Counter Strike or CS:Source?

[NYHoustonman]

For (most likely) a combination of reasons, I've never been as successful in source as I was up until 1.5. It's starting to frustrate me ><.

 

[fustercluck]

Yeah another thing i don't like about CS:S is that it's still a B to run. I got a nice system and run the game at low settings, and still get big drops a lot. You really need to have a high-end computer to play Source, like in the top 10% high end.

They have higher quality skins for the Orig CS, but it still doesn't look too good. Still though, the game plays a lot better. Source is clunky and a mess of coding. I might find a high quality skin pack for CS and go back to it. Even though the original skins don't really bother me that much. Kinda surprising to see how many people don't play the original CS just because of the graphics.

Edit: Oh man, Steam is still so crappy. They JUST NOW fixed the friends list after it being broken for at least a year, and Steam still CANNOT remember your favorite servers you've added. Are they even working at all? I could be way more productive than the people who work at steam (assuming there are people who work at steam) by myself. Steam is a joke.

 

[DanTMWTMP]

I find that owning in 1.6 is FAR easier than owning in source.

I'm an mp5whore, and since source's mp5 is less accurate than in 1.6, I hate it. I generally avoid long range confrontations. I try to get close to the enemy as close as possible, then strafe around their low 2sensitivity controls, while my 10.5 sensitivity owns them.

I can't do this as well in CS:S as in CS 1.6.

 

[JDrake]

Originally posted by: DanTMWTMP
I find that owning in 1.6 is FAR easier than owning in source.

I'm an mp5whore, and since source's mp5 is less accurate than in 1.6, I hate it. I generally avoid long range confrontations. I try to get close to the enemy as close as possible, then strafe around their low 2sensitivity controls, while my 10.5 sensitivity owns them.

I can't do this as well in CS:S as in CS 1.6.

Really? I find it's A LOT easier to own in Source, especially with the AWP/m4a1, I dunno about the mp5 I don't like that gun very much
Now that I think about it, though, I think the AK is easier in 1.6, but I hate being a T lol

 

[DanTMWTMP]

Originally posted by: JDrake

Originally posted by: DanTMWTMP
I find that owning in 1.6 is FAR easier than owning in source.

I'm an mp5whore, and since source's mp5 is less accurate than in 1.6, I hate it. I generally avoid long range confrontations. I try to get close to the enemy as close as possible, then strafe around their low 2sensitivity controls, while my 10.5 sensitivity owns them.

I can't do this as well in CS:S as in CS 1.6.

Really? I find it's A LOT easier to own in Source, especially with the AWP/m4a1, I dunno about the mp5 I don't like that gun very much
Now that I think about it, though, I think the AK is easier in 1.6, but I hate being a T lol

heh, I RARELY use rifles. I've been playing UT, UT2k3, UT2k4, quake 123, etc..

I've also played a lot of Rainbow6 (original, which btw, was an AWESOME GAME), but I wasn't that great at it, lol. but I found that, actually, in R6, moving around and pumping bullets then hiding was the best way instead of trying to stay still and pick off people.

That's why I love running around and strafing. That's just my style of play. That's why 1.6 is more to my style of play than Source.

Mp5 is nerfed in source, so that's a dissapointment for me 🙁.

But I still play source more, because, well, it looks prettier, and I'm a sucker for eyecandy 😛. Of course, I suck against people w/ AK's at moderate to long range. Some people who are INSANE w/ the AK can pick me off as if I'm nothing. I just have to be on their screen and I'll die.

However, once I get close (that is, if I manage to get close to an insane AK player), I can manage.


Donno, just never liked the fine movements of using a rifle. I have tendinitis, so I use keyboard movements to aim moreso than the mouse.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: jacktackle
Yeah another thing i don't like about CS:S is that it's still a B to run. I got a nice system and run the game at low settings, and still get big drops a lot. You really need to have a high-end computer to play Source, like in the top 10% high end.

They have higher quality skins for the Orig CS, but it still doesn't look too good. Still though, the game plays a lot better. Source is clunky and a mess of coding. I might find a high quality skin pack for CS and go back to it. Even though the original skins don't really bother me that much. Kinda surprising to see how many people don't play the original CS just because of the graphics.

