Talk:Counter-Strike: Source

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	CVG Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid	This article is on a subject of Mid priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
CVG To-do: edit  Gaming Collaboration of the week: Kirby Super Star Expand: New CVG Articles, Normality, Pac-Man World 2, Operation Flashpoint: Elite, Call of Juarez, Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar, Ford Street Racing, Betrayal at Krondor CVG Peer Review: List of F-Zero titles, Kya: Dark Lineage, Wii Remote, Dynasty Warriors 4, The Sims 2, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Kirby's Dream Land, Electronic sports, Fire Emblem, Dante (Devil May Cry), The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Final Fantasy XII, Sonic the Hedgehog (16-bit), Classes in World of Warcraft Cleanup: Age of Mythology, Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, Betrayal at Krondor, List of Nintendo trademarks Merge: Deletions / Essential articles / Magazines Assess and Prioritise articles (Log)

Contents 1 Merge? 2 Related Links 3 NPOV 4 Clan Promotion 5 Criticism 6 Clean Up Please? 7 Equipment 8 Cleaned up 9 System Requirements 10 Dynamic Weapon Pricing 11 Pop Culture 12 Incorrect claim in article 13 Weapons? 14 Missing parts of Customization? 15 "Clan gaming" 16 lasercage and office screenshots 17 Iceworld 18 This article has 1 source 19 Should These Be Mentioned? 20 Customization 21 LAN center play 22 Ranking 23 Helmet Comment

[edit] Merge?

Might want to merge this into Counter-Strike. CS:S is basically just the advancements of the Source engine combined with gameplay that is nearly identical to 1.6. If no one objects, I'll merge them in a few days. --Mrwojo 17:31, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I added what's in this stubbly article to the more thorough info at Source engine and Counter-Strike. Making it a redirect. --Mrwojo 20:29, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Seeing as the CS:S article has grown, i've given it it's own page, header, info and notable releases. it's too big to stay part of CS. Any edits would be much appreciated due to poor programming skills! :)

I think it deserves its own page. Leave it as it currently is.--R6MaY89 01:12, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with R6MaU89, there are way to much differences between CS:Source and CS 1.6. If we are going to merge those two, the content can become confusing. --Your_Neighbour 18:12, 19 Oct 2006 (GMT+10:00)

Indeed, Counter-Strike: Source and Counter-Strike 1.6 are two different games with two seperate information to be said about. Mehicdino 07:14, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Related Links

I removed a few links that had no business being there. For example, weapons in FPSs and Cheating in FPSs are not relevant if there's a CS Weapons page, etc. Also, the one shown below doesn't have an article. Why bother linking to a non-existant article?

• Counter-Strike language

--R6MaY89 01:15, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I also removed several links that were questionable at best. A womens CSS clan site, a general gaming site, a utility/downloads site and a few more that weren't related to CS directly. --Abbynormal1 00:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

I've started doing a few edits so it doesn't look like that there's a schizophrenia problem with "it's better" and "it's suckier" back and forth at various points in the article. Wikipedia articles aren't about whether something is really good or not. They are about background (history) and other specific information that will inform the readers. Most of the article doesn't have this problem but it pops up enough to confuse readers as to what is fact and what is not. (Example, at one point in the article it was stated as fact that the physics were improved, in another that they were worse)

Also, criticism is fine in the criticism section but it shouldn't be "just sucks because" types of statements. Most people who use Wikipedia as a reference expect specific statements and good linked sources to look at.

Nice one. I'm glad someone's cleaned this up.

Monchberter GMT 0800 03/1/2006

Whats with this statement in History "It is a fun game for the young ages despite the M rating." Sounds like a stupid thing to have in there! Insaneassassin247 20:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, hadn't noticed that amid all the vandalism. I've removed it. --Habap 21:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clan Promotion

I'm sure the Necrosis clan is really super, but it isn't any different from the dozens of others out there, and hardly warrants personal linking, a mention in the clan description page (complete with tags) and to serve as an example.

Wikipedia =/= A tool for self promotion.

