On the one hand, great to see Total War: Warhammer, XCOM 2, Civilization VI, Doom, Rise of the Tomb Raider and Stellaris doing well. On the other... ...No Man's Sky.
Hot damn does PC got some jams. Civ 6, Xcom 2, DOTA 2, Dark SOuls 3, Stellaris, Rise of Tomb Raider, Stardew Valley, ARK, TF 2, Europa IV, etc. Too much greatness!
Admittedly I already get my multiplayer fix with other games but it's still surprising to see The Division sold so well on PC. I didn't expect it had done so well!
Yeah it kind of is, the only reason CSGO is alive aside from the stupid ass skin market is because people with their friends forced themselves to play the game.
From this we can surmise that modern pc gamers prefer console ports.
Considering most of those games were actively in development at the same time as the console versions, you can't really call them ports. Besides, the consoles' x86 architecture essentially makes them closed platform PCs with limited capabilities. Most top tier developers are multi-platform and it is easy for them to release on PC with the similar architectures. That is why it is rare to see non first party exclusives on consoles these days. PC is the best way to play games without having them watered down too much like on consoles.
I've said this before, let's not pretend PC gamers have higher standards, because of muh masterrace. They buy a shitload of garbage. I'm part of that.
It's not that they are garbage, it's just they're not something the [incorrect] PC gamer stereotype would buy. Idunno, sometimes I think that among all the gamers out there, maybe PC gamers are thought of as the hipster crowd? I Definitely do my part and buy a lot of indie games and talk about how awesome they are and how much the "AAA" is "shit", but at the same time I love the shit :D
Watch Dogs 2 is fun, dammit!
@uninspiredcup said:
From this we can surmise that modern pc gamers prefer console ports.
Joke? Most of those are multiplatform titles; the only port there is Dark Souls 3 and, my god, what a poor one. I just bought it and loaded it up, they couldn't even be bothered to put keyboard mappings in there; I'm doing the introduction and they're like "Right trigger for ________" and I'm like "AHHHHHHHH NO RIGHT TRIGGER!!! Enter? Alt?!!!!"
Going to try it on my Steam Link later with Steam Controller, that should make it good.
Someone got lost on their way to the PC forum again. Oh wait I forgot, the PC forum is a morgue which is why PC ONLY gamers only EVER post to console gamers who don't give a flying **** what garbage people are buying on Steam.
I think I'm literally the only PC gamer on this forum who does not have this desperate need to seek attention or praise from console gamers who give not a solitary shit about PC. Maybe it's because I also play on console?
Maybe it's a 'single platform' disease? Hey, hey, hey, look at ME!
Someone got lost on their way to the PC forum again. Oh wait I forgot, the PC forum is a morgue which is why PC ONLY gamers only EVER post to console gamers who don't give a flying **** what garbage people are buying on Steam.
I think I'm literally the only PC gamer on this forum who does not have this desperate need to seek attention or praise from console gamers who give not a solitary shit about PC. Maybe it's because I also play on console?
Maybe it's a 'single platform' disease? Hey, hey, hey, look at ME!
No, f*** off.
Strange that you don't extend this same ideology you hold for yourself to me...
Someone got lost on their way to the PC forum again. Oh wait I forgot, the PC forum is a morgue which is why PC ONLY gamers only EVER post to console gamers who don't give a flying **** what garbage people are buying on Steam.
I think I'm literally the only PC gamer on this forum who does not have this desperate need to seek attention or praise from console gamers who give not a solitary shit about PC. Maybe it's because I also play on console?
Maybe it's a 'single platform' disease? Hey, hey, hey, look at ME!
No, f*** off.
Strange that you don't extend this same ideology you hold for yourself to me...
I honestly don't know what to make of you anymore. You have a high end PC but recently claimed what you're most looking forward to is Scorpio which is basically a cheap PC.
You're not that stupid to buy something just for the branding on the case so I just don't know what your agenda is anymore outside of promoting MS and yes I honestly believe they pay you for it I can think of no other reason you would do this.
