{Return to the Xfire Debate Club Main Page}

Xfire Debate Club 2nd Meeting: The Future of Counter-Strike
February 28th, 2007 (Open Debate Transcript)

[Xfire] SDaria:

******** FIRST QUESTION ********

First off, so we all know where you guys stand. If you could only bring one steam game with you on a desert island, would it be source or 1.6

Operator_Shadow: Source

Dorni - Now with Vista!: I would bring Source.

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: source

i√ | ÐarkFury: source ftw!

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: Source

Dendei: Source

Silent.Killer: Source has bots

z450: CSS BABY

≤àR/eR≥ Rich: Source, tho it all stands on what type of computer you have with you

Dorni - Now with Vista!: It's 1.6's successor!

nexuscrysix: Source, I enjoy the graphical upgrade. And both games share the easy to learn but hard to master simplicity of the game

gP#sNk.: 1.6

B00^gerber: I'd take 1.6. I'd explain why, but I'm afraid my response will get lost in the flood.

Silent.Killer: So I can play with myself

AIR_CAV: I would have to pick source simply because the bots, I don’t you can get wifi on a desert island :P

Ruthless Gravity: source and a box of chocolates

DarkVulture: omg i spelled source wrong

|CSC|KoreansRock1: source, but i've never played 1.6

schkottie: On the standars odf 1.6 I would have to say source

duffman0: SOURSE

1.6 isnt any better then source

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: Source, for the simple reason that Source has more things to deal with... starting with better graphics, smoother gameplay... Ragdoll possibilities... more features as of the interactive environment

.♥ wMute ♥: Source, compared to CS 1.6 right now, is my preference because of two major mods: Zombie Mod (better than the zombie mods on CS1.6) and Gun Game.

SM DjDTM: yea pesticide,

|CSC|KoreansRock1: definitely, gg and zombs are great

Ruthless Gravity: 1.6 gives me cancer sadly

wS|Melissa: Source is just more of a challenge, not a hand-over. Plus it has more of the more realistic advantages and features

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: I prefer CS 1.6

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Plus Source is a lot more played than 1.6

SM DjDTM: Yea SHaun!!

Eternal.Memory-: 1.6

Zigman: this is not zombie mod this is counter strike now no server side mods

[Xfire]TwiceUzi: I like the point about the superior bots in CSS, let's assume that you also have an internet connection :)

Freyar: Although I am a huge fan of both of them, I would have to say CounterStrike source would get my vote. Because CS:S has a good deal of the source engine, I could even managed to make my own derivitive works for it. At the same time, I would have to say that Source also seems more secure, as I see about 1/5th of the amount of hacking that I did in 1.6.

DarkVulture: people leaving after that question

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Also Source is alot graphically easier on the eyes.

Mike Fitz: 1.6 Is like David and Source is the Goliath

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: Source for the bots.

Eternal.Memory-: 1.6's gameplay i find better than css

=|SG|= BloodyDragon: I'd say 1.6 is the beginning and the original, so gotta go with the classics.

Mike Fitz: But in my case the Goliath wins

«oGє» В!ѕнор: it has to be source! the dynamic lighting could replace any campfire whilst stranded on a desert island!

GoldenEye`: Source is for the new age kids i say 1.6 because 1.6 is for the older generation that have been playing FPS for a long time and just playing cs 1.6 tournaments for fun and honor is so fun just like source but in the end classic games are always better then new develpoed one :)

Zigman: man source is underrated here

|CSC|KoreansRock1: not always

luclicane: lol

duffman0: WHY do u important ppl like 1.6 (Please give reasons

i√ | ÐarkFury: bah all the old guys have to many memories on 1.6 to say source :D

[Xfire] MasterRen: CS:S is not played a lot more than 1.6. See the steam stats.

schkottie: It's weird because most people in here are saying Source but the experts are saying 1.6

-Ðragon: I would like to say 1.6 as i dislike source. But someone it seems that source would be more moddable and might evolve in teh future

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: yeah...but a long games nowadays are becoming very popular for not using bots

Zombie Queen: Source better graphics more realistic F the mods think of the game

|CSC|KoreansRock1: yeah

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: BF2142 anyone?

[Xfire] Supercop007: I vote for CS beta 5.2 :)

z450: CSS YEA

-»нн«-sїмрŁє: no

Zigman: they must hate CSS

Team.god †Silent Predator: 1.6 beyond the hacking :/ is by far a better choice, classic game play, intense gaming, who needs added visuals as in css

luclicane: i would need some pro bots

nax: **MELISSA** - css isnt cs2, its just a port over to the hl2 engine to see what it would be like, gabe newell said that himself at E3

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: CS 1.5

wS|Melissa: 1.6 is just a prelude to Source, and 1.6 is only enjoyable for goofing around and not wanting that realistic effect

Freyar: @GoldenEye Why is is Source limited to "Newer Generations" GoldenEye?

GorG: Source, Bots

DarkVulture: source is so much better for the graphix upgrade but for game play cs 1.6 totaly wins

Silent.Killer: I'd still say Source due to the newer tech

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: but CS 1.6 just doesn't give you that rewarding feeling from fragging and getting beautifully rendered graphic terrorist blood everywhere

Spencer: I choose Source because I enjoy the hitboxes more and it's more updated and possible to be modded via Source engine. (zombies a perfect example)

Eternal.Memory-: graphix is nothing, when gameplay pwnz

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Plus, the mods for CSS are limitless! 1.6 has mods as well, but they can't really compare.....

Zigman: 3d dosnt play 1.6?

nax: **MELLISA** ----- cs was made to be an ARCADE type shooter, not realism, if you want realism, go play BF2

≤àR/eR≥ Rich: Ok i'd have to say Source, because the ak47 is soo good I could kill the bots for meat :P at long range :P

|CSC|KoreansRock1: i wish i had played 1.6

rime: I vote 1.6

-Ðragon: The hitboxes are not as good as 1.6

|CSC|KoreansRock1: but i was too young then

z450: none

|CSC|KoreansRock1: lol

Ruthless Gravity: only thing lost from 1.6 to CSS is hitboxes

Ryan: I believe that the gameplay and advancements in technology have been major differences in the 2 games.

chidoriglance: I have never played 1.6

Dorni - Now with Vista!: The "classicness" of 1.6 was lost.

|CSC|KoreansRock1: brb

chidoriglance: so I prefer source

Eternal.Memory-: source is spray and pray

▒▓█ [WF] Petom9█▓▒: quick silentcer change and gameplay

luclicane: source seems to be less realisitc on the terms of recoil but i like the fact you cant glitch reload and such as easily

nexuscrysix: Maybe the gameplay, but that was improved by the graphical upgarde from the source engine

[ЋĿД] Mouzer: yeah rly bf is realistic

.♥ wMute ♥: The popular response to what was lost in the transition from 1.6 to CSS are the hitboxes

[Xfire] Supercop007: The best element lost between the two versions is damage of grenades going through walls and doors

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: Should bots continue to remain in the CS series?

AIR_CAV: I would say hitboxes and the inability to see your spray.

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: Also the ability to shoot through pretty much all walls.

=|SG|= BloodyDragon: I'd say the fast-paced action was a bit slowed down in Source.

Silent.Killer: The main elements I find that were lost is in CSS alot of the viewing angles around the maps changed, and you can be seen by people when you cant see them at all

3[x] Davgunit: gameplay hands down the feel from 1.6 and source are too different 1.5 imo is supioer

≤àR/eR≥ Rich: I'd have to say... the sheild

GorG: Ah, the quick silencer definately sounds like something I miss

-Ðragon: I like walling though. I understand that hacking is a problem but it adds a new dimension to gameplay

i√ | ÐarkFury: I would say a lot of gameplay because 1.6 gave that realism that everyone loved, the shooting through walls and better hitboxes. Source just improved graphics and some coding..

Zigman: hax r better managed on css

-»нн«-sїмрŁє: sprays = ruin realism?

3[x] Davgunit: 1.6*

Zombie Queen: The but menu

wS|Melissa: I found the classicness to it lost when all the aimbot hacks and whatnot started to flood into the servers

Mike Fitz: None, Source just blows 1.6 out of the water, It has better graphics which are spectacular, and gameplay which is so much easier and better with the better graphics

rime: Hitboxes.. and the noobie ness of the game in general.

Jgallstar1: I'm completly going to side with source, but I loved the one map, funallin1 in 1.6. That brings good memories about my old clan.

Kenshin: Well in css 1.6 you can shoot through anything so the physics in the game are wack...

GorG: i've never used HLTV :(

Zombie Queen: buy*

[Xfire] Artaxs: Being able to shoot through concrete ruins 1.6 for me.

vidal: The primary element lost from 1.6 to Source has to be the general feel for the game, most veterans of both games should agree that the general handling of the weapons have changed.

-FA-3DCore: Hi All

≤àR/eR≥ Rich: It was good and i dont know why valve took it out

gP#sNk.: maps came to crouded with all kinds of barrels...

Ryan: The gameplay was changes quite a bit, and the enhancement in grafics have also comtributed

GoldenEye`: In cs 1.6 you can wall through walls but not in source which stops the amount of hackers

z450: can i get free Tshirt

Dorni - Now with Vista!: CSS is a gerat game, but it's not the game that open so many doors. You can't really replicate it, but it doesn't have that "feel".

Team.god †Silent Predator: in 1.6 games ie dod, cs, etc, the cone of fire is everything, it gives you a hit box, that was removed in the source versions to gfive the nubs a chance at kills

chidoriglance: Maybe if CS updated

SM DjDTM: the codec voice_speex

luclicane: yea i disliked hitboxes very much

Spencer: I believe that the elements "lost" seem to be the headshot hitboxes. In CS 1.6, they were a tad smaller. However in 1.6, one could shoot through steel if they had the right gun, and I prefer "real life" physics that CS:S offers.

Freyar: @GoldenEye; While that may be true that it is more visually appealing, isn't the inclusion of better physics, server-side mods, and all of the functionality in Source still good enough to list as one that should and is played by any generation?

rime: and you cant really wall in source

Team.god †Silent Predator: hit boxes off, there is NOI hit box in source games, its a random cof

vidal: Ah yes, Shaun touched upon it, the hitboxes were definitely frustrating to deal with especially when Source was first used in CAL.

wS|Melissa: Depends on the server and the location for registration though

Dorni - Now with Vista!: I agree that the guns aren't realistic...

-FA-3DCore: and the awp is too powerful

«oGє» В!ѕнор: Do any of you think valve should develop a new source? In doing so bring back what many loved about 1.6 that they lost in source?

Eternal.Memory-: thats why registery in source afftects gameplay compared to 1.6

Silent.Killer: Also yeah the hitboxes in Source are wack most of the time

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: My Source Registers fine, but i only play 100tic server

Mike Fitz: Agreed source is horrible in the hitbox porportion

Dorni - Now with Vista!: but it's not exactly meant to be.

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: you can kill with a just a few accurate glock shots actually

chidoriglance: yes.... even though I have never had 1.6 shooting walls sounds satisfying

Zigman: 1.6 players cant relate to source because the gameplay is altered so much

≤àR/eR≥ Rich: off

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: i'm not a hardcore CS player but i've played with my friends and i have to say source is quite challenging

ScreWe: The one thing i have to say that makes CS 1.6 better is the easier login system... it authorizes you into the game faster and downloads files faster

GoldenEye`: @Freyaer YES i agree with you i do play source my self i enjoy the main graphics but im a old guy and prefer Games that ive had expience for MANY years like 1.6 and it just how newer genreations evolve like new computer technology which makes everybody want to play "better looking games"

wS|Melissa: Yeahh but think of all that Steam has to build on though! CS:S is going to last for quite a long time

Eternal.Memory-: but its spray and pray

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: 1.6 also runs on lower end machines

Ruthless Gravity: only thing CSS takes is alot of luck and some skill

[Xfire] MasterRen: Source doesn't feel as precise for some reason.

