Valve: Modern Shooters "Pander" to Casual Gamers

[Still Life]

Might have been the community, to be fair.

I quite like CS, but in my experience, the community has been full of Dicks. Lots and lots of Dicks. I wouldn't play CS with the idea of having a (ironically) social experience.

 

[Raddra]

I agree with Valve.

I love valve even more, was that possible?

I see video's of modern casual FPS's and the level they let the payers get away with stuff is unreal. I've seen video's from casual FPS players showing their 'leet skills' and their sights arent even ON THE TARGET, they pull the trigger and get HEADSHOTS. And then they think they're 'leet' and 'skilled'. Its absurd.

 

[scotth266]

Congratulations, you know how to pander to "hardcore gamers" (insult "casual" gamers and pretend that your game will be for hardcore people only).

 

[archvile93]

I loved introducing CS:S to my friends and watching them quit with exasperation after going 0-12 on a normal rotation map server.

Then I told them that it's actually kind of easier than 1.6.

When I first played I got about a 5-5. I got bored kind of quick though, partly because of the super sniper (forget the name) otherwise known as the instant win gun, partly because I didn't like the health system where body shots have the same impact as missing entirel (except for the super sniper), and partly because it got boring waiting for the next round when you die. I just hope they forget about the demolition mode and replace it with just plain last man standing. What's the point of having an objective to complete when the match ends by killing all enemies 99.99999% of the time? that's just wasting coding time. I don't think I ever actually saw someone plant the bomb. Still, it was mind of fun for a little while.

 

[crystalsnow]

I appreciate the efforts, and I do agree with the spirit they're going for, but what they've done so far makes little sense.

Ironsights DO make sense. Shooting without a direct sight line put on your target makes it difficult to predict where the bullet will go on the fly. Having it up all the time is probably stupid, but not attempting to improve your accuracy when accuracy counts is idiotic.

If anything, running around without the ability to pull your gun up to your eye is even more ridiculous.

I also like how Valve is calling out modern shooters for pandering to casual gamers, WHILE INCLUDING A MODE THAT IS DESIGNATED AS 'CASUAL' IN THEIR OWN DAMN GAME.

If hypocrisy wasn't so rampant in everything that Valve has laid out here, I'd be inclined to agree with them on the issue. As it stands they just look like a bunch of howler monkeys.

 

[Kinguendo]

Wait, Iron Sights are the thing they call pandering?!

Not maybe the aim assist? Not drop shotting or quick scoping? Not those really EASY tactics that people use in place of skill? Come on.

There has never been any aim assist in a CS game.

No, but they arent commenting on things THEY use. They are talking about the pandering of other FPS games, and mechanics in those games they wont use.

Valve uses mechanics to pander to casual gamers?

Ok.

What? Oh I get it, you were wrong to comment because you misread or whatever and you cant accept it so instead of tipping your hat and moving on you pull this. Come on!


Unless English isnt your primary languag in which case I understand why you are having difficulty.

 

[SideSlyGuy]

"We don't say, Well we need iron sights because everyone else has iron sights," Magal continued. "If they could figure out a way for them to make sense, we'd add them, but right now we think iron sights just make people move slower because they'll be afraid to put their gun down."

What.

No you idiot. I use iron sights because I want to put the bullets where I want it to go. Not in an area where they are probably going to be.

Im firing a rifle not a shotgun with big pellets. That only fire the pellets one at a time.

As for moving slower?

Uh that's is called toggling the iron sights. DURR HURR HURRR.

Sigh.

Again another developer trying to fix what isn't broken.

There's a reticle in the middle of the screen that tells you where your bullets are going. In my experience with the counterstrike games its pretty reliable, as in you don't have to use those iron sights to set up every single shot. Taking out the iron sights to make the entire flow of the game faster is what, I think, they're getting at here. And nothings broken, they're just not adding a pointless feature to the game.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Wait, Iron Sights are the thing they call pandering?!

Not maybe the aim assist? Not drop shotting or quick scoping? Not those really EASY tactics that people use in place of skill? Come on.

There has never been any aim assist in a CS game.

No, but they arent commenting on things THEY use. They are talking about the pandering of other FPS games, and mechanics in those games they wont use.

Valve uses mechanics to pander to casual gamers?

Ok.

What? Oh I get it, you were wrong to comment because you misread or whatever and you cant accept it so instead of tipping your hat and moving on you pull this. Come on!


Unless English isnt your primary languag in which case I understand why you are having difficulty.

Now I'm confused. Let's look at your previous post:

No, but they arent commenting on things THEY use. They are talking about the pandering of other FPS games, and mechanics in those games they wont use.

See that? Right there? That is you, complaining that they aren't talking about the mechanics that they have supposedly used in the past to pander to casual gamers.

Now my response:

Valve uses mechanics to pander to casual gamers?

Ok.

That is me, refuting your claim that they have used game mechanics in the past to pander to casual gamers by way of some sarcasm.