From this we can surmise that modern pc gamers prefer console ports.
Considering most of those games were actively in development at the same time as the console versions, you can't really call them ports. Besides, the consoles' x86 architecture essentially makes them closed platform PCs with limited capabilities. Most top tier developers are multi-platform and it is easy for them to release on PC with the similar architectures. That is why it is rare to see non first party exclusives on consoles these days. PC is the best way to play games without having them watered down too much like on consoles.
We can make excuses here, but ultimately, the proof is right there. Pc gamers prefer console ports, no if's and or but's about it, Valve themselves released the data.
Basically £500 for a GTX to run a console focused game that looks about 8% better.
From this we can surmise that modern pc gamers prefer console ports.
Considering most of those games were actively in development at the same time as the console versions, you can't really call them ports. Besides, the consoles' x86 architecture essentially makes them closed platform PCs with limited capabilities. Most top tier developers are multi-platform and it is easy for them to release on PC with the similar architectures. That is why it is rare to see non first party exclusives on consoles these days. PC is the best way to play games without having them watered down too much like on consoles.
We can make excuses here, but ultimately, the proof is right there. Pc gamers prefer console ports, no if's and or but's about it, Valve themselves released the data.
Being (what we would define) as a proper pc gamer, I mainly play older titles that were developed with the platform in mind. No interest in some game ported over, even if it does take advantage of some.. Nvidia gimmick or whatever.
Basically £500 for a GTX to run a console focused game that looks about 8% better.
That money could have went to Unicef.
Just because games are not super complex and have a thousand hotkeys, doesn't mean they are console ports. I use whatever input device is best for each game. I have been using controllers on PC since the Gravis gamepad. So, don't give me that proper PC gamer shit. I use the best tool for the job. PC gives you that luxury. Consoles do not.
Honestly, it just sounds like you are poor and can't afford good hardware. I sense butthurt and bitterness. I enjoy the benefits of my hardware everyday. 1440p/144hz Ultra is amazing and demanding.
Someone got lost on their way to the PC forum again. Oh wait I forgot, the PC forum is a morgue which is why PC ONLY gamers only EVER post to console gamers who don't give a flying **** what garbage people are buying on Steam.
I think I'm literally the only PC gamer on this forum who does not have this desperate need to seek attention or praise from console gamers who give not a solitary shit about PC. Maybe it's because I also play on console?
Maybe it's a 'single platform' disease? Hey, hey, hey, look at ME!
No, f*** off.
Strange that you don't extend this same ideology you hold for yourself to me...
I honestly don't know what to make of you anymore. You have a high end PC but recently claimed what you're most looking forward to is Scorpio which is basically a cheap PC.
You're not that stupid to buy something just for the branding on the case so I just don't know what your agenda is anymore outside of promoting MS and yes I honestly believe they pay you for it I can think of no other reason you would do this.
Because I still really enjoy console gaming and PC gaming while my favorite gaming medium is a constant, there's nothing to ever get excited about. New console launches and strides in that medium are more meaningful to me, it's more exciting to see what can be done with a few hundred dollar box than something I mix and match parts into every several years.
More great choices than shit, so I guess that helps alleviate things...
@blueinheaven said:
Someone got lost on their way to the PC forum again. Oh wait I forgot, the PC forum is a morgue which is why PC ONLY gamers only EVER post to console gamers who don't give a flying **** what garbage people are buying on Steam.
I think I'm literally the only PC gamer on this forum who does not have this desperate need to seek attention or praise from console gamers who give not a solitary shit about PC. Maybe it's because I also play on console?
Maybe it's a 'single platform' disease? Hey, hey, hey, look at ME!
No, f*** off.
Nowadays i'm primarily PC. Let's get rid of this ego, and stop thinking this forum rotates around your pecker.
Most of this shit is lighthearted... Hell, even the term "Master Race" evolved from a largely derogatory video for PC gamers. They just made it their own.