Edit: Oh man, Steam is still so crappy. They JUST NOW fixed the friends list after it being broken for at least a year, and Steam still CANNOT remember your favorite servers you've added. Are they even working at all? I could be way more productive than the people who work at steam (assuming there are people who work at steam) by myself. Steam is a joke.

you aren't serious right? u got an opteron!
i gues you are runnining at too high a resolution with your monitor for your video card.
i run at 1024x768 so i get away wtih 2.2ghz mobile barton and 6600gt with quite decent framerates at high settings(no hdr). i only had to run low settings with a radeon9000pro. pretty good scaling since it got over 40fps average still.. but looked hideous of course.

 

[rstrohkirch]

Originally posted by: Nextman916

First of all the unit of measure is not the same for both games

Yes, it is.
I said units of measure - I.E. a 8unit thick brush in CS is exactly the same as an 8unit thick brush in CS:S. I'm not sure what you are refering to.

source is much more open and adds new dimensions to old existing ones. Dust2 for instance is much larger in tunnels than in CS.

Thats nice and all but my entire post was how accurate the registration is not whether mappers actually did a better job. You'd be suprised just how similar the ground dimensions are for the stock levels.

I could decompile both versions of the map if you like and post the exact dimensions of each hallway. That way I interject some facts we can look at instead of your opinion.

sv_maxspeed 320 may be the MAX player speed but source uses more potential of that than 1.6.

I guess you'll have to explain what you mean by "potential"
Max movement speed is max movement speed

If you claiming that the player speed is the same for both[q/]

What else would I be claiming? I even said it was the same for both
Confused on that statement

That would just mean that in source you would actually move slower due to the larger enviroments, which we all know CS is much slower paced.

You would not move slower, it would take you longer to get some where
That kind of correlation makes no sense

Also how were you able to load up models in comparison, and actually have access to view the registered hitboxes? I find this impossible to anyone but the developers.

This would have taken you like 5 wholes minutes to research, perhaps you should invest more time in it.

Dont direct your opinions at me

I didn't throw out some contrived CS:S pwns CS blurp, I'm directing my response to you because of a statement you made to me

because most everyone in here is saying that CS is more accurately registered

People say a lot of things, I don't recall that making it fact
You say that CS has better registration so should I take your statement as the truth or should I look up FACTS and decide for myself?

So bottom line CS is for pros CSS is for noobs. And you sir are a noob.

Grow up just a little and come to a slightly more...rounded...conclusion



Lets look at some things logically ---

1.) People seem to say "It's easier for n00bs to get kills in CS:S"

Well, logically that would mean it's easier to hit a player.
The difference between the models is minimal soooo that would mean either the guns are more accurate or bullet registration is....so which is it?

2.) People say "The netcode in CS is better then CS:S"

Well, if it's better then that would imply that it's more accurate between client and server side frames.

There are 2 GIANT problems here - 1.) tickrate of servers varies 2.) actually packet output by the server does not nessaceraly match that of the set tickrate. It's rather easy to keep a consistent packet out from a CS server but it's not nearly as easy with a CS:S. A 66tick server with to many players or a certain map may bring a server down to a "massive" 11-12 out until a certain number of players die and/or the action subsides. This would easily result in much less accurate gameplay then a common CS server

Now if these problems don't occur then CS:S FOR A FACT has better frame registration even at default settings as the server does more calculations per second. A 66 tick server that can keep a steady in/out ~66 should almost no interpolation going on. As long as you have a decent ping, what you see on your client should be should be an extremely close match to what happens on the server.

 

[Chrono]

CS:S on the San Jose Division X server FTW!

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Source requires Steam, so the original gets my vote.

 

[0roo0roo]

Lets look at some things logically ---

1.) People seem to say "It's easier for n00bs to get kills in CS:S"

Well, logically that would mean it's easier to hit a player.
The difference between the models is minimal soooo that would mean either the guns are more accurate or bullet registration is....so which is it?

plus, its not just easier for YOU to hit the other player, it should be easier for all, so that means it evens it out. so it makes no sense that n00bs would get easier kills in css as it would be the same advantage for all. i think some people are just used to the old game and cant handle change. i hit things just fine in source, and i scout pretty well and thats not n00b. i've tried those glass maps in plain cs that show the bullet registration and learned how the guns behave from that. my knowledge of the gun behavior seems to transfer pretty well to source so i don't really see the huge difference. the maps are different in sometimes subtle ways, and thats good and i don't mind.

 

[Nextman916]

Originally posted by: rstrohkirch

Originally posted by: Nextman916

source is much more open and adds new dimensions to old existing ones. Dust2 for instance is much larger in tunnels than in CS.

