[QUOTE="Eggimannd"]
As for preferring CS.. There's a couple of reasons:
- I much prefer Keyboard and Mouse to controller. I just feel so much more in control of my actions. Nothing to do with Halo.
- Counter-Strike is the most balanced online FPS ever in my opinion. Everyone has access to the same level of weapons. You can choose your team. There's no ridiculous vehicles. No ridiculous perks or kill-streak rewards. No overpowered weapon.
- It's the most precise FPS ever in my opinion. No other FPS does EXACTLY what I intend my actions to do like CS does. It's just so precise.
- CS Dedicated servers DESTROY Halo's matchmaking. I've been playing a lot of Reach and those lag screens are starting to make me rage. So annoying.
- For now Reach needs a lot more maps (obviously I know it's going to get some). I'm getting sick and tired of playing the same maps over and over.
- Betrayals are stupid as hell. Some people just go right in front of my shots on purpose and I kill them by accident. Then I get booted and get no CR for the game.
Those are just a few of the reasons I find CS far superior.
Heirren
-I understand the Keyboard/Mouse comment. However, it is still a preference, and to be honest I think halo is actually suited better to the gamepad than the m/kb. Both games control so well that it is a matter of practice, really. I do love the m/kb setup though. I can't lie there.
Well CS is undoubtly more precise than Halo. Although I do feel Reach is more suited for a console.
-I agree CS is balanced, but at the same time I feel it is balanced because the play is one dimensional. Reach throws more variables into the mix, and remains just as balanced. The thing here is that these extra variables thrown into the game allow the player to play in even more ways.
Sure. CS has a one sided gameplay. Yet it's stil played 10 years after for that reason. The design is simple yet perfected.
Reach is definitely not as balanced as CS. Can't agree there. Some weapons are clearly more powerful than others and there's only a couple of them per map for all players to fight over. I also feel that a few maps, one of the team has a better spawn zone than the other. Aside from those, I guess it's well balanced.
-CS the most precise? Sure, I guess, but most good games lay down the rules and the player follows them. I've never even thought about this in regard to any good fps game--in fact, it is what makes them good games.
?? I don't get what you're trying to say with "games lay down the rules and the player follows them" and I don't see what relevance that has to do with preciness.
-I don't experience much lag with Reach. Here and there, but hardly anything that hinders the experience. If that is one of your reasons for thinking CS is the better game, I'm not sure what to say.
You don't think that saying "Dedicated servers are far superior to matchmaking (which I seriously think they are by FAR) is a valid point?
-REACH DOES NEED MORE MAPS!!!!
Yes it does!
-I think you may be over exaggerating the betrayal aspect, but you indirectly bring up a good point. I've experienced some jerks in Reach. Sometimes I'll take a vehicle that apparently one of the other players OWN, and they will proceed to hunt me down. Annoying.
This one was more of a minor complaint than a big one. It still does get annoying though.
But still, as far as the actual gameplay? There's just more to Halo Reach than CS
More doesn't necessarily mean better. Like I said before, CS gameplay is simple yet perfected and that is why so many people have continued playing it after all these years. It doesn't need all the gametypes Halo has and it definitely wouldn't benefit from vehicles or perks/kill streak rewards.
People adore and are hooked on CS for what it is. One if not THE most precise and balanced online FPS there is with a perfected simplified gameplay.
Log in to comment