Considering most of those games were actively in development at the same time as the console versions, you can't really call them ports. Besides, the consoles' x86 architecture essentially makes them closed platform PCs with limited capabilities. Most top tier developers are multi-platform and it is easy for them to release on PC with the similar architectures. That is why it is rare to see non first party exclusives on consoles these days. PC is the best way to play games without having them watered down too much like on consoles.
We can make excuses here, but ultimately, the proof is right there. Pc gamers prefer console ports, no if's and or but's about it, Valve themselves released the data.
Being (what we would define) as a proper pc gamer, I mainly play older titles that were developed with the platform in mind. No interest in some game ported over, even if it does take advantage of some.. Nvidia gimmick or whatever.
Basically £500 for a GTX to run a console focused game that looks about 8% better.
That money could have went to Unicef.
Just because games are not super complex and have a thousand hotkeys, doesn't mean they are console ports. I use whatever input device is best for each game. I have been using controllers on PC since the Gravis gamepad. So, don't give me that proper PC gamer shit. I use the best tool for the job.
Honestly, it just sounds like you are poor and can't afford good hardware. I enjoy the benefits of my hardware everyday. 1440p/144hz Ultra is amazing and demanding.
While it's true I'm very poor and have almost no money, it's still ultimately a fairly cheap way to dismiss a fact.
You can go on about your hardware specs until the end of time, your 4k's, your ultra amazing Megazord, your 1440p.
It's very much like reading a book aimed at women (e.g. a bodice ripper) that has a very impressive cover and clamming the impressive cover makes it not a bodice ripper, even though the cover clearly depicts a man and a women in the heat of the moment. It's aimed firmly at bored housewife thinking about having an affair.
If you're a guy (and presumably you are) you'd rather read something like Alpha Bravo Two Zero - regardless of how nice that cover looks, it's not aimed at you.
Likewise, a console game is aimed at console gamers, regardless of how jazzed up it looks. You're basically a console gamer masquerading as a pc gamer, you have the rig, but not quite the mentality. Diet coke, essentially.
I am a gamer. I care about quality and playing games the best way possible. I have always played on PC and console. I don't limit myself to one platform and then miss out on exclusives. That is just stupid. That being said, PC is my primary platform and has always been my platform of choice. Consoles are redundant and I only use them for exclusives. I would not buy them if all games were on PC.
Yeah it kind of is, the only reason CSGO is alive aside from the stupid ass skin market is because people with their friends forced themselves to play the game.
Something tells me it's more to do with Counter Strike being one of the best first person shooters available.
Yeah it kind of is, the only reason CSGO is alive aside from the stupid ass skin market is because people with their friends forced themselves to play the game.
Something tells me it's more to do with Counter Strike being one of the best first person shooters available.
Reality says otherwise, before skins were added to this piece of crap game no one cared about it, for over two years it was as dead as Counter-Strike: Source...
The only reason this game made its way off of life support was because of perpetual 66% price slashes, skins being added and competitive features, as a game it was and still is a mechanical disaster that the Counter-Strike community soundly rejected.
You're basically a console gamer masquerading as a pc gamer, you have the rig, but not quite the mentality.
I'll own up to this.
When it comes down to it I really just like a good game. I play stuff that is traditionally geared towards PC sometimes. I like a good CRPG. I enjoy the occasional strategy game. When it comes to FPS games, I usually only enjoy the ones that are targeted at the PC crowd.
But the vast majority of games that I play and enjoy are traditionally "console experiences". Yes, probably 80+% of my time spent gaming on PC is spent playing what you would call console games, but in better form. I like being able to play those games without suffering the shitty performance that comes with console gaming. Having better graphics, choice of controls, mods, etc.. are just a welcome bonus.
I've been primarily a console gamer for most of my life, not gonna deny it. I just use a PC to enjoy those titles to their full potential. And being able to play a "true" PC game when the mood arises is another excellent bonus as well.
I am glad to see Total War: Warhammer and XCOM 2 up there, as well as Civ 6. Strategy games are alive and well.