Thats nice and all but my entire post was how accurate the registration is not whether mappers actually did a better job. You'd be suprised just how similar the ground dimensions are for the stock levels.

Who said anything about mappers doing a better job? What are you talking about?

I could decompile both versions of the map if you like and post the exact dimensions of each hallway. That way I interject some facts we can look at instead of your opinion.

Okay i would like to see this evidence, dont even try to deny me this, for you are the one who offerd these "facts" to me because my opinion wasnt enough for you.

sv_maxspeed 320 may be the MAX player speed but source uses more potential of that than 1.6.

I guess you'll have to explain what you mean by "potential"
Max movement speed is max movement speed

Potential meaning a variety of things, perhaps certain weapons in 1.6 might weigh you down more than in cs, potential that acceleration may be improved when pulling out a knife in source over 1.6, potential that when getting shot your movement that is restricted is less in source. Potential that any factor of the game alters your player speed, im not coming off hard facts here and ill admit, source feels much faster paced to me and im sure many people here would agree.

If you claiming that the player speed is the same for both[Q/]

What else would I be claiming? I even said it was the same for both
Confused on that statement

uhhh did i mention you claimed something else? i just flat out stated what you said but substituted the word "claim" for said is that ok? Can i not quote you on what you said? you must be an idiot to confuse on such a simple concept.

That would just mean that in source you would actually move slower due to the larger enviroments, which we all know CS is much slower paced.

You would not move slower, it would take you longer to get some where
That kind of correlation makes no sense

Was it not you yourself who said that the dimensions in both games were so similiar? So now your admiting that source is larger and takes longer to get somewhere? Tangled in your own web much?

Also how were you able to load up models in comparison, and actually have access to view the registered hitboxes? I find this impossible to anyone but the developers.

This would have taken you like 5 wholes minutes to research, perhaps you should invest more time in it.[/quote]

Again i ask you for this evidence, you seem to claim all these hard facts but havent yet presented any of them. Instead you just keep delaying and putting it off.

because most everyone in here is saying that CS is more accurately registered

People say a lot of things, I don't recall that making it fact
You say that CS has better registration so should I take your statement as the truth or should I look up FACTS and decide for myself?[/quote]

Decide watever you want, stay up all night, have a ball conjuring up facts to prove me wrong. NOBODY is stoping you. But if you want to try to convince me of this, then again my man show me some facts.

So bottom line CS is for pros CSS is for noobs. And you sir are a noob.

Grow up just a little and come to a slightly more...rounded...conclusion[/quote]

Well that is my conclusion based off the whoping NOTHING you provided me. And you want me to give a more rounded conclusion? please, you grow up and provide a more rounded arguement.

Lets look at some things logically ---

1.) People seem to say "It's easier for n00bs to get kills in CS:S"

Well, logically that would mean it's easier to hit a player.
The difference between the models is minimal soooo that would mean either the guns are more accurate or bullet registration is....so which is it?

Wait so now your confused about which it is? I thought you said that neither are true, but now your willing to side with me on account of one? Werent you just arguing previously for both those points, if so, wouldnt you already have answered that question to yourself and said none.

2.) People say "The netcode in CS is better then CS:S"

Well, if it's better then that would imply that it's more accurate between client and server side frames.

There are 2 GIANT problems here - 1.) tickrate of servers varies 2.) actually packet output by the server does not nessaceraly match that of the set tickrate. It's rather easy to keep a consistent packet out from a CS server but it's not nearly as easy with a CS:S. A 66tick server with to many players or a certain map may bring a server down to a "massive" 11-12 out until a certain number of players die and/or the action subsides. This would easily result in much less accurate gameplay then a common CS server

Now if these problems don't occur then CS:S FOR A FACT has better frame registration even at default settings as the server does more calculations per second. A 66 tick server that can keep a steady in/out ~66 should almost no interpolation going on. As long as you have a decent ping, what you see on your client should be should be an extremely close match to what happens on the server.

Cool pointless fact to blurt out there buddy. When did i ever mention the CS netcode is better than CSS? wtf?

 

[rstrohkirch]

I forgot about this and since I'm bored I'll answer some of the questions you brought up in your post.
I'm going to clean this up some so you will may have to look back at your's to clarify something.

Originally posted by: Nextman916

Who said anything about mappers doing a better job? What are you talking about?

