[QUOTE=Nail;205908]hiding behind a box is complex ?
people play CS because it’s simple, camp, snipe[/QUOTE]
people start playing css because its simple.
people continue to play css because its complex.
OMG NEW SMILEY RUN TAPIR RUN!!!
:stroggtapir: :armadillochase:
K you can call it complex but that’s just semantics, let’s differentiate between ‘complex’ (IE, ‘comp’ ‘pro’) and ‘elaborate’ (games that have lots of variation, like QW, or that RPG shooter I can’t remember the name of).
For me, complexity is given by the variety of choices I can make, there isn’t much choice in counterstrike, two maybe three routes and a bunch of weapons to choose from, walk or run, lead the attack or trail behind, shoot first or die. Yes, very “complex”.
ET on the other hand gives me much more to choose from. That’s more complex.
[QUOTE=DoubleDigit;206069]For me, complexity is given by the variety of choices I can make, there isn’t much choice in counterstrike, two maybe three routes and a bunch of weapons to choose from, walk or run, lead the attack or trail behind, shoot first or die. Yes, very “complex”.
ET on the other hand gives me much more to choose from. That’s more complex.[/QUOTE]
If you just play CS for fun deatmatch then it comes down to that basically, yes. You chose a weapon and then go somewhere and shoot someone. But with the normal CS mode you have to think about your decisions, otherwise you will just fail. And then if you have a team to communicate with it’s even more complex because you can make very complicated strategical decisions.
If you want to the the true complexity of CS you should watch a pro match though because only there you can see all the different aspects of the game. Or maybe rather read a strategical discussion because players make mistakes that are not planned in theory.
It’s like that with every game and you can always see that if you compare n00b level to pro level.
soccer: (n00b) bunch of guys running after a ball <-> (pro) tactical system, much theory involved, daily training
chess: (n00b) move pieces of wood on a board according to certain rules, senselessly trying to kick the other player’s pieces out <-> (pro) strategic masterminds battling in wise foresight and pulling of ingenious moves you won’t be able to comprehend if you didn’t study hours of theory
… and so on, you get the idea.
Now you can argue that ET has better preconditions for a complex game, which I understand but my point was that CS and Quake are played on such a high level that not many games will get to (I hope for BRINK to pull it off but I know it’s not likely).
Anyway the argument was about IS making a more complex game then without and without IS a shooter is brainless and I still don’t understand why.
Movement vs Firepower is already done in BRINK with body types, so you slow down (be a heavy) in order to have bigger guns. I don’t need any more slowing it down (by standing still and camping) for a gun to be useful.
[QUOTE=Ragoo;206075]Now you can argue that ET has better preconditions for a complex game, which I understand but my point was that CS and Quake are played on such a high level that not many games will get to (I hope for BRINK to pull it off but I know it’s not likely).
[/QUOTE]
Yes I am argueing that. How far it’s taken from there is up to the players themselves.
Well, 'pro’chess is as much strategic as it requires an efficient method to learn and reproduce previous games, and not just those played by you. I’d even get the strategic part out since at that level is just a matter of seeing patterns and using old matches to see the outcome of a game.
But then again, I’ve seen ‘pro’ CAMPERS at work. Pretty boring and I still stand by my idea of complex. Counter strike is not in this category.
Pretty soon you’ll start seeing nascar and the late Indy car more complex than Formula 1.
Obviously you have never seen CS pro matches and don’t understand that camping is part of efficient team tactics and nothing to be ashamed of. You have to camp in the right spot at the right time, otherwise you are useless.
We were talking about game complexity, and cs seems to be that complex that camping is a big part of competitive play and mostly the ONLY strategy available. And yet you guys seem to think that the complex part is to figure out which corner to camp at. Great.
I love these games where you do nothing but wait… and wait… and wait some more, maybe the enemy gets bored first and sticks his head into my crosshairs. Imagine the variety of it… Hmpf, or not.
[QUOTE=DoubleDigit;206202]
I love these games where you do nothing but wait… and wait… and wait some more, maybe the enemy gets bored first and sticks his head into my crosshairs. Imagine the variety of it… Hmpf, or not.[/QUOTE]
There is a time limit so you can’t just wait as Terrorist or you will lose. Also if Terrorist go bombspot A and you are camping spot B you have to rotate.
Rounds in CS in general can be pretty fast, 2, 3mins roughly. It’s when you’re down to the last 2 players and they REALLY want to win that it can get a little slow. On the flipside, i play QuakeLive Clan Arena a lot… and it can get just as tedious waiting on the last 2 on a fast paced game like that as well… regardless of the medium, it’s just comes down to who is playing and how.
Maybe CS’s simple rules just blend better with the various playing styles around the Internet?
Also, there might just be less things to mess up the game for the entire team. Think of running out of mines because your friedly but clueless engi buddy planted all around your initial spawn becaus some goon was spawnkilling him.
[QUOTE=Paul;201540]I want modtools 
And really really important is that cheat protection, even punkbuster is much better then VAC (which really suck lol) IW FAILED![/QUOTE]
Infinity Ward didn’t really fail. It’s just the game feels just like the First. The games was so overly hyped that people hoped it would be different. It’s still a good game, well Can’t say for the PC version I bought the X360 version. I’m waiting for Infinity Ward to change some things.
Rumour has it Infinity Ward’s next game won’t be a CoD title, is that enough change for you? 