[edit] Criticism

I'm interested in seeing more in-depth criticism. Not too detailed, but the current explanation for why CS:S isn't widely accepted by classic Counter Strike players seems a little vague. Mike Flynn 02:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I have seen more people in Source than 1.6. That critisims looks like need an Update. I will put a thread in Gamespot, because I see in X-Fire more people in CSS.

This was in the Criticism section:

"Being able to shoot the opposing player in the head region will result in a one-hit-kill in most situations. The standard kevlar obviously offers no protection to the head area, however if a helmet is purchased, it will aid in the protection of the instant-kill headshot. However, the Desert Eagle, AK-47, and sniper rifles will still kill in one hit, unless from extremely long (50m+) distances, not found in the official maps, or while being shot through a wall. Calibers such as the .50AE from the game's now iconic representation of the Desert Eagle pistol will be effectively stopped by a helmet from mid to long ranges, leaving the user with little health left as opposed to dying instantly. The helmet is usually bought to avoid being killed by an enemy in an "eco round" (in competitive play), where they will most likely be using weapons doning the 9mm ammunition (Glock, MP5) or the .45ACP from the USP pistol, the latter which is lethal againt a target without helmet, from close."

I don't believe that this is criticism, more of an explanation of how headshots work in the game. Perhaps it should be converted into a separate article, even if it creates a stub.--WaltCip 22:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I have several reasons why CS:S remains unpopular compared to 1.6, also Xfire does not mean anything. Steam keeps track of how many players are playing a game at any time [1]. CS:S rarely has more than half of the 1.6 at any given time. For anyone who feels like beating me to a write up the reasons are

Not fit for competition: a very large reason since one of the major reasons for counter strikes longevity was the constant tournaments and international events.

Several bugs at launch: although most of them have been fixed players still refuse to play because of bugs

No Walling: In every version of counter strike until source you could shoot people through almost any wall (no matter what it was made of). It became central to the play of counter strike, and was removed.

Changing weapons: very minor changes that vastly affect the way counter strike is played. In 1.6 it was possible to shoot people without visably scoping in with the AWP, it was very difficult and only experienced awpers could do it. It was removed in source completly. Several other minor changes to the weapons have been made Skeith 02:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Although it is an explanation, which could merit it two seperate sections (a hitbox section?), it is fine in criticisms. One of the reasons I hear alot of people complain about CSS is because of this. (odd to me because it seems like the head is in proportion with a normal human body) And I think we should move away from "some do not enjoy this game because it has/had many bugs" And just state "At Sources release it contained (some/X/Many) bugs, (list examples)" "Also with the release of Source, it fixed some bugs with CS1.6" Rubbergovernment 23:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

It's still possible in CS:S to shoot the AWP without using a scope. People who show exceptional skill with "no-scoping" are almost always using macros; they aim using the pistol crosshair, and to fire the AWP they have a macro which will toggle to AWP, fire a shot, and toggle back to pistol. This happens instantly, does not invoke the scope, and makes it look like the player has exceptional skill. I and many others consider this to be unintentionally possible and dishonorable at the least, exploitative or just plain cheating at the extreme end. Nonetheless, it remains possible in CS:S, and accounts for most of the perceived "skill" of the executors. I don't think any of this deserves a mention in the article, but I did want to respond to the claim that it's no longer possible to no-scope with the AWP. All of this applies for the Scout as well, but generally players do not employ this tactic with the less-deadly Scout. James A. Stewart 12:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

It is possible to shoot someone unscoped, but it takes alot of skill, or alot of luck. I've done it before, and it's just luck. YazzaMatazza 14:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

No-scoping was effectively removed in one of Valve's update. I can't find the exact date, but the update line went something like "Weapons not fully scoped and shot during the zoom-in time period no longer have 100% accuracy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.26.21.7 (talk) 08:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

Yes. Scope-guns have more accuracy when the scope is zoomed in, but it would be once in a blue moon that you would get a headshot unscoped. YazzaMatazza 09:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clean Up Please?

Can someone please take the time to clean this page up, it looks like that people have just added partially relevant paragraphs in the middle of otherwise informative sections, breaking up the flow and just making the sections read poorly. The 'Havok Physics... section is particulary confusing, jumping from explaning the physics into player made maps on football, and then back to the original point. This all just needs a reread and a restructure, I can't do it, too much to do.

