the craziest thing I ever saw........

[Zero]

Originally posted by General Ludd

It don't think it has it in terms of damage reduction, but it does have it in terms of certain weapons or usage of weapons being useless at long range. The ubi, for instance, is a laughable sniper weapon. It is good for short and quick bursts at close to point blank range, however.

WW2online is alot better in this regard, of course. The bullets even arc.

Ummmmmmmmmmmm Ubi is not good at close range. It loses to *edit ALL other primaries in CQB.

CS has crappy way of dealing with accuracy reduction. just about every gun can be used accurately. its sad.

another problem with CS. ****ed up tier weapons.

OMG I think I know more about CS in comp level play here.....

And you just explained why quakers are a degenerative influence on games.

that was a stupid comment. my point, quake has all u mention and more. CS, not even half of what u mention is significant factor in CS gameplay. beside im not a quaker. I'm agnostic and i dont like oatmeals. maybe if u knew how to play the game, you would have seen that I like catholic school girls.... maybe...

[Maquiladora]

you just explained why quake type game is better than CS

Better because only 2 weapons rule the game? As opposed to 5 primary guns, 3 secondary guns, and 3 types of grenade all used heavily is professional matches of CS?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Zero


Ummmmmmmmmmmm Ubi is not good at close range. It loses to *edit ALL other primaries in CQB.

It was when I played. Did they turn the short barreled sub machine gun into a sniper rifle in recent patches? If you can't kill anyone with it, it's probably because you don't know how to use it to take advantage of it's strengths and weaknesses.

CS has crappy way of dealing with accuracy reduction. just about every gun can be used accurately. its sad.

A single shot from any gun should be accurate. You should be able to snipe with a machine gun if you are making slow single shots. It's all about knowing how to use the weapon.


A machine gun can make a mediocre sniper weapon at long ranges, or it can lay down covering or suppresive fire, and at close ranges it can be a meat grinder. A rifle is a good sniper rifle or support weapon, and can be devestating at close ranges but is precarious and requires steady accuracy. An assault rifle can make a decent sniping or support weapon at long range, and at medium to close ranges it can be a meat grinder. ect...

that was a stupid comment. my point, quake has all u mention and more.

Sorry, but it doesn't seem likely to me that a game with nail guns, rocket launchers, and "BFG"s is trying to take a serious aproach to weapons.

[Zero]

Originally posted by General Ludd
It was when I played. Did they turn the short barreled sub machine gun into a sniper rifle in recent patches? If you can't kill anyone with it, it's probably because you don't know how to use it to take advantage of it's strengths and weaknesses.

im not saying i cant kill anyone with it. Im saying why use that piece of crap when everything else is better in every aspect. Unless you enjoy handicapping urself and playing around. There is no str and weakness. Its ALL weakness. Thats my point. BAD design.

I havent played CS in a long time. Im basing it all on when i used to play seriously.

A single shot from any gun should be accurate. You should be able to snipe with a machine gun if you are making slow single shots. It's all about knowing how to use the weapon.

Should be and would be accurate is nice but in gameplay point of view, it makes it dull.

The bottom line is every gun in the game is used to pretty much same role same situation except there varying degree of "this gun is better in every aspect". And if it isnt for prices there would be absolutely no point in getting any other weapon. Theres hardly any Pro VS Con when comparing weapons.

Oh wait.... yeah, even with prices people get the same weapon... cause mid class weapons suck. oh well.

oh yeah, "but it feels more realisitic" is a craptastic argument for gameplay issues. It might be an important game immersion factor but it means jack**** in gameplay.

Sorry, but it doesn't seem likely to me that a game with nail guns, rocket launchers, and "BFG"s is trying to take a serious aproach to weapons.

I dont think i need to explain to a n00b this. there enough ppl here who know Quake types enough to explain to you in n00b language OMG WTF LOL.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Maquiladora


Better because only 2 weapons rule the game? As opposed to 5 primary guns, 3 secondary guns, and 3 types of grenade all used heavily is professional matches of CS?

Ummm in Q3, every weapon has their purpose. And in UT, certainly every weapon has their role except maybe for the rifle which is in every way inferior to mg if u dont consider the grenade. thats a pretty damn good balance.

OOOOOOOOOOOh yeah soooooooooo nice that pros play all kinds of guns. IT MUST BE BALANCED! I play Yun in soulcalibur2 professionally. I won some LOCAL TOURNEYS with that piece of **** character. Theres a japanese guy who plays T-hawk religiously in ST. Oh yeah not to mention bunch of famous low tier tekken character players that show up in EVO annually and get mad props....

Doesnt mean **** cause pros use it...

[Maquiladora]

I havent played CS in a long time.

Good start sailor boy.

Im basing it all on when i used to play seriously.

Seriously as in with "friendly fire" enabled?

OOOOOOOOOOOh yeah soooooooooo nice that pros play all kinds of guns. IT MUST BE BALANCED!

...

Doesnt mean **** cause pros use it...

Id rather trust someone whos been playing CS to earn a living, than someone whos posting on a forum blowing off because they think they know it, despite admitting (in the same post) to not actually playing the game for "a long time".

[Traianvs]

You all suck. There's only 1 mighty and awesome weapon and that's the sweet shotgun in SoF1. Overpowered, unbalanced, gruesome and just the way we like it over there. It's not impossible to kill with the other weapons, but it's a lot harder. I don't think there's any game in which 'corner' reflexes are more important than in that game. If you want to train a bit, then that's the game!

Btw that movie is utterly gay. That kind of games.. that's beyond stupidity, it's simply not even worthy of my contempt because then I would at least admit that the game is intended to be played for fun

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Zero
im not saying i cant kill anyone with it. Im saying why use that piece of crap when everything else is better in every aspect.

