Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
First Person Shooters (Games)

A Look at the CounterStrike Source Beta 262

mutewinter writes " has posted an article reviewing the recent CounterStrike Source beta. What is unusual about Source is that it keeps the same gameplay, including guns and maps, of the original CounterStrike and simply brings CounterStrike (which uses the original Half Life engine) up to date graphically. Imagine if Doom 3 had been just like the original Doom, but with a better engine. Many gamers look down on recycled content, but is this a problem for a 5 year old game that is still as popular as ever?" S!: We also had an alternative look at the Beta over on Slashdot Games a couple of days back.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A Look at the CounterStrike Source Beta

Comments Filter:
  • by mesmartyoudumb ( 471890 ) on Friday August 20, 2004 @05:17PM (#10027653) Homepage
    I work for a very larger server company and Counter strike is still the most popular game, At least 95% of our servers are CS.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 20, 2004 @05:20PM (#10027684)
    Gameplay is fine exactly how it is. Porting Counter Strike to the Source engine is just an added bonus.
  • Touchy subject (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Skandal ( 624659 ) on Friday August 20, 2004 @05:23PM (#10027713)
    I was actually amazed at how ugly and washed out the screenshots look considering what the engine is capable of. But I appreciate that hardcore CS2 players would revolt if the lighting conditions are changed too much since that would ultimately affect gameplay. But I guess there will soon be new maps which take better advantage of the new engine.
  • by FerretFrottage ( 714136 ) on Friday August 20, 2004 @05:25PM (#10027743)
    CS has had the longest retention of any of the FPS shooters for me (besides maybe Q2 and all of its assorted mods). I think I got hooked because I found a decent, mostly honest server where people would play as a team to meet the objective. You actually felt like you had a job to do and became more immersed in the game.

    Once it started to become more and more popular, a lot of the team play went away on "common" servers where it just became a frag fest. I'll definitely check out Source and see how it looks and feels. Hopefully most of the map exploits have been fixed better cheat prevention mentions have been added.
  • Re:Hitboxes (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Zed2K ( 313037 ) on Friday August 20, 2004 @05:34PM (#10027829)
    Are they even hitboxes anymore or are they what doom 3 has per pixel hits? Give you the ability to shoot between the legs and not hit anything or shoot over the shoulder, etc?

    You figure they could stop all the hitbox complaining by getting rid of them entirely. If you get hit you are really hit, if they miss then they really missed you.
  • Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lisandro ( 799651 ) on Friday August 20, 2004 @05:38PM (#10027867)
    iD took too much flak for Doom 3, i think. "Booh, it looks nice but all i do it's killing monsters in dark corridors!". Well DOH, it's Doom, for Christ's sake!

    I love it. I love the atmosphere, the level design, the graphics, the sound (underrated, it's excellent), and the nods to other games, including Half-Life, System Shock 2 and of course Doom itself. It managed to freak me out in a couple of parts (one with a ghost women voice truly perturbed me), and it's also funny in parts; check those PDAs as you go along.

    Best single player FPS experience in years. I downloaded it, but as soon it's published here (South America), i'll be first in line to buy it. Can't wait for the Linux binary either.
  • by CAIMLAS ( 41445 ) on Friday August 20, 2004 @05:39PM (#10027889) Homepage
    An update which costs money. Money which, up until this point, was not required to be exchanged in order to play.

    This is like giving away an OS, or charging for updates (and thus requiring the updates to keep the product functional). This is the same thing as the threat of MS charging for product updates (that is, aside from their yearly product release cycle).

    Sure, they might alow original CS to be played for a while until enough people transition over. How long will that last, though? Seems like the MS business model to me: get people hooked, and then charge for that 'addiction'.
  • by CAIMLAS ( 41445 ) on Friday August 20, 2004 @05:42PM (#10027915) Homepage
    I disagree.

    It's currently too balanced. It's like a symetrically perfect face - it looks weird and awkward.

    That's what CS is like now. Everything is so perfectly balanced, that there's no excitement to playing any longer. There's no challenge.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 20, 2004 @05:46PM (#10027944)
    Counterstrike players complain for months if you even change small weapon balancing issues. I've even people complain about the new graphics. it would be like if you changed the rules of football. Its the game they've learned to play and Its highly upsetting if you start messing with it. I wouldnt be suprised if Counterstrike Was almost identical 10 yeas from now. with maby the addition new weapons.
  • Doom (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Neurotoxic666 ( 679255 ) <neurotoxic666@hotm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Friday August 20, 2004 @05:53PM (#10028005) Homepage
    Imagine if Doom 3 had been just like the original Doom, but with a better engine.