@dynamitecop said:
@GarGx1 said:
Something tells me it's more to do with Counter Strike being one of the best first person shooters available.
Reality says otherwise, before skins were added to this piece of crap game no one cared about it, for over two years it was as dead as Counter-Strike: Source...
The only reason this game made its way off of life support was because of perpetual 66% price slashes, skins being added and competitive features, as a game it was and still is a mechanical disaster that the Counter-Strike community soundly rejected.
That is nice and all, but correlation does not mean causation.
Sure, the game made its way off "life support" because of those things, but those price slashes wouldnt explain why it continued to rise aftewards.
What all these features and additions made was to return interest to the product. Which in turn lead to publicity. With this newfound publicity, the game got more and more Attention, which can lead to Interest, leading to further Desire and eventually Action. As a game gets more popular, word of it spreads around more easily. Be it via streamers on twitch or just friend to friend. But this cycle never really gets started if the product is mediocre to begin with. If CS GO never had that quality to begin with, the cycle it started would never have happened. What we would have seen would have been a spike, not a continous rise. All it needed was to reach out to a new audience, and both of those updates allowed the game to do just that.
We have seen this pattern multiple times before. Believe it or not, but Minecraft was actually a very small game for a long time. It wasnt until the TF2 team started praising it on one of their blogs till the game really hit the mainstream. And even then, that was not immediate. The game only truly took off, after a free weekend.
Edit: tl;dr: The game didnt work with the old audience. But after gaining publicity with a new one. It exploded and has just kept growing. While it may not appeal to you. it doesnt change the fact that hte game is popular because primarily because of its quality. It is arguably one of the best in its category of multiplayer shooters, if not the best.
Something tells me it's more to do with Counter Strike being one of the best first person shooters available.
Reality says otherwise, before skins were added to this piece of crap game no one cared about it, for over two years it was as dead as Counter-Strike: Source...
The only reason this game made its way off of life support was because of perpetual 66% price slashes, skins being added and competitive features, as a game it was and still is a mechanical disaster that the Counter-Strike community soundly rejected.
That is nice and all, but correlation does not mean causation.
Sure, the game made its way off "life support" because of those things, but those price slashes wouldnt explain why it continued to rise aftewards.
What all these features and additions made was to return interest to the product. Which in turn lead to publicity. With this newfound publicity, the game got more and more Attention, which can lead to Interest, leading to further Desire and eventually Action. As a game gets more popular, word of it spreads around more easily. Be it via streamers on twitch or just friend to friend. But this cycle never really gets started if the product is mediocre to begin with. If CS GO never had that quality to begin with, the cycle it started would never have happened. What we would have seen would have been a spike, not a continous rise. All it needed was to reach out to a new audience, and both of those updates allowed the game to do just that.
We have seen this pattern multiple times before. Believe it or not, but Minecraft was actually a very small game for a long time. It wasnt until the TF2 team started praising it on one of their blogs till the game really hit the mainstream. And even then, that was not immediate. The game only truly took off, after a free weekend.
My point was the Counter-Strike community rejected it, for years, the core player demographic. These numbers of people who you see playing this game now are not the Counter-Strike community, they are feature band-wagoners that got indoctrinated into the game by coerced means. Yes the top end Professional community are people from previous CS games but they simply followed the money and followed the competition, and both for 1.6 and Source were forcibly taken and shut down, they either moved to this or retired.
In terms of living up to what came previously in terms of mechanics this game shit the bed, that is why for two years it sat in total obscurity with nothing happening, the game was not good enough to stand on the merits of its gameplay. So what did Valve do? They introduced a gimmick, and this gimmick has perpetually spiraled the community to the numbers that currently exist. Global Offensive isn't a success on the merits of being a logically or mechanically sound successor in the Counter-Strike franchise, it's a success driven by gimmicks and features, both of which could be added to Counter-Strike 1.6 or Source.
Yeah it kind of is, the only reason CSGO is alive aside from the stupid ass skin market is because people with their friends forced themselves to play the game.
