Counter-Strike: Source Review

[Ferag]

I like this game. I don't actually own the game, but I play it at my friends house sometimes and it's quite fun. If I owned the game I think I would have a lot more fun than I did already. My two cents.

[JD]

CS: S was my first real online computer fps game and I still think it's the best, I have tried many other games such as "Call of Duty" but they just don't do it for me.

I must say that I have a lot of respect that you have the cahonas to say that the game sucks but I don't agree, not even close.
There is a reason that so many people play this game and I don't think that 90% of the players are pro's.

Just find any normal De_dust2 server and you will find many noobs to play along with.

Thanks for the review and I hope to see more

JD

[Ulgrim]

Its all about surf

[olemortenm]

I have to agree with the OP/Reviewer on this one.

There is, in fact, nothing special about CS:S. Then why do so many people play it? For the mods? I don't know, but from a professional point of view CS:S is outshined by the likes of COD4, Bioshock, and even Halo. It's not unique, like TF2. There's no FPS quite like TF2, but there are just so very many CSS's, and quite frankly the majority of them are better.

Sure, COD4 doesn't have the 20k+ servers, but there's enough to keep you playing non-stop. Same goes for pretty much every other "contender" to CS:S.

What I find most "boring", or shall we say what kills CS:S for me is that it gets old so very very fast. I'll use COD4 as an example:
You have an unique experience-based leveling system with perks and weapons along the way. This builds a more "personal" relationship with your "character" and prolongs the life-time of the game to so much more than it would have been normally.

I don't see how people can rate the replay-value of this game 10/10. Sure, there are mods, but if you don't know them you are pretty much thrown into a game with no clue whatsoever, and GL reading the chat for the rules.

Besides - should you have to rely on MODS on the first DAY of playing the game? Cause thats what any sane person would have to do.

"Yay, I played for a couple hours and now I've perfected my headshot. Now what...?" It's just... dull. And so very very bad compared to what's available.

On it's own, it's not a bad game. When compared to everything else, it doesn't even deserve this thread.

[Remahlól]

"Yay, I played for a couple hours and now I've perfected my headshot. What now...?"

made me lol. hard.

[Alkoholik]

This is a decent review. It falsifies many things about Counter Strike: Source, such as the fact that you can't attain any type of skill if you are not already a natural to First Person Shooters. This is simply not true. Personally, I was horrible when I first picked up any type of Counter Strike game, and over years of practice, I eventually got to the level in which I could play in a CAL-I league. Now, the level of skill is definitely different for everyone, but this seems to me a biased review. Many people enjoy games that are "fan-boy" only games, but how can you truly consider this a fan-boy only game? The sheer amount of people who play it is staggering. Also, you really cannot judge any games from a graphical standpoint that use the Source engine. It is about four years old now and technology doubles itself approximately every two years; so in the time that Counter-Strike: Source has been out, gaming and the technology that has driven gaming has increased to four times the power that older systems in 2004 needed to even run a high end game such as Battlefield 2 and Counter-Strike: Source. The graphical review is sort of obsolete. Anything that uses the Source engine is NOT high end. The Source engine has not been updated and there are really no games that take advantage of this engine. One could make the argument that Team Fortress 2 is graphics intensive, but really, it is not. The only reason that TF2 has any type of hardware limitation is if you max out antialiasing to 16xQSAA, but you cannot as this is a SOURCE GAME. Also, you cannot compare this game to Bioshock. It's like comparing Peggle to Rock Band. The games and genre are completely different. Counter-Strike: Source is a MULTIPLAYER tactical shooter involving stealth and tactics, and Bioshock is a First Person Action Adventure game that has NO multiplayer. The only thing that these two games have in common is the first person shooting part. However, if you do happen to want a tactical shooter that does NOT pride itself on its graphics, but on its game play and competitive aspects, please pick up Counter-Strike: Source.

-AlKoHoLiK!!

[N3MTR3X]

I prefer CS 1.6, because it just feels right with it.
One reason is that you can almost wallbang allover the maps, but on CS:S you can barely wallbang trough an barrel.
Another one is that there is more cheaters on CS 1.6 and thats the funny part that you can actually own the cheaters without cheat.
Also you can duckjump and im used to it, but you cant do that on CS:S.

[master_4cs]

is it me or a guy just said Bioshock (multyplayer i presume) is better than CS:S ? that made me lol ( not IRL ) anyways i started with CS1.6 and thought that was the best fps shooter ever but then i bought CS:S and i can easily say IT ROCK!!!


IMO, u are by far better at CS:S if u play CS1.6 first because 1.6 is much harder than CS:S


but that`s my oppinion



HAVE FUN with u`re HS:P

[OblivionMage]

It has great replay value in its balance and e-sport compatibility.