-Ðragon: Source seems a little more fastpaced since its easier to kill

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: The hitboxes are not off. They are simply more realistic. Did people whine about hitboxes in Half Life 2?

GorG: I've always felt the opposite of what most people say

DarkVulture: 1.6 is better because u need more skill!!

z450: can i get free Tshirt

-FA-3DCore: well if any1 has a wallhack they will kill everybody when they shoot through walls and the protection isnt the best

AIR_CAV: When you shoot in 1.6 you can see where the bullets hits in source you have cant really see and this throw off a lot of the experienced players.

nexuscrysix: Both CSS and 1.6 are challenging to new players

GorG: hitboxes are way way easier in 1.6.

≤àR/eR≥ Rich: @Torbull, Yes the hitboxes are annoying sometimes

[Xfire] Supercop007: I think Source just lacks the precision that 1.6 has.

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: i know this is kind of anti-realistic but i lke bullets that i see when i shoot lol

duffman0: CSS does not take luck

Eternal.Memory-: lol

.♥ wMute ♥: one issue that CSS didn't expand on over 1.6 is the intreraction of the player and sound effects. For example, Rainbow Six 3: Ravenshield made excellent use of Sound effects in terms of how you used it to determine where enemies are, and for creating a lovely audio experience. CSS doesnt seem to use the potential of sound effects or audio hardware like the Audigy's EAX drivers

Zigman: no u need more skill in source because the aim is off so much

i√ | ÐarkFury: Here's a real debatable question, "Why did Valve ever even try with the Dynamic Weapon Pricing???" Biggest FLOP in Source!!

Dorni - Now with Vista!: I disagree, Source seems exact. Maybe it's the attractiveness of the graphics but I think they hit the nail on the head.

Ruthless Gravity: wuba tee eff, where did Rainbow Six fits into all of this?

Spencer: You shouldn't have to worry about hacks when considering games... it should also be said tht there exists more hacks for 1.6 than CS:S.

nax: UHHHHH - there are no hitboxs to worry about in hl2 because theres 0 lag.... its not online...

SM DjDTM: Its cause theres a big problem with the hitboxes not syncing with the model that you see, so when you shoot at what you see, you're not causing damage.

-Ðragon: There is evidence that hitboxes are off

Eternal.Memory-: yes i agree

i√ | ÐarkFury: @@DEBATE QUESTION

Zigman: and HACKERS are more prelevent to 1.6 then source

ScreWe: another bad thing about source.. sprays are harder to use and make.. they have a large chance they may not even work on walls

Jgallstar1: You have a much much more better chance of someone hitting you in Source, but they have that much of a chance of hitting you back as well. It really just comes down to the reaction time of the people who are gonna be shooting. Although I will say a kill in 1.6 is more rewarding.

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Oh yes, the ahcks are annoying...

GoldenEye`: One Thing about source is that Killing people is WAY TOO EASY many people can jsut spray and bam easy headshots here and there but not in 1.6 which requires "skill of the mouse" to kill your opponent

luclicane: spraying and praying is a LOT easier in source than other CS's which kind of blows when you get headshotted from 150 ft away by someone spraying

-Ðragon: And you need to realize tat there are hacks in every single game

|CSC|KoreansRock1: what exactly are hitboxes?

-FA-3DCore: we need more realism like scope movement, breathing, etc

Spencer: Have you opened up the SDK editor, Dragon?

DarkVulture: there are some many hacks for both and it ruins it for evryone

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: Klaak, see... most people think that Source is not challenging for the simple fact that the game feels smoother when shooting... so it's easier to pull out the big shots... but yet YES, it is a challenging game since there are a lot of people and a lot of people means a lot of good & average people

nexuscrysix: Though this does bring up something, would you trade the gameplay you loved for newer graphics?

chidoriglance: I believe source is a solid game.... but definatly needs a tune up

vidal: That's another element that was a concern to me when playing Source, the need for better servers. Everyone always says that 100 tic servers are the best and that when you're playing a match you NEED a 100 tic server. This was never an issue for me in 1.6.

H@X-Trupa / 145^Trupa: but CSS isnt about realism

-Ðragon: you can invent new hack detections and guards and what not but there will always be peopel taht work around that

|CSC|KoreansRock1: scope movement would definitely be a great addition

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: where your bullets will hit = hitboxes

-FA-3DCore: well we need more

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: a lot of maps, servers and style of plays to choose from

-»нн«-sїмрŁє: hitboxes are the area around the body where bullets hit

Eternal.Memory-: that you can say, upgrades are needed for css

|CSC|KoreansRock1: and ironsights i think would add more immersion

duffman0: If everyones skills increased then its still a level playing field

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Soucre is also MUCH easier to get sued to than 1.6.

Dorni - Now with Vista!: used*

«oGє» В!ѕнор: Anyone else think that people just need more time to transfer from 1.6 to source?

Eternal.Memory-: spray and pray, thats why

Team.god †Silent Predator: he used the correct word, off, there is no cof in source , its random spray yet ur xhair is aimed, it can be frustrating

wS|Melissa: I totally agree, when Valve fixes all glitches then it's going to be an amazing and even more fun game

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: some argue source simply because its newer, better graphics, and the source engine

Kenshin: I'd really llike to see where they put the gameplay of 1.6 and add the new graphics and sounds so it will be the ultimate 'Counter Strike'

DarkVulture: moveable objects!!

duffman0: SPRAYS AND RAGDOLL

-FA-3DCore: any1 know when a new CS is coming out

rime: Thats cus 1.6 ACTUALLY TAKES SKILL DORNI

[Xfire] SDaria:

******** NEXT QUESTION ********

[3D]Torbull: So while there are notable differences and changes (for better or worse) to 1.6 and source, they also added some new things. What do you guys think ar the best NEW things ADDED to source?

chidoriglance: not all the glitches

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: CS:S for me right now is perfect. Zombie Mod and Surf are the most awesome things ever invented for CS:S.

Freyar: I do have to say that the weaponry has been vastly "improved" in terms of accuracy. This does detract fromg ameplay, but something that doesn't worry me too much is that BOTH sides actually have to deal with the accuracy.

i√ | ÐarkFury: yeah, i still talk to people that have not built a better pc for source

Zigman: what new things wwere in source besdes graphics?

H@X-Trupa / 145^Trupa: the aztec map is a prime example of hitbox errors

яєѕιѕтαη¢є:.Opieo™: Since when can u pull teh pin from a nade then it magically appears again when u switch weapons..........

-Ðragon: Source is easier to handle as there are a lot of new players. 1.6 has less new players

Silent.Killer: The ragdoll is great

eternalwyrm: I like the graphics and physics

SM DjDTM: Notable differences would be map object placement.

Ruthless Gravity: pyshics ftw

chidoriglance: what about those non responding moments?

SM DjDTM: Barrels and such.

Eternal.Memory-: graphix was defintely a new thing

GoldenEye`: The best new things added to source which i like is people cant "wall through WALLS" but through boxes which really tunes down the amount of hackers; in 1.6 alot of hackers which really gets me mad

-FA-3DCore: ...

DarkVulture: moveable objects and graphix

GorG: graphics

nexuscrysix: Obviously the graphical upgrade, however the bad hitboxes can annoy some people

-»[€€]«-Twister60: slow it down ppl

hydrokd: 1.6 is all LUCK shot threw walls WTF source much better

-Ðragon: The graphics and physics imo is distracting

Silent.Killer: Also the new CZ positioning when people radio so you get more of an idea where your team is

Mike Fitz: The graphics would be the best improvement from 1.6

«oGє» В!ѕнор: Graphics/Source Engine FTW!!

-FA-3DCore: nobbish awps need surpression

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: Ragdoll System and Interactivity with the environments are the new things i mostly like with CS:Source... you have more possibilities and the game seems to be endless with possibilities

Ruthless Gravity: source aint dramatic

H@X-Trupa / 145^Trupa: on that server a deagle can literally kill anyone in 1 shot

B00^gerber: the Physics engine.

▒▓█ [WF] Petom9█▓▒: i prefer smaller hitboxes, easier not to get hit

duffman0: also nades are horrible in cs

[Xfire] Supercop007: I really like the flashbang effect upgrade.

Zigman: ragdoll cant affect gameplay, can it?

rime: spamming takes skill Hydrokd

GorG: god I hate dynamic pricing.

Dendei: I think what always stood out for me from the beginning was the graphics. During that E3 teaser, i couldnt help but get excited at how great it looked. Thats something that still sticks with me, as the aging platform of the previous game had been a growing issue for me.

GoldenEye`: CSS prices change so much which really gets me mad

-FA-3DCore: oh

chidoriglance: I disagree koreans,

hydrokd: there is so much MORE to do with source than 1.6, more starts with source its better for competion

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Shaun you can change the pricing when you start a server.

wS|Melissa: Haa yeahh well I agree, the way the bodies work and everything is tons of fun in Source rather than 1.6

chidoriglance: it is realistic

SM DjDTM: Shaun, your right. When the prices keep changing so must your strats.

chidoriglance: to a point

.♥ wMute ♥: The best new elements in CSS are the physics engine, which adds plenty to the atmosphere. Going back to the Zombie Mod for CSS, this game shows a perfect example of how fun physics can change the game. It would be nice if there were better uses for objects in CSS, like building barricades out of sofas that weren't so easily breakable to further simulate the cinematic gun fight experience, but oh well

Spencer: It's of course the graphic update, and physics. Graphics are important because they put you IN the game, you see see dirt on scopes, you hear the footsteps, it can really make it a very realistic experience.

chidoriglance: you have to remember it's just a game

nax: @ MELLISA ---- the game wasnt made to be realistic.... which means they screwd it over by making it realistic...

-FA-3DCore: and when u have the guy set to right handed, the shell ejection needs to be on the RIGHT side of the gun (dur)

Team.god †Silent Predator: I agree with Midway on that -- STEAM_0:0:11444167

=|SG|= BloodyDragon: Well of course, it was awesome physics, of course you're going to experiment.

«oGє» В!ѕнор: If anyone checks out my xfire ss's. I have a pic of a guy who died on a surf map with his legs strattling the ramp! How cabn you beat those physics?!

wS|Melissa: Nax: I'm getting at the point that it's MORE realistic than 1.6

-Ðragon: Realism isnt a goal in CS..

i√ | ÐarkFury: I remember when I first came to source, I think I stood in de_dust and de_dust2 for about 5 minutes looking at the lighting effects and I was just amazed. This took a lot of people from 1.6

Freyar: The benifit of Source would have to be the updated video capabilities as well as the Source Engine's physics. It wowed people in Half-Life 2, and strangely enough it is definately wowing people with Source. Although the game is slightly old now, the actual freedome you have to interact with your environment and the objects in that environment is top notch. Not only that, but the way the source engine works with physical objects and prevents too much latency issues with the program.