If instead your post was to ask what they would do to prevent the afore mentioned pandering, the answer to that is quite simple. The same things that have been in CS forever.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

Let us not have this discussion turn into a debate on iron-sights and if they are better then not. We all know iron-sights are very beautiful when implemented right but also that very few games pull them off well. Given the nature of CS, the games they are 'deriving' from and all the rest I would be pissed if they included it and I love iron-sights.

They are just not part of CS and never should be. The ridicule, as ridiculous as it is as guns should fire straight and I have seen bullets fly more then 45 degrees the moment they leave the barrel in CS, should not be removed as it is part of what it is. To change it would change the very nature of the game it is, and draw less from the versions of CS in the past.

As much as I hate unrealistic guns in games even I realize not all games need realistic guns.

Besides, my largest grip with games of late is the fact they throw away the predecessors and try to turn the game into another cookie cutter of whatever is the latest selling block buster. To see a game that promises nothing more then an update to what is already there, leaving the core elements intact, is a refreshing change. I always expect some improvements of course, new features to be tried and not just graphic enhancements, but as long as the core elements are not change I will be happy.

PS: Yes, you can tell I am still crying over X-com and Syndicate...

 

[Kinguendo]

See that? Right there? That is you, complaining that they aren't talking about the mechanics that they have supposedly used in the past to pander to casual gamers.

That is me, refuting your claim that they have used game mechanics in the past to pander to casual gamers by way of some sarcasm.

If instead your post was to ask what they would do to prevent the afore mentioned pandering, the answer to that is quite simple. The same things that have been in CS forever.

Ah, I see... you can read. You just dont understand context, which is very important in understanding what people say.

I did say this:

No, but they arent commenting on things THEY use. They are talking about the pandering of other FPS games, and mechanics in those games they wont use.

In response to this:

There has never been any aim assist in a CS game.

As in, no they dont have aim assist in CS games... but they arent talking about their games. They are talking about other mainstream FPS games that try to appeal to casual gamers... so, you done?

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

See that? Right there? That is you, complaining that they aren't talking about the mechanics that they have supposedly used in the past to pander to casual gamers.

That is me, refuting your claim that they have used game mechanics in the past to pander to casual gamers by way of some sarcasm.

If instead your post was to ask what they would do to prevent the afore mentioned pandering, the answer to that is quite simple. The same things that have been in CS forever.

Ah, I see... you can read. You just dont understand context, which is very important in understanding what people say.

I did say this:

No, but they arent commenting on things THEY use. They are talking about the pandering of other FPS games, and mechanics in those games they wont use.

In response to this:

There has never been any aim assist in a CS game.

As in, no they dont have aim assist in CS games... but they arent talking about their games. They are talking about other mainstream FPS games that try to appeal to casual gamers... so, you done?

No, now I'm confused as to what you were actually saying in response to me, but whatever, man.

 

[Jimi Bove]

We already have 2 shooter equivalents to Dark Souls: the Oblivion Lost mod for STALKER Shadow of Chernobyl and the Pripyatan A.R.M.S. mod for STALKER Call of Pripyat. Also the original Counter-Strike Source.

I much appreciate what shooters do these days. I have fun improving all the time with school, my personality, writing, music, art, StarCraft, etc., but for some reason it just doesn't work in an FPS. Somehow an FPS that makes me be the best there is to not constantly die isn't fun for me. Perhaps it's because at least in modern warfare shooters, being the best isn't just about aiming and strategy (if it was, I would do a LOT better in Counter-Strike and InfinityWard CoDs). It's also about things that I hate to have to learn because I'm not a f***ing grinder: glitches, everything about the map I'm fighting in, crazy strategy ideas one never thinks of on their own, and miniscule things like split-second timing and which item you run faster with. Somehow I only enjoy learning those things in an RTS.

Counter-Strike is all about who knows the map, lags the least, aims the fastest, and knows when to go behind cover and aim at a doorway. Knowing the map and lagging the least are what I lack, and there's no way I'm the fastest aimer around (I'm good, but those AWP tweakers are crazy).

 

[Turtleboy1017]

I loved introducing CS:S to my friends and watching them quit with exasperation after going 0-12 on a normal rotation map server.

Then I told them that it's actually kind of easier than 1.6.

When I first played I got about a 5-5. I got bored kind of quick though, partly because of the super sniper (forget the name) otherwise known as the instant win gun, partly because I didn't like the health system where body shots have the same impact as missing entirel (except for the super sniper), and partly because it got boring waiting for the next round when you die. I just hope they forget about the demolition mode and replace it with just plain last man standing. What's the point of having an objective to complete when the match ends by killing all enemies 99.99999% of the time? that's just wasting coding time. I don't think I ever actually saw someone plant the bomb. Still, it was mind of fun for a little while.

I think it's about finding the right servers. I started playing on a 24/7 office server with no awp or autosnipers, and a bunch of brand new players just kind of trying to learn how to play.

