Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (chino tradicional)
日本語 (japonés)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandés)
Български (búlgaro)
Čeština (checo)
Dansk (danés)
Deutsch (alemán)
English (inglés)
Español de Hispanoamérica
Ελληνικά (griego)
Français (francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (húngaro)
Nederlands (holandés)
Norsk (noruego)
Polski (polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português-Brasil (portugués de Brasil)
Română (rumano)
Русский (ruso)
Suomi (finés)
Svenska (sueco)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraniano)
Comunicar un error de traducción
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
No, quake live is fun and hard to master.
What about your 500 hours crying in the mic while playing dust_2 rofl?
if we are talking about combat then there is a higher skill cap in quake. Strafe jumping, Mid air rockets, Rocket jumps, item timings, power up timings. flick rails etc... There are just more things to be aware of in Quake. The combat is very different Quake is far more fluid.
If your a really good Quake player you can pick up cs and play really well after a short period of time. The same can not be said of making the jump from cs to Quake (imo)
EDIT: both games require "pointing and clicking" and yes it is a skill that can be developed although it's developed differently for both games.
^ DCW is right. If I remember correctly, Cypher tried to switch from Quake to CS, but never made it big. I assume a CS pro transitioning to Quake would be equally unsuccessful (unless they "pay their dues" and spend as much time learning the game as any other Quake pro did).
So yeah - apples to oranges. As far as individual skill goes, Quake is more about coordination (movement+aim+item timing) whereas CS is more about precision (being able to instantly shoot the opponent's head, which is a far smaller target than the ones in Quake + spray control etc.)
Neither is easier / harder than the other. One will usually do better in CS, but that's because of a larger player base, which spreads across all skill levels. Quake has only a fraction of that popularity and you're very likely to run into people with 10+ years of experience, so no wonder it feels "harder" to play it. A game is only as hard as one's opponents make it to be. If you played CS:GO and the only guys left were members of world's top 10 teams, you would find it extremely hard too.
Let's be honest, is cs go hard?
It's basic aiming plus crying in a mic and eventually teamplay
But people say it's "skilled" because new players get owned.
But it deosn't make the game "skilled" and depth.
It makes it unfun for newbies (while quake is fun for newbies and noobs) and lots of people say it's "skilled".
Stop mistaking complexity with skill.
Is it really? I tried to convince many people to Quake. Some tried it and their general experience was getting severely owned and uninstalling OR getting kicked for being "noob" and uninstalling.
Some of them switched to CSGO and have enjoyed it ever since.
I know what you mean, but player base and the ability to play people of your own skill is a very important context which cannot be neglected in such discussions. That's because in theory, Quake is more fun for new players, because it's easy to pick up (run and shoot). However, in reality lots of people try it and instantly leave it (unlike CS), because of the aforementioned context.
In cs go being bad means not even being able to play more than 1 minute in a 15 minutes long round.
But cs go has rank based games tho, because of its huge community....while quake is full of idiots vote kicking newbies.
repeating what mass people think isn't an argument....
"People think its skill based because of many players,many of those are noobs,bla bla" Many of those are also very good players keep that in mind too.Kd ratio of 2 in cs go and kd ratio of 2 in cod aint the same thing kid.Since i see you enjoy cod black ops 2 multiplayer so much.
About cod bo3 multiplayer, yes, I like it, I love cod 4-like games, like I enjoy quake and I don't really care of cod's bad reputation.
But let's contructive: when I hear someone say "cs is skilled", I can't understand.
How is firing an ak-47 harder is cs than firing an ak-47 in cod?
Same aim, harder movement in cod bo3, harder teamplay is cs go....
But the fps parts of the game aren't different.
Maybe more recoil in cs go...
But according to this logic, the ridiculous recoil in insurgency makes it the ultimate skilled game.
Obviously, cs is round based and you can't respawn, but I think it's the identity of the game.
It can make it harder but it doesn't make the fps deeper.
I know because that is EXACTLY what I wrote in my previous post! However, new guys don't care about any "IFs". They don't care about what COULD be. They care about the current situation and the current situation is that CS is more newbie friendly because it has more players - including other newbies so they can enjoy the game together.
Nobody cares about what could POTENTIALLY be.
In CS:GO, the AK-47's spread will very quickly widen its radius if you shoot full auto. Assuming you're shooting from a standing position, this spread patter will be more or less contant, meaning that you can control it by "countering" it with proper mouse movement. It's a very hard thing to do (because you also have to consider the distance etc.), but very rewarding once you master it.
I wrote earlier - Cypher (one of the best Quake players in the world) tried to transition to CS. He failed. How do you answer to that? How do you justify that one of the most skilled Quake players could not beat CS players if it requires no skill? How do you justify that some teams consistently stay on top of CS rankings if it's not about skill? If it was random, teams should switch all the time right? And yet, teams such as SK.Gaming, Virtus Pro, Astralis, NiP etc. constantly beat dozens of other teams for their place in the finals.
But according to this logic, the ridiculous recoil in insurgency makes it the ultimate skilled game.
jk
ok, I see what you mean but is really recoil control as hard to master as advanced rocket jumps or midairs, or strafe jumping?
And is it the only deep stuff in cs go?
I honestly don't know and I doubt anyone knows. That's why I wrote that it's "apples to oranges". It's impossible to tell. DCW wrote above that he used to play both games on pro level and thinks both require skill. He has hands on experience so why not believe him?
For me, rocket jumps etc. are easier, but that's because I've been playing Quake since 1998 or something (can't remember now). If I had played CS since its beginning and had never tried Quake, I would probably find spray control easier.
That's why it's impossible to compare the two. Both require different types of skill and neither is "easier" or "harder" than the other. The only reason why CS seems "easier" is that more people play it. Like I had written - if Quake had 300 000 players at any given time and CS had less than 1000 (all of which were very experienced), Quake would seem "easier". This context is important.