I think you're being a bit harsh there. It maybe the worst Counterstrike game, but that says more about how good 1.6 and Soure are in comparison. GO is still very much a good video game, because it's core is still a strong video game. Shitty skin stuff n gambling not withstanding. The Division was out right boring.
From this we can surmise that modern pc gamers prefer console ports.
most of those were developed with pc in mind and best played on pc ( rocket league, witcher 3 etc ) or are only on pc Dota 2 , civilization CS GO ( unless you somehow think CS on consoles is anywhere near pc ), and the rest games are great games on pc console ports or no ( with the exception of no mans sky and to a degree fallout 4 ).
But of course we all know this is a post to talk about how bad the Witcher 3 is again aint it ?
Yeah it kind of is, the only reason CSGO is alive aside from the stupid ass skin market is because people with their friends forced themselves to play the game.
Something tells me it's more to do with Counter Strike being one of the best first person shooters available.
Reality says otherwise, before skins were added to this piece of crap game no one cared about it, for over two years it was as dead as Counter-Strike: Source...
The only reason this game made its way off of life support was because of perpetual 66% price slashes, skins being added and competitive features, as a game it was and still is a mechanical disaster that the Counter-Strike community soundly rejected.
Yet it is still one of the best FPS games out today and far better than the vast majority of CoD clones.
No one is forced to play a video game (Chinese gold farming slaves aside)
From this we can surmise that modern pc gamers prefer console ports.
most of those were developed with pc in mind and best played on pc ( rocket league, witcher 3 etc ) or are only on pc Dota 2 , civilization CS GO ( unless you somehow think CS on consoles is anywhere near pc ), and the rest games are great games on pc console ports or no ( with the exception of no mans sky and to a degree fallout 4 ).
But of course we all know this is a post to talk about how bad the Witcher 3 is again aint it ?
CounterStrike: Go was primarily built for a console gaming audience. It booming far more pc shows just how much pc gamers are indifferent to design mentality, regardless of all their huffing and puffing.
Of those games, 12, 8 are console specific built titles - fairly disgusting
The Witcher 3 is indeed an interesting case, it has never been good. Consistently bad design on the most basic level (namely controls), more interested in attempting to be grand, epic and mature rather than concentrating on gameplay fundamentals, we have a game clearly built for consoles, from a once pc developer jumping ship, much like Crytek - huge sellouts.
But pc gamers so desperate for validation, so willing to be deluded, somehow, inexplicably accepted it as the mightiest pc RPG of all time, even though (ironically) titles like Skyrim and Oblivion, where much better ports and generally speaking, better games, mainly through their extensive modding support.
@uninspiredcup: cs go on console was inferior to the pc anyone who has play both would say the samething. Knowing this is coming from you no one takes you serious anyways
@uninspiredcup: cs go on console was inferior to the pc anyone who has play both would say the samething. Knowing this is coming from you no one takes you serious anyways
Every console version is inferior. It's still a console game. It's like painting pretty stripes on a pony and claiming it's a Zebra, ridiculous. Taken seriously or not is largely irrelevant, Valve themselves, pc gamers supposed ideological gods, made a statement, not a debate, it's up there, we can all see it.
Real pc gamers, the ones who play pc games, are practically non existent. Even Ghost4Ever has resorted to boasting about Doom and Prey 2.
Something tells me it's more to do with Counter Strike being one of the best first person shooters available.
Reality says otherwise, before skins were added to this piece of crap game no one cared about it, for over two years it was as dead as Counter-Strike: Source...
The only reason this game made its way off of life support was because of perpetual 66% price slashes, skins being added and competitive features, as a game it was and still is a mechanical disaster that the Counter-Strike community soundly rejected.
That is nice and all, but correlation does not mean causation.
Sure, the game made its way off "life support" because of those things, but those price slashes wouldnt explain why it continued to rise aftewards.
