hopefully you understand.

QFT.

The randomness built in to CS drops it down a notch when you are talking about pure skill. You could have been playing since cs .00001 for all anyone cares, there is still randomness BUILT IN. There's a reason why Thresh was undefeated in every quake1 tournament he entered and it wasn't because quake had a built in randomness to weapons.

Not to knock CS though, there are many other aspects of the game (teamplay, coordination, anticipation) that take an incredible amount of skill. I've seen lots of cs videos that reminded me of some of the legendary dm3 battles I saw years ago when tournament play started becoming popular.