-Ðragon: Its nice but not a major part of it

-FA-3DCore: realism should be

|CSC|KoreansRock1: to a point, yes, and of course i'm not saying that realism makes a good game, but i'm just saying that realism does add a certain sense of immersion and intensity

Ryan: Myabe also allow more bullets to go through walls because things like plastic and glass allow ffor a bullet to go in.

|CSC|KoreansRock1: take red orchestra for example

Kenshin: Yeah the HLTV is a nice add on to the game

-FA-3DCore: compare it with AA

GoldenEye`: It shows many people play source today than 1.6 But 1.6 i think has a higher popularity when it comes to tournaments and BIG teams and league teams

wS|Melissa: I actually think it does KoransRock1

nax: it isnt SUPPOSE to be more realistic , the game was made to be an ARCADE SHOOTER.... NOT A SIMULATION SHOOTER

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: ok...so team play and pro play are all cool...but about ppl that play just for fun?

chidoriglance: I wish CSS had a peer around the coner button

Freyar: Nax, no need to shout.

gP#sNk.: i really think the hitboxes are the biggest difference gamers feel between cs and css;. allso it went from a simple gameplay to a bit more complex and the simple gameplay i think is just what made counterstrike so popular

[Xfire] Supercop007: Let's just say CS:S is "realistic arcade"

hydrokd: HLTV SUCKS

-FA-3DCore: ??

vidal: I'd disagree that the graphics are thebest thing for Source, though the radoll effects are appealing for a couple of days, it doesn't necessarily make the game realistic at all.

-FA-3DCore: HLTV?

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: So we are saying that the future of CS lies in an defense contract to train soldiers?

Spencer: Agreed with Supercop.

|CSC|KoreansRock1: or just simply arcade

chidoriglance: stick to the subject

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: HLTV is in Source. Its called SOURCE TV

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: or is it a game

.♥ wMute ♥: The best elements of CSS that the developpers looked at was adding to the simple experience of CS 1.6 without drastically changing the core gameplay, with the exception of hit boxes of course. Easing the addition of simple mods like the WC3 mod, or stat-tracking rankings, music at the end of rounds, etc.

-FA-3DCore: whats hltv

wait! Tropicalpyro: A large majority of my friends play soly for fun. I think it's good to have a good variety of players playing the game, but it is also necessary to make sure the game is appealing to them as well.

hydrokd: yea much better source tv

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: You can't get TOO realistic

-Ðragon: There is no great HLTV type thing for source. Source TV is pretty bad

-FA-3DCore: ^

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: sort of like BF2142...much of that game was conditioned more for a streamline market than Battlefield 2

chidoriglance: I wish CSS is more of a pick up and play type thing

luclicane: no cause in my opinion AA sucked i shot someone in the head like 10 times with a sniper before he died

i√ | ÐarkFury: look in Main Floor for what HLTV is

chidoriglance: but you have to have a commitment

|CSC|KoreansRock1: yeah, css has such a low learning curve

«oGє» В!ѕнор: Starcraft is the biggest game at local lans!

SM DjDTM: If a games fun, then its fun. Graphics are just the bells and whistles of a video game.

Mike Fitz: Source TV was awesome to get to see some of the awesome players in CAI and learn from them and get experience from them

[Xfire] SDaria:

******** NEXT QUESTION ********

[3D]Torbull: That brings up an interesting point about the graphics. Can 1.6 or an old game bring CS / E-sports to the masses? Could an old game work here in the US like Starcraft owrked in korea or do we need the brightest, most spectacular graphics?

duffman0: Game play is over graphic but graphics improve gameplay

chidoriglance: no less than an hour tor eally get in the game

SM DjDTM: I remember when text based rpgs were the shit.

-FA-3DCore: I think we ned to at LEAST be able to use our iron sights in the game

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: The graphics are what matter to most people. Look at Gears of War it wouldn't have done nearly as well as it has if it looked like CS 1.6.

GorG: no

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: yes counterstrike source is just too hard for the beginning gamer imo

Spencer: Too realistic brings into play things that games shouldn't tread into, like breathing control, because it is not fun.

GorG: general public is too obsessed

chidoriglance: yes

-FA-3DCore: well

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: Well frederic... i actually think CS:S is one of the games that even the non-gaming audience can enjoy watching... because the graphics are quite impressive still now in 2007... it's not Unreal Engine 3 for sure... but it's still really nice, the ragdoll system makes it REALER then most games out there... the tactics, the real guns, the "real" environments...

chidoriglance: I agree klaak

-FA-3DCore: sights r good

-Ðragon: Graphics are surely nice. But to most extent arnet tournements about skill not who has the prettiest game?

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Klaak CS:S got me into FPSes.

GorG: graphics are very important for making things mainstream.

|CSC|KoreansRock1: it seems our whole society is based on how good something looks

B00^gerber: As UNIMPORTANT as graphics are, there are always people out there that think graphics eman everything. Just ask any Die Hard PS3 fanboy.

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: We would need the more spectacular graphics. People want the most realistic looking and silkiest images possible. If they see a crude looking game graphic they would be turned off thinking it is old/obsolete due to the market portraying the image of almost realistic graphics today.

i√ | ÐarkFury: I think most people are to worried about graphics then gameplay.

chidoriglance: What about the camera option

|CSC|KoreansRock1: from shoes to games

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: Frederic, people could probably even look at CS:S as a movie

-FA-3DCore: >

|CSC|KoreansRock1: i think shooters need to have fairly decent graphics in order to survive while strategy games or arcade games can do very well without shiny glass and hdr lighting

AIR_CAV: An old game could work in the US simply because it is, just look at the player stats with all the new MP games that have come out since the beta release of CS and its still the number 1 game player speaks for its self. It all about how the game is played and presented to the audience, no one complains that the cards in the WPT look old.

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Come on, everybody knows they would love great graphics... I think a combination of both is what I want.

GoldenEye`: @FREAYER dont you believe that many people just not look at the amazing graphics but just how the game is entirely?

-Ðragon: The graphics in source are indeed very nice. But a lot of things can be distracting.. or realistic depending on how you look at it

eternalwyrm: Graphics are very imporatn in bringing in new players. If people shell out money for a game, they want something that's pretty

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: [3D]Torbull ... i think Old games can still make their way to immortality (that's how i name a game after 6 years of life) ... just see Unreal Tournament 1999 and Unreal Tournament 2004 for exemple... UT2004 instagib community in America is basicly dead... as UT99 instagib community are still playing pugs and matches on ladders... so i believe most classic FPS games will go Gameplay over Graphics

Team.god †Silent Predator: game play or graphics, Im for game play myself, graphics are great on single player games such as COD or BIA and such, but for all out warfare, Im for the game play

luclicane: if a game is realistic then you get those people that will think its their life and not leave their rooms for days and end up becoming psychos

[Xfire] Supercop007: There is the problem of quality vs. performance, unfortunately, because not everyone has the best computer. You really need to have a scalable engine that lower end computers can play, but looks good enough not to be ugly.

chidoriglance: I think first person shooters should have more than resonable graphics

|CSC|KoreansRock1: yes

chidoriglance: ify ou can see an outline of a character

|CSC|KoreansRock1: definitely

SM DjDTM: Shaun is right, the gaming industry is targetting the rich people.

B00^gerber: A better classic game reference would be SUper Mario Bros. 3. Still one of the highest Grocing games of all time.

Mike Fitz: Graphics is one of the key elements of the game, without graphics things wouldnt be as dramatic or suspensful.

Spencer: Screw, that was a different era. You had no expectations back then. Well you did, but nowadays ragdoll physics is almost needed in some games to be even considered a mainstream game.

wS|Melissa: Reasonable graphics meaning what? What features would you want to see?

Freyar: @SuperCop I find the Source engine decent on scaling.

.♥ wMute ♥: Not to mention the fact that Professional Sports in Korea are somewhat lacking. The main reason CS would fail on television in America is that it simply cannot compete with a Football, Basketball, Baseball, Nascar audience

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: My computer cost 500$ and can run Source fine.

chidoriglance: that's true to a point mike

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: I just want great gameplay, and at least half-decent graphics

|CSC|KoreansRock1: the game industry targets the masses

eternalwyrm: @Shaun, prices have dropped, 3k is no longer reequired for Source

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: When it comes to popularity among common gamer culture, WoW > CS

|CSC|KoreansRock1: true

SM DjDTM: Alot of the gaming indusrty is completely forgetting about the budget gamers that play games for fun, and not for eye candy.

nexuscrysix: Alrthough, some old games like Warcraft 3 have still become popular to the masses

|CSC|KoreansRock1: unfortunately

«oGє» В!ѕнор: The gaming industry has to be revolutionized with new gameplay in order to make it a good spectator sport. People cant watch a bunch of people playing for longer than 15 minutes with out getting bored.

-Ðragon: I would prefer gameplay over graphics. I own CSS and CS 1.6 and i hardly ever use CSS

NRG †: Graphics are important nowadays, Ok Gameplay has become great, but with all these new Graphics Engines and such, its hard to go back to CS after playing GoW and such. Graphics matter a lot but they arent't the most important

-FA-3DCore: WoW is horrendous

[Xfire] SDaria:

******** NEXT QUESTION ********

[3D]Torbull: what void does that next step need to fill (dont need to say how to do it)

eternalwyrm: Systems from 500-1000 can easily run Source these days

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: well...I've run 1.6 on an 8 year old Dell

-FA-3DCore: dont compare CSS to WoW

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: WoW is in a catagory of its own. You could do a business class on it.

[Xfire] Supercop007: I think the source engine has hit the right spot where even computers from 3-4 years ago still play it very well, but as we progress into dual-core and quad-core processors, it looks even better.

duffman0: When grphx become too real the comunity thinks its too violent which is unfair

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: Klaak, Yes, but it depends on what you like... RPG or FPS

GorG: more guns

GoldenEye`: Look at STARCRAFT it doesnt have GREAT amazing graphics like Source W0w or anything but people still play it because its FUN!

GorG: we need more gun

GorG: s

chidoriglance: ture

chidoriglance: true*

GorG: the same guns over and over and over, doesn't work.

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: More GUNS!!

-FA-3DCore: not really...

AIR_CAV: It could be possible to make a client side version of CS just for HLTV with better graphics and sounds, because when any pro teams does play they turn down all the settings anyways.

Team.god †Silent Predator: indeed NRG, graphics are great but the game play is why we are here

Mike Fitz: Like in condemened for the Xbox360 is very suspensful and a great game, but if you compare it to resident evil for the playstation(the first one) it is nothing.

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Newer, more advanced guns.

wS|Melissa: The void would definitly have to be maps, we need more

chidoriglance: ratchet and clank

B00^gerber: WoW has FAR from Amazing Graphics

chidoriglance: they should base it off that

chidoriglance: for the next CS

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: new gametypes

-FA-3DCore: base the game off of AA

Operator_Shadow: More weapons and options for adding to them

Silent.Killer: I dont think I'd ever really want to just watch people playing games

|CSC|KoreansRock1: more mission modes

luclicane: True more guns would be nice with all the new real life technological advances

Spencer: If they fixed the hitboxes in CS:S, I'd give 1.6 3 months to live before CS:S was then at the top.

«oGє» В!ѕнор: i agree more guns would definately bring more strategy to the game

eternalwyrm: @Goldeneye, this is true, but a large number are switchying over to WC3 and the new C&C games, with better graphics

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: yeah...exaclty Korean

.♥ wMute ♥: If CS can somehow integrate the weapon mods which Rainbow Six 3: Ravenshield posessed, then I believe that would help expand the gaming experience without drastically changing the gameplay, overall

B00^gerber: The obvious next step is a future oriented CS, obviously.

chidoriglance: I think they need vehicles

|CSC|KoreansRock1: instead of the generic ctf stuff, we should have more team oriented missions

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: More guns would be pretty cool to have in CSS.

|CSC|KoreansRock1: or dm stuff

GorG: the ability to upload your custom weapon models when someone joins the game like you do with sprays

B00^gerber: Basically, CS: UnReal Tournament.