Oh, and an explanation in the intro as to what maps were originally in the initial release would make the 'Notable Updates' section mean something.

(before anyone bites myhead off, i did construct MOST of this page).

Cheers.

Monchberter 10.50am GMT 29th June 2006

[edit] Equipment

What now, that the equipment page has been deleted? There's no mention of the weapons or equipment used in the game, or their prices etc? Should we remake a page? King nothing 18:45, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleaned up

Ok, i've done a clean up of the page in anticipation of the announced changes forthcmoing in September '06, lets keep it clean and I hope I've made the page more readable! Monchberter 19:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] System Requirements

I would like someone to post CS:S's system requirements, please. Hoodie 12:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

It already was posted, but whoever did it messed up the format. I went ahead and fixed it. It should show up now. --Averross 18:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dynamic Weapon Pricing

Valve Software introduced a Dynamic Weapon Pricing system for CS:S, the Prices of the Weapons bought in the game depend on the Market Demand, value in the CS Weapons Market[2]

The system was met with much more Criticism.

Someone please edit the Main Article..

---User:Subbu.exe 2:33, 13 October 2006 (GMT +5.5)

I agree

[edit] Pop Culture

An addition of a Pop Culture section would help people who have never played the game, or have not played often, to understand how Counter Strike affects the internet gaming community. A popular character in coining the term "Boom Head Shot!" is PurePwnage.com's "FPS Doug" in episode 5 (aka "M8s") of their internet TV series. Since Counter Strike has had the ability to perform head shots, this may be how this quote became popular with the CS:S community. When explaining this, it maybe hard not to bias it with personal favoritism. If someone could add this info, and any other popular pop culture about this game, that would be an improvement to the article, in my opinion.

[edit] Incorrect claim in article

This paragraph needs to be rewritten: "In 2004, original Counter-Strike developers Minh Le and Jess Cliffe, along with members of Valve and the Day of Defeat team, brought Counter-Strike into the Source engine as an obvious choice for the multiplayer component of Half-Life 2. Following a period when the game was available to select "beta" testers, the game went gold on October 7, 2004"

First of, Minh 'Gooseman' Le had nothing to do with the creation of CS:S. He isn't even listed in credits.txt, which contains about 80 names. Nor has he been listed as an employee on Valve's home page (http://www.valvesoftware.com/people.html) for years.

Also, it's mighty generous to list Jess Cliffe as an 'original developer'. Concept, gameplay, coding, and animations was all Minh Le. Jess Cliffe contributed some sound effects and set up a web page.

[edit] Weapons?

Hey, can we add a list of weapons with their descriptions? I've never played the game myself, but I think it'd be useful in this article. Druss666uk 22:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

They've tried that before. It always gets deleted. 65.87.33.53 04:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Similarly, whenever someone creates an article listing the weapons it get deleted. There have been 3 or 4 such articles this year alone. Unless you want to play the game, nothing is really added by listing the weapons. If you want it in order to play the game, then you're looking for a game guide. Wikipedia is not a game guide. --Habap 15:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Missing parts of Customization?

I don't normally edit Wikipedia, but it bothered me that under the customization section, there wasn't a section for surf maps. I know that surf maps aren't a complete mod like zombie mod or gun game, but I think that it differs from the original gameplay of cs that it deserves to be put in. I'd appreciate if someone changed that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.124.174.54 (talk) 02:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] "Clan gaming"

Someone, please, keep it removed if more admins are coming to revert my edit before even taking a look on what the hell is going on. That section is plain useless, if you know something about Wikipedia and have experience with competitive FPS gaming. Cpt. Obvious.. I mean, there's an article on firearms, compare it to online games, we can also compare M4A1 to Counter-Strike: Source, or AK-47 to Enemy Territory, or even a Desert Eagle to Far Cry. Now, do they mention on the firearms article that what a weapon is, even though it reads there already that it is one, it is a common, known word, and it can be looked up seperately since it if the reader thinks he needs. Same goes for online videogames, does it need to explain beyond the fact that it is a videogame? Well, on the M4A1, do they mention anything about how the gun is USED, like it isn't obvious enough already that this can be looked up on the firearms article if the reader is ignorant on the subject? Is it mentioned in the AK-47 article that "some people group up and go to competitions". CAPTAAAIN OOBVIOOUS! Same point as previously. So why the hell would Counter-Strike: Source or Enemy Territory need a damned explanation that it can be played "online, competitively". Not only is the section - by the way - very stupid, it's poorly written and uses regional terminology (scrimmage? Sorry, Cpt. America, but it's called "clanwar" in Europe, and most people play through IRC or Clanbase) I hope you got my point :) --84.249.252.211 01:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