An awp is better than an ubi at long ranges, but in close quarter skirmishes it's a clumsy weapon. A colt is better than an ubi for shoot outs and precise firing, but an ubi can get more shots out quicker.

I havent played CS in a long time. Im basing it all on when i used to play seriously.

Me too.

oh yeah, "but it feels more realisitic" is a craptastic argument for gameplay issues. It might be an important game immersion factor but it means jack**** in gameplay.

Bull. Gameplay and realism are not exclusive, and realism can be a key point to the gameplay. Take a game that is serious about realism, such as WW2online. The gameplay isn't about speeding around in a tank cappin' biznatches. It's about driving in a tank collumn with other people covering your flanks ('cause if you don't you're dead in an instant), with infantry crawling through the bushes and acting as spotters ('cause if they don't all the tanks will drive into a trap) and calling in support from bombers to take out the entrenched guns. ('cause you need combined arms to take out a fortified enemy)

Counter Strike is obviously not at this level of gameplay or realism, but it has more tactics and strategy than most FPS games do.

[Zero]

Originally posted by General Ludd

An awp is better than an ubi at long ranges, but in close quarter skirmishes it's a clumsy weapon. A colt is better than an ubi for shoot outs and precise firing, but an ubi can get more shots out quicker.

I know that recent versions of CS dont have crosshairs for AWP legally anymore, but what Im hearing from FPS players around me is that CQB AWPing is still a joke.

Insta kill, insta scan, accurate.... no matter how bad the ROF is, you cant balance that ****.

Bull. Gameplay and realism are not exclusive, and realism can be a key point to the gameplay. Take a game that is serious about realism, such as WW2online. The gameplay isn't about speeding around in a tank cappin' biznatches. It's about driving in a tank collumn with other people covering your flanks ('cause if you don't you're dead in an instant), with infantry crawling through the bushes and acting as spotters ('cause if they don't all the tanks will drive into a trap) and calling in support from bombers to take out the entrenched guns. ('cause you need combined arms to take out a fortified enemy)

In my FPS game, humanoid robots cannot speed around in a giant bunnies cappin' dildos with limbs. It's about driving in a tank collumn with other people covering your flanks ('cause if you don't you're dead in an instant), with bugs crawling through the marijuana shrubs and acting as spotters ('cause if they don't all the bunnies will drive into a trap) and calling in support from drunken seagulls to take out the 12 inch penises. ('cause you need combined arms to take out a fortified enemy)

It doesnt have to be realistic to achieve same kind of play. Gameplay and realism is exclusive.

IN FACT, its because some players cannot seperate the two and cling to "what should or what is logical" that makes them play worse when theyre thrown in a situation with rules that are foreign to them. Ever read ender's game where ender talks about how other kids think like there should be up and down in zero gravity battle.? yeah its kinda like that.

Counter Strike is obviously not at this level of gameplay or realism, but it has more tactics and strategy than most FPS games do.

Incorrect. EVERY tactic and strategy in CS can be applied to any FPS games. From there other FPS usually offer beyond that level of play because CS is in the bottom tier when it comes to strategy play in FPS. CS was a fun game to play but it seriously lacks in the strategy department.

[Zero]

i may sound like im bashing the **** out a realism and cs but FYI i enjoyed CS because it was quite realistic.... just that gameplay and realism just dont go together when discussing them.

that and props to CS for pioneering big penalty for death. I think CS was the first game to do so... wasnt it?

[Zero]

Awesome... EVO2K4 match for free at gamespot

Gamespor is illegally hosting a match agst Alex Valle (incredibly famous Cali player) VS Daigo (that kid in my avatar who pulled the crazy counter in the first vid). I say illegally cause all match footages are properties of evo2k and i smell a complaint coming soon because evo2k sells the match vids as DVDs.....

Its Super Street fighter 2 turbo.

http://www.gamespot.com/arcade/action/superstreetfighter210/media.html?gcst=sf2sturbo_evo04.asx

[Zero]

Originally posted by Trajanus

Btw that movie is utterly gay. That kind of games.. that's beyond stupidity, it's simply not even worthy of my contempt because then I would at least admit that the game is intended to be played for fun

Says the guy who plays SOF..... oh man that is just TOO funny.

[Zero]

Omg +5 for me!

Originally posted by Maquiladora
Good start sailor boy.

It dont mean **** unless there major revision. And AFAIK, there isnt.

Seriously as in with "friendly fire" enabled?

No **** duh.

Id rather trust someone whos been playing CS to earn a living, than someone whos posting on a forum blowing off because they think they know it, despite admitting (in the same post) to not actually playing the game for "a long time".

and have you said anything that shows you know your ****. obviously not. then STFU.

You honestly think just because someone stopped playing a certain sport or game means that they have no right to give their input on the game or sport? You think jordan doesnt know his **** about basketball cause he stopped playing? LOL

I'd be incredibly delighted if you gave me that attitude by owning my statement with what you know... or what your reference thinks he knows, instead of saying that absolutely meaningless "id rather trust this other guy" bull**** statement. You got no argument so STFU.

I'd rather trust some dumb forum guy who thinks hes a hotshot cause he's played hardcore with really good people therefore he thinks he knows his **** over some ****** who has no argument whatsoever.

[BustaMike]

Zero, what's up with that Evo2k4 thing? The guy is playing as Balrog, but is named Bison?

[BustaMike]

Oh, and for the record the two best multiplayer shooters ever are Wolfenstein - Enemy Territory and Splinter Cell: PT. Quake and CS were fun in the day, but they really just don't hold up compared to what's out now. And SoF sucks my ballz.