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Vehicles would break Source

|CSC|KoreansRock1: or whatever

Freyar: @GoldenEye; Yes, but Starcraft also does not have a SEQUEL to actually have to fight against. If a specific version of a series of games is to become used for mainstream e-sports, there can't be anything "Better" than what is available.

vidal: Plenty of people can run Source just fine, but can they run to it's full extent? Can you have HDR while obtaining FPS over 90? It targets the masses who (and please don't take offense to this) are too gullible to figure out that though they can run Source decently, they would've been better off with 1.6 both in gameplay and financially.

chidoriglance: yeah dm sounds fun

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: well

chidoriglance: but crazy

B00^gerber: or some such cheap knock off

Ryan: Possibly more guns and some more individual modes such as playing against better bots and be able to get better both offline and online.

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: But the problem with people not wanting to/able to watch an e-sport event is because everyone has the preconception that you need an amazing computer(2.5k-3k range) in order to play the game. And everyone thinks that they have to have the best of everything to play.

duffman0: It needs thermo goggles and more realism

i√ | ÐarkFury: I think the Game Industry is focusing on making higher resolutions and more pixels par say then trying to work out the bugs! The better gameplay is what all the gamers I ever hear say they want, there just helping out companies like Intel//NVIDIA//ATI//and other big pc gaming companies that people have to keep buying their products to do their hobby that they love, GAMING!

Mike Fitz: I beleive addons, or upgrades to the guns wouild be nice

wait! Tropicalpyro: I think there are a few things that need to be filled. New (so to speak) real maps need to need to be added in for scrims and CAL and such but new guns would be a definate thing players would like, without removing the current stuff ofcourse.

-FA-3DCore: \\\\what time is this over at

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: DM is already available.

«oGє» В!ѕнор: maybe even implementing mines, rockets, etc to increase offense / defense

GorG: imagine, everyoen seeing your amazing looking m4a1 + 4x ACOG scope

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: More guns, more custom ways to have ur guns, and more maps, Many more.

chidoriglance: I have never seen it

Spencer: More guns would be nice, and I would like to see the AWP be more taxing on skill, rather than it basically being the same shot as a scout.

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: CSSDM

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: ok don't go off on my WoW argument. I am merely speaking in terms of popularity, not in terms of game quality. They are 2 different genres. You can compare apples to oranges!

chidoriglance: it is always TDM

Dorni - Now with Vista!: I think they should add enwer weapons while keeping it as realistic as it is now... I mean people mod it for that stuff.

nexuscrysix: Trying to improve on gameplay. Not only with hitboxes but also with missions and such that teams need to accomplish.

Jgallstar1: If the graphics become to "real" then people are going to lose their touch with reality and waste their life playing games. Older games with older graphics help make that difference.

-FA-3DCore: in AA u can cutomize scopes, red dots, m303 etc

GoldenEye`: Yes there has to be a balance of lifestlye and competition because many people love to play for fun because its just great but when it comes to scrims many people love to see furious people duking it out to be the best

-Ðragon: really comparing CS or as a matter of fact any game to another isnt right. They are all different games with different elements. :/

|CSC|KoreansRock1: often times i don't feel a connection with teammates, so it would be great to have team-oriented missions that required more than just getting the highest score

-FA-3DCore: we need more options

Mike Fitz: They already have a mod for CSSDM

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: Vehicles would take away what makes CS unique. Its a very particualy form of gameply

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: The void s are Anti-Cheats and Dedicated communities

i√ | ÐarkFury: All they have to do is focus on what the gamers really want more than what the gRaphics cards can handle!!

wS|Melissa: Ehh, the new features like vehicles and rockets seems like a good idea, but then it'll get WAY too busy and eventually people would wander off to other games

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: Perhaps 1.6 style missions? However bored you are, batterring bots doesn't make you feel any better

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Oh yeah...DM thhough would be weird.

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: exactly

chidoriglance: CS just isn't that original

duffman0: Vehicles would not be a good add

GorG: yeahno vehicles

chidoriglance: You can look at any other game

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: i think CS should have a single player campaign

Spencer: If people are losing their heads because the game is too realistic, perhaps they should not be playing games in the first place.

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: You would have to do all the spawn points over for every map for DM.

Operator_Shadow: Basically give people more things to do, more weapons to do it with and options for those weapons/equipment

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: too many games have vehciles

[Xfire] Supercop007: Definitely the expansion of guns / gameplay modes is the logical next step. There is a point where graphics won't be as drastic an improvement that was from HL1 to the Source engine.

Team.god †Silent Predator: game oriented server objectives, like cod and bia but multiplayer

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: No vehicles that would ruin gameplay of Source

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: and the only thing ppl do is spam them

duffman0: Who would play css in singleplayer

eternalwyrm: They did a CS campaign on the xfire version

eternalwyrm: and people didnt pick up much

Dorni - Now with Vista!: I think bots should altogethe rbe teaken out... or at least let there be a filter feature for no bots!

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: What would a CS:S campaign be like?

«oGє» В!ѕнор: yes

chidoriglance: I think vehicles would be a good addon

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: Halo 2, BF2142

wS|Melissa: Yeahh it's just a noobie trap waiting to happen

Freyar: @Klaak I enjoyed a single player campaign myself on Deleted Scenes. It's something I kind of miss you know.

luclicane: lol frederic ive tried many times and failed

eternalwyrm: Most people still play it in order to play multiplayer with friends

wait! Tropicalpyro: Melissa - I don't think vehicles and rockets would be a good addition. I think that is too much like other games (BF series mainly) and Source has it's own style without such things.

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: ah, but vheicles will lead to a bizarre Battlefield clone with a source engine

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: But if you put the fans above the competitors then the competitors will be soured by the product and not want to play because it isn't a "gamers game" anymore, it would be a spectators game.

i√ | ÐarkFury: Yes I would LOVE to see Source with a Capaign mode, instead of "BOT MISSIONS"

|CSC|KoreansRock1: something original hopefully

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: How would you add a story to a Team Based Death Match game

duffman0: There should be a ranking system

Dorni - Now with Vista!: I think vehicles would complicate the game WAY too much.

-FA-3DCore: tanks!

ScreWe: i was explaining Half Life 2 DeathMatch to my mum

-FA-3DCore: ranks!

chidoriglance: they have bot missions

-FA-3DCore: that would be great

«oGє» В!ѕнор: If you want a CSS campaign go to CS CZ Deleted Scenes

B00^gerber: COunter Strike is based in realism. Terrorists VS COunter Terrorist. There isn't honestly much you CAN do in terms of sequels. YOu can do tons of addons and mods and all that, but eventually it'll die.

-Ðragon: Changing CS to be AA or quake or halo wouldnt make it cs. If you realize how little changes were made from cs 1.6 to CSS and how that made such a impact on the CS community. Imagine how big of a outrage it would be if CS mimiced other games

GoldenEye`: Competition matches show the real rankings

chidoriglance: just other players can actually join

wS|Melissa: I agree Dorni, absolutely

|CSC|KoreansRock1: the sad thing is that css really isn't team-based

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: HL2 is the campaign 0_o

Ryan: I agree with vehicles such as planes helicopters and tanks. Things like that

[Xfire] Supercop007: I'm really looking forward to the return of the APC in cs_siege :)

i√ | ÐarkFury: if you guys want vehicles, go play HALO 3, this game is about STRATS and MAKING YOUR SHOTS.

Dendei: Part of me wants to say new game types, however there isnt much that would work with CS other than what has already been done. CS is a very hard thing to find things to improve on it due simply to the fact that it works as it is to an extent. Thats not to say its perfect in any way, but its hard to say what could be improved on. If i had to pick though, probably a bit of a setting change to spice things up. Terrorists can exist in a lot more scenario's than the current lot gives the concept credit for.

chidoriglance: They should have more voice options

.♥ wMute ♥: CS, and CSS, to me, are Community-based games that depend on active communities. Tournaments are what make CS and CSS interesting, as are competetive ladders and user-made mods. Valve doesn't need to add anything specific: they simply need to provide the community with tools and potential to make CS into their own thing: examples: Zombie Mod and Gun Game are simply mods, yet extremely popular

wS|Melissa: I disagree, CSS is EXTREMELY team based. Especially during scrims

chidoriglance: or squad leaders

Freyar: Dark no need to flame bud.

Silent.Killer: Maybe if the game was set out like a tv show, introducing players etc

wS|Melissa: Ventrilo helps enhance the experience

chidoriglance: to leave map markers

luclicane: i tried explaining CSS to my mom whos 34 and plays wow and she just couldnt grasp any concepts

GorG: I hate mahjong

Silent.Killer: Sort of like the intro movies to UT2k3 I think it was

B00^gerber: You can "Fill the Void" but only for so long.

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: exactly

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: the viod changes

chidoriglance: yes

≤àR/eR≥ Rich: @chidoriglance, I really do disagree withyou if there was verichels it would ruin the game besides theres no room and people would just be running over ech other and it would ruin the gameplay so that would be a big "no, no" for me, sorry.

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: As the Gaming Community grows bigger around the world... you have to see the number of cheaters increase with it... as you have to see more games hitting the market and major problems in the lifetime of certain games... on European side it's less of a problem as i tend to see more people playing games on a longer period of time... but here in America... it's quite an issue... people play a game for 5 months then will all massively switch to another game. Not leaving the time to the game to create a great community for itself

nexuscrysix: I'd like to see single player missions as well. And for pro gamers an area for them to practise in

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Luclicane your mom doesn't understand shoot?

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: It depends if the person you are trying to explain to has the patience to listen to someone who plays cs for 10 hours a day. ;-)

wait! Tropicalpyro: Ranks would be a cool add-on, you would know how good someone may be, but it would have to be implimented properly. Because there are peopl who play only SK and such and I don't think how good of a no scope you are is comparable to how well of a strat you run

-FA-3DCore: this is going too fast

H@X-Trupa / 145^Trupa: stop the flooding!!

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: the "void" will always become somthing new

eternalwyrm: Counter strike game play is great the way it is. As time goes on and people want something new they mod it, but most people want a simple game they can get on and play for 20 minutes

B00^gerber: Exactly

-FA-3DCore: source >1.6

|CSC|KoreansRock1: well melissa, yeah, during scrims, but beyond that, it's basically just a competition to see who can get the most kills

Dorni - Now with Vista!: The ranks mod is already on just about every server, so in my opinion that's not needed.

Team.god †Silent Predator: now that there is a cs:s, will there ever be an upgrade for 1.6, anyone?

[Xfire] MasterRen: I don't really think vehicles would work right now. They are usually more oriented towards large-scale battles with many more people that can respawn.

Spencer: Source with a campaign mode... I'm not sure. They'd have to fix how much health and armor you get, and it'd probably have to go into SOCOM mode, where you would have 3-5 soldiers with you at the time. Perhaps even RTS-style strategy to place them would be possible?

AIR_CAV: I have to disagree with midways point, People always think you need to speed things up and add more excitement for it to get appeal, when in reality its not true at all. Maybe that applies to TV but not sports.