    Honestly, that would've been awesome. I like Doom3, but something from the originals is missing, and it reminds me waaay to much of Half-Life rather than Doom. Actualy, is anybody aware of some group re-creating Doom and Doom2 on Doom3's engine?

    And more on-topic now, I think it's good they kept the same maps and guns from the original Counter Strike. For a beta version, it helps to see the differences between the old engine and the new one.
  • Argh. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Telastyn ( 206146 ) on Friday August 20, 2004 @06:02PM (#10028081)
    I for one will be trilled when Counterstrike dies. Given that everyone plays it to the exclusion of everything else [175,000 to 5,000 any given evening from statistics I've seen] the FPS genre has been CS or nothing for pretty much 4 years. And since I can barely stand the game...

  • Re:Hitboxes (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 20, 2004 @07:26PM (#10028796)
    Doom 3 actually has per-polygon hits, it's not at the point where it's per-pixel yet.

    What is the difference between per-polygon and per-pixel? What components are there to models other than polygons? If you hit a polygon of the player, how could you not have hit a pixel of the player? If you don't hit a polygon of the player, how could you have hit a pixel of the player?

  • Re:Hitboxes (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RotJ ( 771744 ) on Friday August 20, 2004 @08:17PM (#10029167) Journal
    I'm not sure how this would work in multiplayer though. Different character models have different girths. Wouldn't the skinny L337 Crew guy be harder to hit than Seal Team 6 with his thick padding? Not to mention custom models. Doom 3's multiplayer has just one single character model with different colors. That way, the per-polygon hit detection is equal for everyone. How are Doom 3 mod-makers going to handle hit detection though? Can they still jury-rig a default hitbox for different models? Or will they start giving different attributes and HP based on body shape and volume?
  • Why per-pixel? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ReKleSS ( 749007 ) <rekless&fastmail,fm> on Friday August 20, 2004 @08:47PM (#10029339)
    This may seem ignorant, but why would you use per-pixel over per-polygon? As I see it, the graphics are merely the visual represenation of the game state stored in memory. Per-pixel collision would be using that visual represenation as the basis for the game state, which seems to me like a weird way to do things, because then it would be influenced by stuff like resolution. Could someone please explain this?
  • by SkoZombie ( 562582 ) <> on Friday August 20, 2004 @09:56PM (#10029649) Homepage
    Yeah i was wondering how far down i'd have to read for someone to post something insightful about CS:S. If i still had mod points i'd mod you up!

    In addition:
    - The muzzle flash is vastly improved ... for instance when you're in smoke firing, a *lot* of the smoke lights up.
    - Flashbangs visual affects are VASTLY improved and give a real feeling of disorientation, with images overlayed and what looks like a 2 year old playing with the brightness and contrast controls.
    - The physics can not be understated! You can hide behind stuff, that might get shot away! Its not a static world, most stuff is dynamic! I played it for ages and ppl were *still* playing with the physics! A grenade explosion will send objects (weapons, bodies, small objects) flying ... it looks SWEET!
    - The dust looks awsome, try wasting a few clips into the ground and tell me you dont drool!

    On top of that ... its generally just more playable!
  • by balster neb ( 645686 ) on Friday August 20, 2004 @11:42PM (#10030199)
    GAMEPLAY is the real core of a game. The graphics are just icing.

    That's a popular myth. Agreed, great graphics is not substitute for great gameplay, but advances in graphics if used effectively can greatly change the nature of the game. Making a game look and feel more real is especially important for 3D shooters.

    Here are a few instances where improvements in lighting can have a significant effect on the way Counter-Strike would be played.

    -You see realistic muzzle flashes that light up the surroundings. The position of an enemy firing around the corner is given away.

    -You see shadows of other players. Many a player's position will be given away by the shadows they cast.

    -Dark or poorly lit areas have different strategic significance. For example, a camper's position is given away when momentarily illuminated by the flash of a firing weapon, or a distant frag grenade.

    Physics is another area, and the articles have already highlighted their importance.

"Never face facts; if you do, you'll never get up in the morning." -- Marlo Thomas