More open and new dimensions
That phrase implies that you believe the levels to be better looking and more spacious?
A lot of that has to do with the fact that the original CS maps just weren't done very well

I will flat out say that I could put out far better looking pieces with the gold source engine

Okay i would like to see this evidence, dont even try to deny me this, for you are the one who offerd these "facts" to me because my opinion wasnt enough for you.

No problem
I decompiled both maps for you and took screenshots
You will notice that both dimensions are almost exactly the same

I didn't have a .wad loaded up for the original de_dust2 so it won't have any textures on the brushes in case you were wondering why it looked odd

They were also compressed a lot =]

Original Dust
Source Dust

Potential meaning a variety of things, perhaps certain weapons in 1.6 might weigh you down more than in cs

The coding for this is the same

potential that acceleration may be improved when pulling out a knife in source over 1.6

Can't say I've looked into this actually

Potential that when getting shot your movement that is restricted is less in source. Potential that any factor of the game alters your player speed, im not coming off hard facts here and ill admit, source feels much faster paced to me and im sure many people here would agree.

I'm actually kind of curious about deceleration after a hit, I may have to look into it

uhhh did i mention you claimed something else? i just flat out stated what you said but substituted the word "claim" for said is that ok? Can i not quote you on what you said? you must be an idiot to confuse on such a simple concept.

I was confused by your original sentence of "If you claiming that the player speed is the same for both would just mean that in source you would actually move slower due to the larger enviroments"

I took it to mean "If you're", which I was and it made no sense to me why you added it.

Was it not you yourself who said that the dimensions in both games were so similiar? So now your admiting that source is larger and takes longer to get somewhere? Tangled in your own web much?

I was pointing out the flaw in your original idea, I wasn't even referencing a game - just the concept

Again i ask you for this evidence, you seem to claim all these hard facts but havent yet presented any of them. Instead you just keep delaying and putting it off.

If you want something easy you yourself can do then I would suggest half life model viewer
This will give you a basic overview of the model and you will be able to view hitbox locations through sequences

Decide watever you want, stay up all night, have a ball conjuring up facts to prove me wrong. NOBODY is stoping you. But if you want to try to convince me of this, then again my man show me some facts.

I actually got into why it's more accurate with my examples at the bottom of my original post

Well that is my conclusion based off the whoping NOTHING you provided me. And you want me to give a more rounded conclusion? please, you grow up and provide a more rounded arguement.

Eh, I suppose I went light on the information

But logically, you provided me nothing as well..so should you not call yourself a n00b?

Cool pointless fact to blurt out there buddy. When did i ever mention the CS netcode is better than CSS? wtf?

I thought you cared about frame registration?

Like I mentioned above, you asked me to convince you yet you say what I just posted is worthless even though it is in very regards to what you asked for??

I'm confused



Here's an old(you may have seen it) link with basic information in regards to some of the weapons
http://www.csnation.net/articles.php/article_201/

Obviously, these could have been slightly changed, but I recall no patches that directly list such.

 

[igowerf]

I like CS:S mainly because of the updated engine. The moveable filing cabinets in office really add a new dimension to the gameplay. I hope new maps will take advantage of the physics engine in a bigger way.

 

[rstrohkirch]

Originally posted by: igowerf
I like CS:S mainly because of the updated engine. The moveable filing cabinets in office really add a new dimension to the gameplay. I hope new maps will take advantage of the physics engine in a bigger way.

Biggest problem is the model collision in net games is quite a bit more flaky then in single player. People HATE getting stuck on stuff and as a mapper you really need to carter towards making people happy. =]

It is nice to see someone use the enviroment to effect gameplay, I perfer it in a larger scale such as a wall or structure more then say a filing cabinet

 

[igowerf]

Originally posted by: rstrohkirch

Originally posted by: igowerf
I like CS:S mainly because of the updated engine. The moveable filing cabinets in office really add a new dimension to the gameplay. I hope new maps will take advantage of the physics engine in a bigger way.

Biggest problem is the model collision in net games is quite a bit more flaky then in single player. People HATE getting stuck on stuff and as a mapper you really need to carter towards making people happy. =]

It is nice to see someone use the enviroment to effect gameplay, I perfer it in a larger scale such as a wall or structure more then say a filing cabinet

That's why I said that I'm hoping that newer maps will use the physics engine in a bigger way. The moving filing cabinets were a nice touch over the original Office, but there's a lot of potential here. My friend made a giant obstacle course map that involved exploding barrels and walls tumbling in a domino effect.