What all these features and additions made was to return interest to the product. Which in turn lead to publicity. With this newfound publicity, the game got more and more Attention, which can lead to Interest, leading to further Desire and eventually Action. As a game gets more popular, word of it spreads around more easily. Be it via streamers on twitch or just friend to friend. But this cycle never really gets started if the product is mediocre to begin with. If CS GO never had that quality to begin with, the cycle it started would never have happened. What we would have seen would have been a spike, not a continous rise. All it needed was to reach out to a new audience, and both of those updates allowed the game to do just that.
We have seen this pattern multiple times before. Believe it or not, but Minecraft was actually a very small game for a long time. It wasnt until the TF2 team started praising it on one of their blogs till the game really hit the mainstream. And even then, that was not immediate. The game only truly took off, after a free weekend.
My point was the Counter-Strike community rejected it, for years, the core player demographic. These numbers of people who you see playing this game now are not the Counter-Strike community, they are feature band-wagoners that got indoctrinated into the game by coerced means. Yes the top end Professional community are people from previous CS games but they simply followed the money and followed the competition, and both for 1.6 and Source were forcibly taken and shut down, they either moved to this or retired.
In terms of living up to what came previously in terms of mechanics this game shit the bed, that is why for two years it sat in total obscurity with nothing happening, the game was not good enough to stand on the merits of its gameplay. So what did Valve do? They introduced a gimmick, and this gimmick has perpetually spiraled the community to the numbers that currently exist. Global Offensive isn't a success on the merits of being a logically or mechanically sound successor in the Counter-Strike franchise, it's a success driven by gimmicks and features, both of which could be added to Counter-Strike 1.6 or Source.
What is more important than anything with CSGO is not how it stood up to its predecessors. But rather how it stood up to its direct competition. CSGO being the weakest link in the franchise means little when it still plays better than the other shooters the people were playing at the time.
Sure, the counterstrike community rejected it. And for a good reason. But that means little for the masses out there that CSGO attracted. Even if it didnt hold up to 1.6 it still plays better than Call of Duty, Battlefield or those popular f2p shooters you find on the net. The fact that it was still better than its competition, made people transition from those games to CS.
What is more important than anything with CSGO is not how it stood up to its predecessors. But rather how it stood up to its direct competition. CSGO being the weakest link in the franchise means little when it still plays better than the other shooters the people were playing at the time.
Sure, the counterstrike community rejected it. And for a good reason. But that means little for the masses out there that CSGO attracted. Even if it didnt hold up to 1.6 it still plays better than Call of Duty, Battlefield or those popular f2p shooters you find on the net. The fact that it was still better than its competition, made people transition from those games to CS.
Trust me I get that, it's just infuriating that this version of the game, the most mechanically backwards version is the one which took off and grabbed mainstream attention... Not any of the other three superior game variants that had existed for the 13 years prior to CS:GO...
It's like Steam itself, I've been a Steam user since the 1.6 client beta in 2002 and on WON before it which is the network that predates Steam. For Steam to get from us low digit users for example my Steam ID is 0:1:7699 to 0:0:40000000 it took 8 years, it took 8 years to get approximately 80 million accounts because there are 0:1 and 0:0 variants of almost every account number, so for example there is a 0:1:40000000 and a 0:0:40000000 account. To get from 0:0:40000000 to 0:0:100000000 it took only 3 years, and to get from 0:0:100000000 to what is now 0:0:200000000 it only took slightly over 2 years.
So to get to 80 million from 0 it took 8 years, and to get from 80 million to 200 million it took only 3 years, and to get from 200 million to 400 million it only took slightly over 2 years. So there's been this exponential growth on the network that I can't explain, just as I can't explain for CS:GO. These games have always been a superior option to CoD, Battlefield etc, so I'm not understanding why like Steam is now, that CS:GO actually took off and the other games didn't to this level, where is all this growth coming from is my question.
@dynamitecop: CS is to PC as what COD is to consoles. They are both pop culture phenomenons that took off and got out of control. Neither is that great IMO. Activision's marketing machine really made COD what it is and Steam's push of CS has made it what it is. BF is way better than both of them, but it is too complicated for most casuals who just want to quickly jump in and shoot others. It also isn't as Esports friendly.