-FA-3DCore: NO

B00^gerber: YOu can never fully fill the void. Just make it smaller.

i√ | ÐarkFury: They didnt need to make Ventrilo though, they could of made an in-game voice system that is high quality..just more money for companies that host Vent's and the Ventrilo company itself.

ScreWe: The void can never change... nuthins there...

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: ranks would make it more like the BF series

-FA-3DCore: no rts

chidoriglance: They should just totally remake 1.6

«oGє» В!ѕнор: No matter what new things you add to fill the void, theres eventually always going to be a new void forming

-FA-3DCore: stick with FPS completly

GorG: no ranks

wait! Tropicalpyro: Well I don't think the (current) maps are meant for vehicles

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Yep CS:S is already so Segregated that vehicles would break gameplay.

vidal: I disagree that Counter-Strike is EXTREMELY team based, the question is, have you ever heard of clutching in a match? One person based on their how their shots are placed can change everything.

-FA-3DCore: ranks r cool....

chidoriglance: with all the CSS sounds graphics...

wait! Tropicalpyro: That's why there are none

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: exactly bishop!~

≤àR/eR≥ Rich: @Masterren, agreed the gameplay would be shattered

chidoriglance: just with CS 1.6 graphics

.♥ wMute ♥: To me, ranks wouldn't work because this brings about the question of "time invested into the game versus skill". Someone with a "high rank" may use that to improve his reputation, but it wouldn't say how much actual skill he has, merely how much time he's invested in the game.

-FA-3DCore: we should get rid of sprays though

|CSC|KoreansRock1: i think ranks would be a good idea since it gives players more incentive to improve their kills

luclicane: CS is easy tp pick up IF and only IF you are used to actual physics and using all your senses

chidoriglance: excuse me gameplay

«oGє» В!ѕнор: Thx major silver

Dendei: Vehicles? Im not so sure that would fit very well. I have seen it tried in different mods and maps to CS, and it just felt really out of place for the most part. The action is so fast paced in CS, adding vehicles would trivialize a lot of that

|CSC|KoreansRock1: skills**

Spencer: No, not RTS like that. I mean, perhaps hit a button and your cursor goes from a crosshair to a pointer, and tell your soldier to do something there.

B00^gerber: If you want Vehicles, play some Unreal TOurnament. The Vehicles there are great.

i√ | ÐarkFury: I agree, DS Major Silver, I enjoyed playing BF2142 and getting new weapons and gear, if they could create a system like that for Source, I would love it even more and support it greatly!

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Sprays are awesome. You can represent yourself.

B00^gerber: Not so much in CS.

eternalwyrm: @vidal but the point of a scrim and teamwork is to try to NOT have someone in that situation

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: Not necessarily sports, should the person not know of sports. Relate it to something in their lives that they know and see on an every day basis.

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Exactly, CS is not for vehciles.

Freyar: As much as I like persistance in games, I really don't think Counter-Strike: Source would benifit from it.

wS|Melissa: Well yeahhh I've heard of clutching and acing, I've done it a lot myself, BUT you still run your strats and usually that person just has 1) a good aim, 2) good hearing, and 3) Their team to help them out

Dorni - Now with Vista!: vehicles*

GoldenEye`: Europe gaming is a tottaly diffrent topic because there many people have a diffrent type of living which really affects the way they "view" a game and how diffrent competion is for them; Im sure many of them are very hyped up for matches

luclicane: no CS definately needs some interactivity with tanks and such

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: Hmm, the two sides of the ranking system arguement. Well, On one hand you can docuement any and all cheaters, haxxorz, and rule breakers with ease. You can find freinds, (but that's what Xfire is for) You can document knife kills. THen you have issues with freedom. You couldn't freely change your name, the game would become a bind of MMO proportions...

wait! Tropicalpyro: Well there would have to be a certain balance between skill and time. I mean maybe more points per HS you recieve but for every minute of play you get an eighth of a point

chidoriglance: yes i agree luclic

duffman0: i think u should be able to catch nades and throw them back like dods

Mike Fitz: Vehucles would ruin the whole principal of CS

eternalwyrm: Because while once in a while someone gets lucky, but a 1v5 is usually bad

Silent.Killer: Maybe if you setout tournaments like a football leaghue aswell

Spencer: Not much you can do about pornographic sprays in CSS, but just because of a few spoiled eggs, the whole carton is not bad.

i√ | ÐarkFury: Sprays are horrible, IMO. People can put whatever picture they want on there which offends many people! Plus, they are unneccessary.

wS|Melissa: Tanks on Source's maps? I don't think that would work at all

Silent.Killer: People could relate more to it

[Xfire] SDaria:

******** NEXT QUESTION ********

[3D]Torbull: Given the recent announcements regarding game selection by some organizations and "leagues" (WCG is 1.6, ESWC is 1.6, CPL is 1.6, WSVG is TBD, and CGS is source), what do you think has the most potential for 2007, or will it vary by region?

Silent.Killer: They could follow clans

Silent.Killer: But thats after they get into it

Dorni - Now with Vista!: I think vehicles would ruin the series. The tactical play is what more people want, not the "run over your enemies and shoot at them with a tabk" strategy.

chidoriglance: It really needs to be more of an arcade game

«oGє» В!ѕнор: Vehicles would totally ruin GG, and Zombie mods

wait! Tropicalpyro: I disagree with the nade catching. It is too, abnormal. I mean the odds of you have time to get the nade and returne it are slim

chidoriglance: it is kind of based on it

.♥ wMute ♥: Adding vehicles drastically changes the gameplay of CSS. The further you move away from the original CS 1.6, the more you will hurt the original users who loved it

chidoriglance: but you can't just pick up and play it

vidal: However usually there is always that one person on a team whois considered by many tohave "carried" their team, thoughmany teams do rely heavily on their strats I've come across many teams that have won matches based on theperformance of one of two players alone.

-»[€€]«-Twister60: lo

eternalwyrm: The large leagues are whats holding source back a great deal

chidoriglance: I agree

GorG: I concur

eternalwyrm: They are being holdouts, and stop a lot of people from transitioning

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: I believe it will be varied by region. People who have/are more apt to play 1.6 will go with that being it their stronger game. And same with source. It will show where the majority of players for each game reside in.

Mike Fitz: Agreed

B00^gerber: 1.6 is still going to reign supreme in the Pros. it's familiar, it works, and, well.. It isn't Source.

[Xfire] MasterRen: I think the biggest question many of us has is, "What's the difference between all of those leagues?"

luclicane: CSS has most potential but it will most probably be based solely on regions and what the people of those regions enjoy

chidoriglance: They need to totally remap CSS

wS|Melissa: Wait, I like the leagues and the competition, why do you guys hate them?

≤àR/eR≥ Rich: I'll have to pass on thi

eternalwyrm: If a few of the large teams and leagues were to switch, then the current would go that way

Team.god †Silent Predator: the only thging holding sourcs back is 1.6 players, hehe

chidoriglance: get those priorities straight

Silent.Killer: I think until CSS fixes some things that hinder competitive play ie - The bouncing off physics objects, the dodgy hitboxes I doubt it will be accepted at a highly competitive level

wait! Tropicalpyro: I think Source being the newer game will be able to expand more, i think it just needs to be publicized properly and more people need to get into it

eternalwyrm: However, they don't want to risk change: they are comfortable where they are

i√ | ÐarkFury: I think leagues are the most important part of Source, and region is mostly in USA for the moment, but they are expanding to new regions like how CPL went to Australia!

Freyar: It will probably stay as CS 1.6 until people get tired of watching it. Again, I hold to the belief that people want a visually appealing experience due to the limited senses that can be used while playing a game.

nexuscrysix: Depends around where in 2007

ScreWe: the next CS game = Counter Strike : Heaven Vs Hell... Will you judge the ending?

wS|Melissa: Source has a lot more potential that 1.6 when it comes to expanding in my opinion

B00^gerber: Exactly, Eternal.

eternalwyrm: So they hold on to 1.6, and stop the entire advancement of the sport

Spencer: Currently I believe 1.6 would be best for competitive matches... but I am hoping it will change.

Silent.Killer: There's just too many times you feel ripped off in Source which kills competitiveness

GoldenEye`: Too me its Going to be the CPL because CS 1.6 is a prominate and dominate game that Many people play for prizes and for being the best! im sure torbull would agree he himself is a cpl type of guy winning big competions and getting crowned to be the best and CPL again is a WORLD tournament and winning a big event like that will sure get you some respect

«oGє» В!ѕнор: The only thing that CSS is missing is the LACK of realism.

GorG: I don't want realism in my CS:S

DarkVulture: get rid of the awp compleatly!!

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Yes!

B00^gerber: 1.6 is familiar, why fix what isn't broken?

nexuscrysix: From now till the 3rd quarter I'd expect to see 1.6 do good.

i√ | ÐarkFury: Leagues will always be in games, people just have a natural competetive spirit which drives them to want to "Go Pro"

chidoriglance: If you look at 1.6 and source. They probably aren't that different. THEY NEED TO REMAKE CS 2.6

[Xfire] SDaria:

******** NEXT QUESTION ********

[3D]Torbull: what needs to change to make source more accepted? or can it not be?

|CSC|KoreansRock1: i want a lil bit of realism in cs

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: sort of like Halo 2...the game is finally slowing down. People get bored with it. Happens to every game

Dendei: I think there will always be a place for both, it really all depends on what people feel comfortable with. If more players feel like they would be better off with 1.6, these leagues will support that. If people feel more comfortable with Source than 1.6, im sure you would see a change

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: [3D]Torbull... it will vary by region... if the largest part of a community goes to a game... there's a huge possibility to see the rest follow up with them... But yet again CS 1.6 and CS:S are 2 popular games... and people will still play both

GoldenEye`: Lack of realism you gotta be kidding me SOURCE has everything to look real

.♥ wMute ♥: People who are good with 1.6 will stay with 1.6. People who aren't so good with it, will move to CSS and vice versa. Success will be directly related to the game where the most users feel they will be most successful and which has the most money prizes.

wS|Melissa: The glitches to be fixed!!

AIR_CAV: This question can only be answered by the teams who compete in the tournaments. They could easily make the switch back to 1.6 if they felt it would help them, right now a team committing 100% to source has nothing to lose but that could all change when there major tourneys come around.

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: It needs to have a stronger engine. One crucial problem is as everyone knows, hitboxes and netcodes. Also consistency of servers. Making sure rates and such are fine throughout.

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Source can be accepted. People need to get off their ancient high horse and give it a chance.

chidoriglance: I just can'[t sit down for long periods of time

-Ðragon: source has everything to LOOK real. not FEEL real

DarkVulture: get rid of the damn awp and ppl may actualy like css a little more

Silent.Killer: What I said before about physics and hitboxes needing to be fixed up

«oGє» В!ѕнор: Read what I said noobsauce! ITS TOO REAL!

Mike Fitz: The hitboxes must be fixed ASAP in my opinions

chidoriglance: and play it

i√ | ÐarkFury: Glitches mostly, and just listen to the Fans to see what is needed. TAKE DWP OFF!!!!!!!

wS|Melissa: If those are fixed then I wouldn't ever have a problem with the game and wouldn't ever have to worry about crashing (like switching sides in a scrim)

nexuscrysix: But nearing the fourth quarter, especially with HL 2 EP: 2 coming out, We might see CSS having some gameplay improvement.