It is legitimate content related to the article and it should stay.--Andeh 19:09, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

You didn't really read what I wrote? Then let's fucking shove it up every multiplayer article. I'm removing it. I'm pissed off because you didn't respond to me LEGITIMATELY. "Related to the article"? OF COURSE IT IS, BUT FOR GOD'S SAKE, THAT WAS NOT MY POINT! --84.249.252.211 18:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm putting it back. No matter what you think, it's still legitimate content.--WaltCip 00:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

The man has a point, besides, the section has been tagged since December 2006. I really despise people who use special cards such as "legitimate content" to pull out when they seem to fear to counter arguments like those presented above. His talkpage already has a mention by a user to create a discussion to reach consensus after removing the section several times and being warned. --194.251.240.116 20:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

This article needs serious cleaning. --84.249.253.201 22:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Be bold and edit it yourself instead of just writing things here. Or be specific and lets us know what needs to be changed. --Habap 18:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] lasercage and office screenshots

Lasercage features a non-standard weapon skin, which could be confusing to readers. Office is an old screenshot from before the radar change so that should also be redone --froth^{T C} 21:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I uploaded a nice "cinematic" screenshot of texturecity with no gun or HUD blocking the view of the level. --froth^{T C} 21:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iceworld

Anyone else think the maps section deserves a brief mention of the fy_iceworld map? It's extremely popular, with hundreds of fy_iceworld-only servers up at any given time. Along with cs_office, it's one of the only maps that sees single-map dedicated servers. It's also a pretty distinct style of play, given the small field size, lack of objectives (beyond eliminating the opposing team), common central buy zone, and pre-placed weapons at spawn points. I don't think the article needs to go into much detail about specific maps, but a paragraph about iceworld is worth mentioning. There are many other arena-style maps out there now (cs_deagle5, fy_funtimes, etc.), but fy_iceworld is by far the most popular, and one of the earliest (if not the earliest). If there's general agreement that it deserves mention, I'll write up a few sentences about it and a very brief mention of arena style maps in general and add them to the article. James A. Stewart 12:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure, we need more detail under "player created maps" and iceworld (along with the texture maps) pretty much represents the best of player-created maps. That whole customization section is looking pretty lean; it's mostly section headings --froth^T 20:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This article has 1 source

wtf --Jecrell 10:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to add more sources! I agree it needs more, but editors need to add sources in to help the article become better sourced. -- Kesh 03:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Should These Be Mentioned?

Should the betting system and sprays be included in the article? --ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever 23:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Sprays are in Counter-Strike culture. The betting script, no. --froth^T 07:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Customization

It seems like important content as relates to counter-strike but looking at the scope of the article, the customization section seems way too detailed and crufty. Any suggestions? I hesitate to delete it outright, but at the same time right now I think the article would probably be better without it --froth^T 07:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone know how to get different characters in your player name? When you see some peoples names, they have X's that are different to the rest of the text, anyone got any ideas?

Um, that has absolutly nothing to do with questions about the article. Look it up on google or somthing, not on Wikipedia. And about your question, no. --ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever 01:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LAN center play

I'd like to see a section added on LAN center play of this game. BigTimeGamer 05:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not really notable. Same game, different place. BJ^Talk 06:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ranking

I'm just asking, is there any kind of ranking in CS source? Chessmanlau 04:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I think only for each server, for example you may be rank 30 in one server, and rank 190 in another server.

[edit] Helmet Comment

"The helmet is usually bought to avoid being killed by an enemy in an "eco round"" That seems a bit of a stupid comment. Seems to imply helmet is best used in the first round that is pistols only. The problem with this is of course that you cannot purchase helmet is the first round, because you don't have the funding to.