What is more important than anything with CSGO is not how it stood up to its predecessors. But rather how it stood up to its direct competition. CSGO being the weakest link in the franchise means little when it still plays better than the other shooters the people were playing at the time.
Sure, the counterstrike community rejected it. And for a good reason. But that means little for the masses out there that CSGO attracted. Even if it didnt hold up to 1.6 it still plays better than Call of Duty, Battlefield or those popular f2p shooters you find on the net. The fact that it was still better than its competition, made people transition from those games to CS.
Trust me I get that, it's just infuriating that this version of the game, the most mechanically backwards version is the one which took off and grabbed mainstream attention... Not any of the other three superior game variants that had existed for the 13 years prior to CS:GO...
Probably just cause its more streamlined with comp play and game modes for the people who werent into it before
Reality says otherwise, before skins were added to this piece of crap game no one cared about it, for over two years it was as dead as Counter-Strike: Source...
The only reason this game made its way off of life support was because of perpetual 66% price slashes, skins being added and competitive features, as a game it was and still is a mechanical disaster that the Counter-Strike community soundly rejected.
Yeah, let's go full retard and pretend that bugfixes, hitreg and balance patches had nothing to do with this game coming out on top.
I was one of the people that dropped the game back in beta because of how broken it was.
I'm also one of the people that came back when they fixed most of the shit.
Reality says otherwise, before skins were added to this piece of crap game no one cared about it, for over two years it was as dead as Counter-Strike: Source...
The only reason this game made its way off of life support was because of perpetual 66% price slashes, skins being added and competitive features, as a game it was and still is a mechanical disaster that the Counter-Strike community soundly rejected.
Yeah, let's go full retard and pretend that bugfixes, hitreg and balance patches had nothing to do with this game coming out on top.
I was one of the people that dropped the game back in beta because of how broken it was.
I'm also one of the people that came back when they fixed most of the shit.
There is no finer example of polishing a turd than CS:GO, there's only so much improvement you can make to a fundamentally flawed foundation and core of a game.
Even with the improvements they have made which I will acknowledge, the netcode is still complete garbage with severe lag compensation and overbearing interpolation to 'smooth out' the experience for high latency and inconsistent connections. It doesn't matter how much you improve shot registration when peekers advantage is as bad as ever, shots, dinks and kills don't register for a quantifiable and perceivable amount of time after they've been executed and you can still get killed after having rounded a corner and being completely out of view for at least five feet.
The seed based recoil model they added to this game which did away with the vector based model in 1.6, CZ and Source is still a complete mess that puts you at the mercy of spread. You can learn the seed but due to completely random spread your shot can still variate within a set parameter that could land it dead center or off in any 360 degree direction, this is particularly troublesome when trying to spray.
Then there is the directional audio, it's still garbage and even stereo sound on an 18 year old 1.6 it's outclassed by leaps and bounds.
The player to world scaling, still fucked as they went with Source based environmental scaling in a game that plays more like 1.6, simply put the maps are too small for the scale of the player and pace of the game.
Color contrasting and color palette, still horrible with grey and brown hues to nearly everything which makes player and environmental backdrops blend rather than contrast, this was compounded further and more problematic by the introduction of fog.
They still have forced post processing which nets a haze and blur over the entire image that ruins image quality and fine details at distance.
The movement is still bad and like controlling a tank with rubber tracks on an ice rink.
The point is, the game at its core should have been scrapped, they're only 'bettering' something that has a very low ceiling for quality and logically sound mechanics in the first place. They've inhibited the potential of the game by adopting a flawed base created by Hidden Path Entertainment and building from it rather than creating something better and building from that.
It might be a comparatively good game in relation to other shooters available, but it's a comparatively poor game when stacked up to its predecessors. That is why the game is "coming out on top", not because it's a good Counter-Strike, because it's simply better shit in the pile of other shit available.
Log in to comment