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: no game will EVER be glitch free

|CSC|KoreansRock1: they need to step up on cheaters since that makes source look bad

«oGє» В!ѕнор: I agree silver

GorG: DWP is so horrible

wait! Tropicalpyro: There are some minor glitches but I think a large majority of people play 1.6 (or at least my friends) because of low graphic capability

Mike Fitz: But it can come close

GoldenEye`: Source wont be accpeted at all; even though the graphics are amazing it wnt get accpeted due to many glitches and problems with some of the newest hard ware but playing source in wide screen is amazing :)

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: If you observe the British i-series gaming events, CSS remains one of the most popular tournament entries. People enjoy watching, playing and fragging for money. CSS is one of the most popular tournie games on the market

wS|Melissa: Yeahh but they can at least eliminate a LOT of the more common glitches

ScreWe: i didnt even know about e-sports untill they just now started talkin bout em

Jgallstar1: I think Source is a better choice just because you can expand so much on that. The zombie mods and the gun games are what makes source so fun.

GorG: I swear to god if it wasn't disablable source would be ruined

wait! Tropicalpyro: So some of Source's success hinges on the people upgrading and getting into it

B00^gerber: Source is a Sequel. It's not hard to fathom a SEQUEL not living up to the original. It's common place.

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Like what Melissa?

|CSC|KoreansRock1: gg is unbelievably fun

≤àR/eR≥ Rich: @Torbull, Nothing has to change, but the only thing Counter strike:source lacks is A global ranking system.

DarkVulture: find a betterway to prevent hacking and it will help with the gameplay of cs overall

|CSC|KoreansRock1: and frustrating too

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: Get rid of hackers, Fix Glitches,Fix Hitboxes,Fix Registration,get rid of DWP.

vidal: No, realism is what will hinder CS:S. People switched over to Source eithe rbecause they wanted something new or they wanted an upgrade with the same 1.6 gameplay. The gameplay of Counter-Strike is what got it to the top and if it wants to stay there, it needs tokeep it's current gameplay and nott insitute some more realism.

Silent.Killer: But fun is ok if you're joining a server not so much for a competitive series

duffman0: Source in not well known enough i was talking with my friends today and like no one knew wat it was, More advertisements and maybe some sort of demo

|CSC|KoreansRock1: global ranking would be awesome

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: No

Lt. Adams: yeah

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: No

Spencer: To make Source more accepted, you should fix the hitboxes to conform to the actual body. Lag protection is not as important until you reach 100ms ping.

[Xfire] Supercop007: It won't become an accepted engine until the mainstream computer is at least at the level of the current dual-core processors. Frankly there is a huge population of lower-end players that simply won't trade high-performance with essentially eye-candy

luclicane: Acception of cs is dependant on your POV if you dont like good graphics and play styles and interactivity with the environment then they prolly wont like CSS

chidoriglance: we need a change of subjects

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Dark you can never eliminate hackers completely.

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: I beta test a lot different programs...it can be really hard to fix the stuff. you have to understand how programming works.

i√ | ÐarkFury: Instead of testing new ideas like the ever so terribad "DWP" actually view the game from a "Gamers Perspective" and see what is really needed updated!

wS|Melissa: Like the crashing when it comes to scrims, also the computer-game compatibility

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: It would cause HUGE problems

Mike Fitz: yeah, global ranking would be intense

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: [3D]Torbull ... Those who are diehard 1.6 players will never like Source until it has the same graphics 1.6 has, the same hitbox 1.6 has and the same way to react to the environment 1.6 has... Source is pushed a step further into realism.. so basicly i dont think you could make 1.6 lovers like Source until both games become the same exact thing

DarkVulture: i agree with koreansrock

chidoriglance: *****Controls*****

.♥ wMute ♥: If through some sheer feet of game coding somehow allows CSS to replicate the EXACT feeling of CS 1.6 (hitboxes), then that may lure CS 1.6 gamers into CSS. Otherwise, it will always be a matter of preference. One side will prefer what they've always liked while the other appears to have a more open-mind towards a "slightly different, but not drastically" style of gameplay provided by a more powerful game engine, etc

«oGє» В!ѕнор: No video game will ever be fully accepted until the image of the pro gamer is changed. People think gamers are dumb and fat and dont do anything but play.

Dendei: I dont think it can be, due to the fact that a lot of what makes CS is its player base. Before games like World of Warcraft, CS was the standard in finding jerks online. This can turn a lot of people off to the game. More importantly though is the scaling of skill in CS. It takes a lot of practice to get to the point where you really start enjoying yourself in CS. Having to deal with being dead constantly doesnt seem that fun to a lot of new players

nexuscrysix: i agree with brodo

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: yeah

яєѕιѕтαη¢є:.Opieo™: rlly

chidoriglance: Yes me too

duffman0: It should have some sort of built in clan system

яєѕιѕтαη¢є:.Opieo™: do u

[Xfire] MasterRen: Isn't the most common video card of a steam user around a Radeon 9600?

|CSC|KoreansRock1: it'd create healthy competition

AIR_CAV: I think its to early to call, almost reactionary to think source will rule over this coming year. Once the other major tourneys weigh in then we will be able to see what game will come out on top.

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: excellent point again Bishop!

eternalwyrm: @Melissa, the crashing is definetely a problem, however what is Valve supposed to focus on: the small percentage who compete, or the majority who just play for fun

Freyar: I think a bit of a tweak to the weaponry, including the Arctic Warfare Magnum, and the Automatic Shotgun in terms of accuracy or power. As much as the AWP may be powerful in the world of the living, I find that it's really frustrating to have to deal with it's near pin-point accuracy while in a standing position. Not just that, a lot of people get upsed when it is used because of the combination of accuracy and it's power. The shotgun spread patterns seem really tight, allowing for headshots at a range that really might need a hard accuracy fall off.

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: i agree with dendei!

яєѕιѕтαη¢є:.Opieo™: 6200 geforce

i√ | ÐarkFury: i like the nvidia 8600

[Xfire] MasterRen: I'm pretty sure performance of gameplay is a major hindering factor.

«oGє» В!ѕнор: Ty silver

B00^gerber: All the jerks from 1.6 have moved on to Source and WoW.

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: 8800

luclicane: I use nVidia gforce 8600

chidoriglance: I have Radeon 6200 I believe

Team.god †Silent Predator: yea, until source reacts like 1.6 with the hit box, game physics, game play, its not going to catch on for alot

B00^gerber: Leaving the rest of the internet relatively.. Intelligent.

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: LOL @ radeon 6200

wait! Tropicalpyro: I agree Vidal, 1.6 has completely different gameplay - a lot because of the graphics. I think people stay because it's what they love, and are good at. The more it is weeded out and source put in the more it will become known.

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Europe is behind. :\\\\ Don't they still play Starcraft?

i√ | ÐarkFury: i think a new nvidia 9000 series is coming out

GoldenEye`: Not true about a video game. A video game is perfect for one who is attracted and plays it ; gamers make games for Customers who like those types of games im sure many games would get accpeted

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: Now, CS with the same engine as Crysis...

wS|Melissa: I used nVidia Geforce FX 5200 compared to my old onboard GeForce4 Integrated GPU

|CSC|KoreansRock1: i have a radeon x800xl

chidoriglance: ****Controls*****???

|CSC|KoreansRock1: 256 megs

|CSC|KoreansRock1: and it runs fine on my pc

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: I think that the source community as a whole is not ready for the attention. The game itself is still developmental and so is the gamers in it.

[3456]Fr0z3n-316-[CSR]DN: Until css gets 100 frames constantly (like 1.6) I will not be playing it

nexuscrysix: Although DX10 will take awile for it to become regular in gamers homes, sooner or later we will be seeing old games getting some improvements in mid 2008. And thus maybe an upgrade with CS

duffman0: stop talking about vid cards we're talkin about css

chidoriglance: wsad

wS|Melissa: Both ran Source thoug

DarkVulture: with vista will there be any upgrades for cs?

Spencer: I run the Radeon X1600 and I run CS:S *nearly* maxed and that's likely due to my processor.

-Ðragon: I guess we might ahve to wait and see how csp works out. If it really is what its hyped to be a lot of people from both 1.6 and source will like it

wS|Melissa: Well we're talking about compatibility here

eternalwyrm: @nexuscrysix, i wouldntb ese so sure there

wait! Tropicalpyro: But video cards and game quality play a big bart Duff.

Dorni - Now with Vista!: I doubt it DarkVulture, there is basically no need to yet.

GorG: my GF gets 80fps in source with a integrated MX-4000, its NOT hard to get 100fps

duffman0: but theres too much i have...

eternalwyrm: its a lot of work to implement a new directx

[Xfire] Supercop007: The mainstream graphics card seems to be creeping up to the Geforce 6 series at least, up from the FX 5200 and as recently as 2 years ago the Geforce 4 MX

eternalwyrm: and many companies may not feel it necessary or worthwhile

nexuscrysix: Although this could also mean an upgarde for Half-Life leading to a whole new source engine. Though that might not come til HL 3, maybe HL 2 EP 3

eternalwyrm: especially for older games

wS|Melissa: Yeahh I still have trouble getting good fps but that doesn't detere me away from the game

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Right now CS is in a perfect spot, they should really let it stay this way for a while more.

.♥ wMute ♥: I beleive there are two typers of CS users. Those that are conservative (who enjoy 1.6 because its still fun) and those who are more in favor of change (those who want to accept technological advances to add to their overall gaming experience). It's always going to be like this. Some want change, some don't. 5 years from now, if there's a CSS2, half the users will play CS 1.6 and the other half will play CSS2

wait! Tropicalpyro: I agree Gorg, it depends on the machine more than the game itself

GorG: when source first came out, before all the new models and HDR and such, my old 6800 got ~200fps on average.

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: absolutely

GoldenEye`: [GotFrag.com]Midway: As of 5pm EST - 154,800 playing CS 1.6 - 74,000 playing CS:Source according to the steam powered website

Looks like many people are coming back to cs you know why because source has to many issues with new technology such as the newest VISTA

luclicane: IF CSS gets better graphics that means us users needing to spend MORE money on a better graphics card thus turning some poeple off which is why CS 1.6 is soo big

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: no game can appeal to everyone. Period

B00^gerber: I accept technological advancements, but Source just didn't live up to what I'd expected. It's an alright game in a pretty wrapper, nothing more

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: [3D]Torbull: so SOME of the community has a reputation for being whiney

[3D]Torbull: but i think that changes, shaun

Yes it is changing because people are realizing that to play at a REALLY GOOD level in CS:S... you still have to be really good at it, you can't just switch from 1.6 to Source and be the greatest player in a week... takes practice to get intense at anything

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: you NEED a keyboard to make CS what it is

[3456]Fr0z3n-316-[CSR]DN: After this chat I'm going to play 1.6, not source

Jgallstar1: I could not ever imagine playing Counter Strike without my keyboard and mouse.

chidoriglance: they should make

chidoriglance: a contorller

chidoriglance: just for that

GoldenEye`: CSS is at its max compatiblites for grpahics and im sure it would not get any better in realism

3[x] Davgunit: i dont think cs should even be considered for a console game after the imo failue of the xbox version

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: CS:S would feel wrong on the 360. I love my 360 and Crackdown but I think TF2 will fill that void for a good MP Source game on consoles.

chidoriglance: I disagree goldeneye

[Xfire] SDaria:

******** NEXT QUESTION ********

EGLN|Shaun: do you guys feel the source community is ready for this much attention?

|CSC|KoreansRock1: i would play source definitely, but i unfortunately have to study for exams

B00^gerber: FPS on consoles are just normally bad

wait! Tropicalpyro: Heh is there any other way?

wS|Melissa: YES!

