Counter-Strike 2D or Counter-Strike: Source
1 
Offline
edited 1×, last 10.08.11 09:52:42 am
Forum
Off Topic Counter-Strike 2D or Counter-Strike: Source
Poll
Css or Cs2D
Only registered users are allowed to vote
| CSS | 14.29% (7) | |
| CS2D | 48.98% (24) | |
| CS 1.6 | 10.20% (5) | |
| Both | 16.33% (8) | |
| None | 10.20% (5) |
49 votes cast
Counter-Strike Source is awesome too but, well, after "the big update" it sucks a bit. A bit.
CS2D is awesome too but, you cant compare CS2D and CS. They are just to different.
A Mad Bro has writteni like css more because it is 3d.
Graphic doesn't make the game.
MrShock has writtenThat's correct!
Gameplay:
+ Game types, that aren't available in CS:S [Con, Dom (I'm not sure about Domination)],
+ It's 2D!
+ Has better Zombies, Lol : D,
+ Easy to learn&use Map Editor,
+ NPC's,
+ Portal Gun : D.
+ Better Armor system.
And few another things.
Css and Cs2D are complelty different. Both requires different skill both has got different modes. For example death run on cs2D is not that good like in css. Zombie mode in css is better than in cs2D. But dead match and construction are both better in cs2D. Css doesnt have got the same thing. Also playing cs2D is for players from 13 to 18 cause it doesnt require big skill. Map edior in cs2D is awesome and can be made tons of different maps without scripting. Css is good in something cs2D is good in something. I still like css more, but cs2D is not that bad at all if you want relaxing free 2D game.
Erik963 has writtenI agree. Graphic doesnt make the game but it makes more fun. For example who would play gta 4 with san andreas graphic. Most of the fun is with ragdols and real car destruction.
Thats physics
MrShock has writtenBugs and "for the time which it was created it's good and bla-bla-bla" as well.
CS1.6 = Crappy, buggy, lame graphics.
CS:S = Physics, nice graphics, cool and balanced.
CS2D = Cool, easily customizable, awesome game modes, easy lua support.
Conclusion: CS1.6 is the worst. CS:Source and CS2D? Can't decide which one is better so i'll vote for the one i'm actually playing: CS:Source.
Nem has written Erik963 has writtenI agree. Graphic doesnt make the game but it makes more fun. For example who would play gta 4 with san andreas graphic. Most of the fun is with ragdols and real car destruction.
Thats physics
Physic is graphic in game.....
You're wrong here. Physics is the another part of engine, it does not connected to graphic part actually.
Erik963 has writtenPhysic is graphic in game.....
Of course it's not... you mean in-game look?
Mechanolith has writtenCS1.6 = Crappy, buggy, lame graphics.
Conclusion: CS1.6 is the worst.
Conclusion: CS1.6 is the worst.
Crappy, but millions of players... buggy... ever played beta 1? lame graphics. sry, there was no crysis 2 in 1999.. its still alot of fun and thousand of cs-players think 1.6 is better than cs source. oh and, never heard about condition zero?
Mechanolith has written MrShock has writtenBugs and "for the time which it was created it's good and bla-bla-bla" as well.
CS1.6 = Crappy, buggy, lame graphics.
CS:S = Physics, nice graphics, cool and balanced.
CS2D = Cool, easily customizable, awesome game modes, easy lua support.
Conclusion: CS1.6 is the worst. CS:Source and CS2D? Can't decide which one is better so i'll vote for the one i'm actually playing: CS:Source.
For god's sakes, Graphic Doesn't Make The Game !.
Mechanolith has writtenCS1.6 = Crappy, buggy, lame graphics.
- My PC can't handle CS 1.6 or CS:S
- CS2D has great moddability
You guys are so predictable, now stop that s**t.
Quote
For god's sakes, Graphic Doesn't Make The Game !.
There is one gaming saying i know since now.
Graphic makes you play
Gameplay makes you stay
CSS FOR HATE :@