Then I went to a normal map rotation with no restrictions, but massive teams and unorthodox maps.

And now I play on a server that only allows server side models, sounds, etc. etc. and has a 24 player limit with an active and VERY good playerbase that routinely makes me want to uninstall the game. But that's the fun part.

 

[lockgar]

A "casual difficulty". Oh gamers, we need to get over our self. We use casual as an insult, as if it is something to be feared. Damn gaming has become so petty. Then again, any "uber 1337 teh h@rdc0rz" gamer was probably an asshole to being with. Yeah, counter-strike was a breeding ground of elitist gamers.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I would love is shooters stopped with the iron-sight already. I would love if I could hold more then 2 guns. I would love to be able to jump again. Although not bunny hoping, that was always stupid. Does it make sense to keep slamming the spacebar key while playing? Not to mention it always makes everything looks ridiculousness. Although Counter-Strike made sure that wasn't possible, until someone made a nice script for it.

but yes, build your exclusive club house, no girls allowed you say? I need a password to enter you say? I agree with the arguments, but I disagree with the tone.

 

[WilliamRLBaker]

Hmmm Counter Strike wasn't filled with cheaters and thus casuals whom couldn't get into the game for years until valve finally patched it?
*shakes head*
Maybe If Valve were to produce something more then twice a decade they could say something otherwise they aren't a game developer anymore they are the faces of a storefront whom happen to help others get thier games produced under the valve name.

and its just laughable how people are agreeing with this...Go play with some of the top tier players with the mind set of Oh im just gonna play a little and you will get destroyed in COD the very concept that you wont get better with playtime in any thing is just absurd we can generalize counter strike down to getting flash bangs throwing them then shooting anyone in the room you just blinded.

*And thats from someone whom hasn't purchased a COD since mw2 and refuses too cause hes boycotting activision*

 

[Therumancer]

Well yeah, shooters... of all types, are "Farmville" just aimed at a differant audience. It's just called "hardcore" because of the sheer number of casuals who play them and want to be seen that way.

It's interesting to see Valve want to get the genere back to it's roots of being a style of "real" gaming, and their plans might very well work out simply because there are so many casual-friendly shooters out there already.

If Valve does things right, this might be a case where the game will challenge some people to actually become better gamers and stop being casuals, though I doubt it will have any real affect on the masses in general.

As far as it being the "Demon's Souls" of shooters, well I doubt that. I honestly don't think the FPS genere could get there while remaining a strict FPS, though I could see some kind of hybrid game being built around FPS conventions that might come close. If anything I think it might be what S.T.A.L.K.E.R. originally set out to be with it's more realistic take on gunplay that threw a lot of FPS casuals for a loop when they were expecting their "magic sighted tube that puls holes in things" as opposed to a more realistic take on recoil and ballistics.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Dick move Valve. I know its just one guy but that's on the verge of outright insulting your competitors and even worse giving into the droning idiots on the internet who hate on modern shooters to be snobs. I thought Valve was better then that. (oh well I don't care about counterstrike anyways).

 

[Aeonknight]

I find it humorous that they can call out every other shooter out there, when they never quite got the balance issues fixed in CS:S.

Want to shoot more accurately? Fuck actually aiming down your sights! Crab walkin' like a mofo is the way to go!

... seriously Valve?

 

[samsonguy920]

What this "encouragement to improve" will entail remains to be seen; while there must be gamers who wouldn't mind this game becoming the FPS Dark Souls, this development won't be welcomed by those who enjoy the odd quick, pandering spell of gameplay before they leave the house.

Considering most casual fps gamers play on consoles, I don't think Valve has much to worry about hurting their feelings.

 

[RA92]

Ahh, now I get it. This is whining because you can't hope to compete on COD because you have no patience and just keep running out so people can easily kill you, and so you blame the game, insisting its "casual" and that's why you suck at it. Because you are absolutely dreadful at aiming (it takes you 4 seconds to actually aim up a sight that should only take you .35 seconds - meaning it takes you close to 12 times the time it should) you think that must mean theres a problem with the playstyle. Instead of actually learning or even attempting to get a loadout that actually works for a speedy playstyle, you just decide to blame the game because of your failure.

Well, this is precious.

Trust me, my aim is just fine. The '4 second' bit was an exaggeration. I'm used to making headshots in CS while my opponent is, as someone put it, 'crab-walking like a mofo'. So it's not an issue for me to shoot someone in the head who's stationary because he's aiming as well and can't move. Not to mention it's much easier when your opponent goes down after two well-placed shots. My issue with CoD isn't that that I can't play it, it's just that it's boring.

And of course CS isn't as popular as CoD. That's because getting shot in CS doesn't mean having raspberry jam on your face, and dying means you're done till the next round. Which is why no one survives pulling the 'lone wolf' act on CS. There's a reason why CoD has 20 million players in it's player-base. It's simple, accessible, and casual.