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: yes

ҳ̸Ҳ̸̸ҳ|°FяÅğДđØøм|ҳ̸Ҳ̸ҳ: YES!!!

-dimensioN: woot

GorG: definately

chidoriglance: NO

DarkVulture: YA

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: absolutely

wS|Melissa: We can handle it, we're ready for competition

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: Source has been ready.

B00^gerber: No

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: :)

wS|Melissa: Bring it on!

GorG: definitely*

|CSC|KoreansRock1: yes

duffman0: I think if it has good graphix but a low enough requirements it will be good

hydrokd: YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

3[x] Davgunit: no

B00^gerber: No freaking way.

nexuscrysix: Yes

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: attention? did they ever have much?

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: I don't believe it will work on a console. Most people who would buy it already have played an FPS for pc or other FPS on console. It's reaction times and how the gameplay is versus a PC will cause too much dispute. People will be turned off by the idea. And if they do play it they will not like the product.

[3456]Fr0z3n-316-[CSR]DN: Halo on the pc = slow paced

duffman0: YES

Spencer: Yes! Absolutely. Can't say my answer any longer than that! ;)

wait! Tropicalpyro: Definately. I think the gamers in source are ready and can handle it. They want to get their game more "out there" and known to the world.

vidal: Addressing Shaun's question, the Source community at this time is not ready for all this attention. The Source and 1.6 community are too busy battling each other to get some more attention and both are practically the same game. It's not only depressing to see such communities deteriorate each other to such immaturity but it's also disgusting to see the level many have reached to prove one game is better than the other.

[Xfire] SDaria:

******** NEXT QUESTION ********

[3D]Torbull: What abbout CS on consoles... the first CS on Xbox wasn't too hot, but do you think a game like CS can live and breathe on an Xbox or do you need the mouse and keyboard?

AIR_CAV: Id agree with Pesticide, if its made for a console it will work but if you just port it over you will have trouble.

luclicane: I need my microphone for the truly authentic militaristic style along with my mous and keyboard of course. With a controller you have a stickier aiming system

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: To the people in the main floor : How many of you guys will be playing Halo 2 Vista?

Dendei: On a professional level, yes. On an average joe level? Not so sure

Team.god †Silent Predator: no matter how you look at it, cs 1.6 and cs:s are 2 equally fantastic games, gamers love to play them and I do to

B00^gerber: You really want to give all these angry, attention starved, immature brats all the attention? Anonimity + Audience = Total FuxWad.

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: EGLN|Shaun ... the Source community already has this much attention... Counter-Strike players have been ready all the way since release for this attention and they've had it since the very first day

GorG: I'm not so into CS on console

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Yes, everybody is waiting for it. Awaiting for the next CS gimmick will be.

Freyar: I think that because the community has a relatively secure environment against hackers/cheaters compared to what I have seen in 1.6, and a decent number of people that want to play in a competitive situation should have that exposure.

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: No, CS must stay on PC

Silent.Killer: People like FPS on consoles and with the new Windows Live Connect would be interesting in mixing CSS players on PC and 360

GorG: CS is about honing your accuracy

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: no...the design of CS is intedned for a PC

eternalwyrm: I honestly think the mouse and keyboard iss required for a shooter like CS

nexuscrysix: They expect to be playing against pros. Then they should be ready for newer gamers to come

3[x] Davgunit: from my experiance the 1.6 players are much more mature and also the cs:s players act more like 5 yr kids that just got a new shiny bike

Silent.Killer: Not sure how well it would go

GorG: consoles are about arcadey style autoaiming messes

duffman0: NO fps's on consoles is a bad idea and thats one less esclusive for pc

GorG: but they're still fun.

chidoriglance: nah

Silent.Killer: But console players play FPS anyway

hydrokd: NO WE DONT WANT ANY OTHER CS GAMES ON OTHER CONSOLS ONLY PC

wS|Melissa: No. I personally haven't really ever played on a console, and new consoles come out SO often, who wants to keep up with it?

|CSC|KoreansRock1: i think that cs is so easy to understand an play that it could be adapted to anything

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: much like H2 is for Xbox

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: You cannot fit all the functions into a gamepad

luclicane: Stickier aiming equals pros that end up sucking when they hear someone behind them

i√ | ÐarkFury: I also belive that wMute, but I think also the two users breaks down into the fun type of people that are not competetive or atleast have not been opened to the competetive scene. Those people like to play the "fun mods" in 1.6,cz, and source. Then you have the competetive players in 1.6 and source that focus on the game in a deeper level than what others can see, they see how the game can be improved more than what new "mods" they can create. But we will see how that changes with CSPRO MOD!

eternalwyrm: the twitch shooting is just too hard on a difficult to control joystick

[3456]Fr0z3n-316-[CSR]DN: You need a mouse and keyboard, the action on the pc if much greater than any action you can get a console

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: No [3D]Torbull ... you don't need a keyboard and a mouse to play a FPS... it's all a matter of what feel more comfortable with

wait! Tropicalpyro: IF and ONLY if they did it right. I think it would be fun to have a similar Halo like idea in the sense that there is a campaign that everyone beats in a day then plays online the rest of the time

GoldenEye`: Console gaming is nothing like Computers becase computer gaming is more intense and have the abilites to reach better graphics and take gaming to a whole new level

Mike Fitz: Counter strike should be left on computers, since consoles are very hard to implicate a relistic live-based game which has way too many controlls and keys for a console

PoopieDeLoopie: agrreed

[Xfire] Supercop007: I really don't think it will work on consoles. There's a major lack of precision while aiming with a gamepad and auto-aim is doing a lot of the work.

eternalwyrm: Some games are totally portable

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: DON'T PORT GAMES

chidoriglance: I disagree

vidal: If Halo can have all this competitive attention on the Xbox then I'm sure CS is just as capable, however it will be a bit tough buying items with a handheld controller.

[3456]Fr0z3n-316-[CSR]DN: Besides that there would probably be a huge amount of camping in console versions

.♥ wMute ♥: I don't believe that CS on the 360 would attrack current PC CS/CSS players. HOWEVEr, it most certainly will attrack the console shooter fans. And, simply put, the Console has a MUCH larger market to attract

Dendei: Mouse and keyboard, simple as that. Im not saying FPS games cant be played on a console, but the controls for CS have a very tight standard

B00^gerber: Console FPS games are TERRIBLE

chidoriglance: CS should expand

Freyar: I've never liked FPS games on consoles. It really is dependant on whether or not the analog sticks can be worked to make it comfortable for anyone playing.

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: dpends on the game

B00^gerber: HORRIBLE

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: The game has to be built for 1 platform to be the best.

chidoriglance: just on the ps3

Silent.Killer: Making it for the specific platform is usually best but ports can be good too

Dorni - Now with Vista!: i can't read the question!

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: You guys saw how HL2 was on the XBox 1.

|CSC|KoreansRock1: splinter cell was great on all consoles and the pc, so obviously it CAN work

chidoriglance: where it can be maximiized in power

B00^gerber: Aiming is just.. bad

Jgallstar1: From what I've seen and played: the fights in Halo for PC were a lot more faced paced (and accurate for that matter) compared to the games I've played on Halo for Xbox

luclicane: if i had CS on my ps3 i would say screw the controller and hook up my mouse and keyboard clearly giving me the advantage over controller users

chidoriglance: and maybe a few motion controls

DarkVulture: counter strike for the xbox is compleatly stupid and it should of been left as a pc only game

duffman0: Multi consoles games have it so each consoles weakness drags it down

[Xfire] MasterRen: Porting games is terrible. Developers sacrifice performance and quality for easy money on a new platform.

B00^gerber: The only console now that I feel can sustain a decent FPS is the Wii

wS|Melissa: Exactly

B00^gerber: because of it's remote

nexuscrysix: only the 360 and the PC count for this one

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: Perhaps CS Wii?

chidoriglance: ahaha yes wii

Spencer: Specific platform, please... and if not, then have console players face console players, and PC players do the same. Aiming with your hand versus your fingers is quite a difference.

[3456]Fr0z3n-316-[CSR]DN: Splinter Cell is a slow paced third person espionage game, counter strike is a first person action shooter game

luclicane: CS is truly a PC only type game

eternalwyrm: Counter strike is fast paced action that requires tight aiming. Other games, (i.e. Splinter Cell) are more stealth oriented, and with less running and gunning. This makes them viable optionns for both console and PC

3[x] Davgunit: players can play both 1.6 and source as i do but i prefer 1.6

vidal: Not trying to digress from the topic at hand but Halo has seen an amazing amount of attention in the competitive scene, more POSITIVE attention than Counter-Strike has ever received, I'm sorry to say.

wait! Tropicalpyro: It can be made for anything if it works. I mean, people will argue that FPS' aren't meant for the Console but I think it can be good. I must say MGS in FPS is amazing eh? So there's obviously something there other than Halo

chidoriglance: The wii?

Silent.Killer: It depends how different the console is

chidoriglance: hmm

B00^gerber: Yes, the Wii

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: CS Wii...never thought of that

AIR_CAV: Not the game play, CS is quite simple game play but how you play the game, make GUI changes and little things that makes it easier for a 9 button controls compared to all the key the players has on a keyboard.

chidoriglance: I have 1

duffman0: cs wii would be terible

B00^gerber: Play Red Steel.

Silent.Killer: From PC to 360 isnt a huuuuge difference

Dorni - Now with Vista!: CS would not make a good console game.

chidoriglance: but i can't see

ic0n: cs neds to stay on the pc andnot go to platform again

GoldenEye`: Yes players can play with a DUAL PASSPORT :) they can paly 1.6 and source because for many source players that are tired of source they might would like to try 1.6 which is a tottal diffrent type of game play same thing with 1.6 players that would like to test a new type of gameplay and compettion and try source

chidoriglance: it being on it

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: No. The Wii's online is so HORRIBLE.

i√ | ÐarkFury: They should of never tried to put source on the xbox, its terrible to play on a controller.

PoopieDeLoopie: wii online = bad

.♥ wMute ♥: Porting games from PC to Console makes sense purely from a business point of view. There is MUCH more money to be made on Consoles, and a much larger audience/market to attract.

chidoriglance: the wiis online ISN"T OUT YET

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: A friend code? FFS. That would break CS:S.

B00^gerber: Even for a new game using NEW technology, I had a hell of a time playing it. IT was fun

|CSC|KoreansRock1: i disagree eternal, fast paced games can easily be played on a console

luclicane: If they were to go console they would need the Wii and it would bring innvoation to the system

B00^gerber: Wii online is Nintendo's 2nd attempt at online

Dorni - Now with Vista!: This isn't about the Wii, it's about CS...

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: Wii couldn't take the engine

chidoriglance: it is going to cfome out this year for games

wS|Melissa: CS:S just needs to stick to PCs and it should boom even bigger in time

wait! Tropicalpyro: If people on the console could play with people on the PC, we will be getting somewhere.

B00^gerber: It has it's bugs

Freyar: Seeing as how Ubisoft totally screwed up thier ports for Splinter Cell and Rainbow Six I really think that each of them should be developed indepentantly to ensure that theya re optomized for all systems. PC gamers have been getting the shaft recently because of the issues pertaining to XB360 -> PC ports.

B00^gerber: BUT

i√ | ÐarkFury: Its all about the money, instead of the gameplay!

B00^gerber: What doesn't when it's new?

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: anyone ever played Gears of War online?

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: [3D]Torbull i think there should be specific titles to each platform... because some people that are good at a certain game on PC or console... can't think they will come around on their game on a different platform and still rock at it... it's all about getting used to one kind of platform... wether you play on consoles or PC... you still have to learn your keys or buttons.... so from Console to PC... it's a totally different world

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: that can be fast paced

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: or Battlefront II, or Battlefield 2

PacGamer: The futuere of CS: Gears of War style

B00^gerber: The mouse is by FAR the best tool for FPS

≈§ØĎ≈ Jack the Ripper: Like DK said, RB6V and Halo are already estrablished console games, all comparisons would be based on those. And with the notority of those games it is a pretty fierce market.

GoldenEye`: AGAIN listen MOST of console gaming is done OFFLINE because many people dont like playing online but in the othercase many people that own computers have internet to have connetion to everyday life and their comes in online play

AIR_CAV: Over 80% of the gaming industry's revenues come from consoles. That s where the masses are and that s probably where e-sports will developThat’s been true for a while put PC is still where E-sports thrives.

[3456]Fr0z3n-316-[CSR]DN: Gears of war online is a 4 player deathmatch - team deathmatch - third person

PacGamer: Ture

duffman0: We should see how dhadow down or wat ever that cyber punk game is turns out

Jgallstar1: I play Source and I'm good at it and I also play 1.6 and I'm good at that. I believe that there is no such thing as one or the other, if you like the games nothing should stop you.

nexuscrysix: While the PC does give you the accuracy, I tend to like the 360 more for its simple live solutio, however thier are too many useless buttons that would be more useful for other games

B00^gerber: but the Wiimote was a ton of fun. I could see more FPS coming out for it soon.

[Xfire-TTHS] Klaak: cite your facts, AIR_CAV!

luclicane: I jumped from CS 1.6 to source and it only took me 10 minutes to get used to the new style

PacGamer: yea

[Xfire] SDaria:

******** NEXT QUESTION ********

[3D]Torbull: is a good 1.6 player going to be good at source to make the jump, or as our panel pointed out earlier is the game play too different.

wait! Tropicalpyro: I think FPS games can be made completely different than RB or Halo

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: The gameplay is too different. The 1.6 player would take months to adapt and would be angry for awhile.

i√ | ÐarkFury: GEARS of WAR is about one of the best console game they made with a FPS. But they should not try it with the upcoming counter strike game..they are two TOTALLY DIFFERENT GAMES!

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: indeed

eternalwyrm: @KoreansRock some can, but games such as Counter Strike require far too specific aiming. It is simply easier to control using a mouse/keyboard than a controller. Case in point PC Gamer staff vs. XBOX Magazine staff on Halo : keyboards/mice vs. XBOX remotes. PC Gamer won. It just goes to show that the control is better with mouse/keyboard

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: DS Major yes i've played Gears of War online ... and it'll never be as action packed as a UT2004 game on PC ... as i've played UT on a console online and it wasnt half as action packed as the same title on PC... because you can react quicker with a keyboard and a moue

GorG: they'll obviously be good, they just won't be "top dog" anymore, they'll have to learn everything.

B00^gerber: 1.6 to Source wasn't a GIANT leap

wS|Melissa: The advertising sucked though, it turned me off from even looking into the game

luclicane: I jumped from CS 1.6 to source and it only took me 10 minutes to get used to the new style its not that hard if you are a diehard or even a casual fpser

B00^gerber: but it was noticably different.

Silent.Killer: They will know what they are doing, but the aiming/recoil and hitboxes will take getting use to

ic0n: source is way easier then 1.6 any decent 1.6 player can totaly own at source

[3456]Fr0z3n-316-[CSR]DN: Depending on the player's system, it can either be easy, or hard

wS|Melissa: I jumped 1.5 to source to 1.6, and I love all versions, but I do have my biases

B00^gerber: Yeah, you have to completely redo how you aim.

duffman0: theyll need to totaly revamp which will be hard for them

wait! Tropicalpyro: Completely different, going into it though they will have an advantage over a CS Newb in the sense that they've had (assuming here) scrims, adaption to gaming and FPS, and know what CS in general is like

GoldenEye`: YEs a 1.6 player would definetly be GOOD at SOURCE because 1.6 takes more skill and accuracy rather then source where sprays get almost headshots many times 4 out of 5 times which would amaze a 1.6 player that is playing source

Freyar: Gameplay is really different between 1.6 and Source. Mainly because of the differences between the engines. It may take a bit to get used to, and in fact it might be a small problem at the start with a bit of discouragement. But like most games that have a sequel to come out, you have to give it time to get used to.

eternalwyrm: Source is noticably different. While some will adapt easily, with others it will take some time. Players shouldnt expect to jump over instantly and be good at a new game.

vidal: To answer Torbull's question, the top 1.6 teams who have transferred onto Source have already demonstrated that any good 1.6 player will most likely be decent at Source (with practice of course). I consider the gameplay in Source to easier than 1.6 which is why it is so much popular and highly advocated amongst it's community.

nexuscrysix: It depends on how long he's played FPS's if he has played a variety of FPS's and faced changes with aiming, then it won't take him that long

i√ | ÐarkFury: They wont be good...TRUST ME! I have made the switch and it is hard to convert! Different feelings and different hitboxes, different sprays with the guns and different teams, different EVERYTHING!

Spencer: The game play is a little different. I actually went from CS:S to 1.6 and I found it to be harder... in fact I believe that my time on 1.6 (when I was running on a really, really bad computer) had made me better. Going to source was simple, and felt more like a rambo mission than tactical.

[Xfire] MasterRen: A good 1.6 player can certainly do well on Source. But can he immediately be better than an equally good Source player? Probably not initially, but their core abilities (reflexes, attention to cues, etc.) are the same. So over time, they'd be good.

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: well FPS on consoles use a slight auto aim...not sure if you knew that

Jgallstar1: I started off on CS 1.6 and CS:CZ, and when I made the transition into Source, I was supprised that I was extremly good at it. 1.6 gets you to the point where you can be amazing at Source.

B00^gerber: A headshot in 1.6 is a headshot. A headshot in Source is only half the time a headshot.

.♥ wMute ♥: The skill needed for a player to be successful at CSS isn't from learning what made you good at 1.6. The skill needed for an FPS is universal. it's not that you need to know how a gun reacts, but rather, how to act in specific situations. An FPS veteran who never played 1.6 but played plenty of other games will likely have just as much success in CSS as long as he is Smart

wait! Tropicalpyro: No he can't be IMMEDIATELY equal

ic0n: no way i played 1.6 for 2 years i played source for 2 months and totaly owned

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: IF you are good at FPS games then you can pick the game up. It's simple, quick to learn, and fun

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: [3D]Torbull ... it's not much of a HUGE GAP between CS 1.6 and CS:S ... but still... there are some differences... the game is not the exact same thing... so you have to learn some new things, to get used to a different community... some different ways of playing... different Shooting vs. Environment reactions

GoldenEye`: But the only problem, a 1.6 player would have on source would be the instance of walling a person through a wall which is not possible and many online users may think he or she is a "noob" but not knowing they are coming up from 1.6

Dorni - Now with Vista!: Over time, they would adapt and their abilities would double!

luclicane: SOME console fps's use a slight auto aim its not really that noticeable either

Dendei: I wouldnt say they are so different that your talking about experienced players starting all over when making the jump. I do believe experienced players hold certain loyalties to each, but i feel those are stronger than the skill gap in determining if they will play which

AIR_CAV: The jump is simple for the dedicated players, they have adjusted to the changes in CS many times before, given CS:S is the biggest but the fundamentals and foundation of the game remain the same. All they really have to learn it some configs and aim.

nexuscrysix: It's kind of like the Wii, sure the stuff you are doing in the games seem simple but you still have to learn them. With CSS, although it's the same thing as before, you still have to notice thier are diffrences

wait! Tropicalpyro: There is enough of a difference, IE going from 1.6 to PK there will be some differences but the fact that the 1.6 person has intense FPS experience they will have a heads up

GorG: ALL console FPS use at least a little, and theres games like Halo where they use tons

i√ | ÐarkFury: What I really hate is how Counter Strike uses the "Snap to Grid" aiming where you can truly free aim. This has gotten me killed on long range headshots!

eternalwyrm: @vidal team 3d transferred to source and made a large debut match. They lost against a mediocre Source team. Instant success is not liekly and certainly not guaranteed

wait! Tropicalpyro: And more adaptable faster

B00^gerber: Agreed.

.♥ wMute ♥: CSS and CS 1.6 rely on the player's intelligence and familiarity with situations, along with the ability to just "know" where the enemy is, when to hide, when to attack, when to be aggressive, and how to use teammates.

Silent.Killer: I think you still do need to know how the gun reacts, games have different recoil patterns which you can use to your advantage to get more bullets where you want them

PacGamer: A cs 1.6 player is not necesarily good at cs souce bcause of the HUGE PHYSICS jump.

B00^gerber: The Wii had a learning curve to it. I was HORRIBLE at every game I tried for it, but I got better.

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: 1.6 seems more to me just like a mod; while CSS seems like an actual game.

Ryan: I agree with silent killer

wS|Melissa: Right, and learning those certain guns makes the game fun

wait! Tropicalpyro: Right Mute, and so with some time either can switch to the other.

-loaf- Teh_Tumnus: Yes

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: wMute just like many tactical FPS games out there... such as CoD2 and BF

B00^gerber: But going from a GameCube to a Wii is a BIG jump. Going from 1.6 to Source isn't.

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: or SWAT

i√ | ÐarkFury: Germans should be open to source because you can take off the violence. European politicians are being to hard on the Gamers out there!!

PacGamer: BF is over rated

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: yeah...like aiming with the remote in Zelda...took forever to learn

duffman0: i agree wiht name maker

-»)B.I.QcW(«-: and many others

i√ | ÐarkFury: Lets face it, BF is not ment for leagues. CS is!

[Xfire] SDaria:

******** NEXT QUESTION ********

[3D]Torbull: Is TV even the end game for spectating video games, or is the future of either 1.6 or source as a spectator sport online or through xbox live?

PacGamer: Zelda + wii = godd idea

AIR_CAV: Money is good for making a TV show midway but sports is a completely different animal.

|CSC|KoreansRock1: the germans are game nazis! no pun intended

DS Major Silver SSF-2 CO: yeah...BF is best for clan play

B00^gerber: Dear LORD no

[Xfire] Supercop007: I'd say if given the same time to adjust to a new engine, a superior 1.6 player will still end up being better than a mediocre Source player.

Mike Fitz: Agreed air-cav

chidoriglance: yes

B00^gerber: I Don't want gaming to become apart of the MTV culture thing

ηﺃىђ†§ - name maker: No it would have to be through the game it self. Regular people wouldn't care about video games on TV.

wS|Melissa: It's in the future, isn't it? I would much rather prefer to watch a match on the telly than on the computer

B00^gerber: Eff that noise.

.♥ wMute ♥: If you've played a game like Madden or NBA Live, players have a stat called "Offensive Awarenesss". This is what separates most FPS gamers from each other: their ability to be 'aware" of the game, where enemies are,w hat to do, etc

ic0n: any tact fps has recoil and its all diff becuase of the diff engine and game desgin but they travle along the same basic desgin when it comes to recoil and spary it is diffrent in some points yes but its basicly the same over all method of play

eternalwyrm: Games like Source are online games: it is likely that their future will be dictated by the internet more than by television

GorG: I'd say it'd be a lot more mainstream