Valorant is source 2

[mr shower ❤]

I'm a long time cs player (10k hours, hit global, faceit lvl 10) and I want to just give my opinion on Valorant and why you as a Counter Strike player should really give it a good shot. Valorant has everything you've ever wanted from cs and more, the graphics are really good, the matchmaking system isn't broken, 128 tick servers, better looking skins and overall it's a really good game. It's fundamentally cs but the gunplay and movement are a little bit different and it can take a bit to get used to. The fact that there's agents and abilities isn't that big of a deal because it doesn't take long to learn what they do. I really didn't have an opinion about the game for most of the time it's been out and I've only been playing it for ~6 months but I'm really enjoying it compared to cs at the moment, especially with cs lacking any operation or significant updates. I will play cs again when there's an operation but for now I'm a Valorant scrub. That's all folks, see you on the flipside.

Edit: I just wanted to add, if you love cs you'll also love valorant. Now that I think about it, most well known pro players play Valorant instead now too. CSGO is my most favourite game of all time and I wish Valve really stepped it up with the content but it is what it is.

[Nutsnut]

Played valorant for approximately 5 months upon launch instead of Csgo. Grew tired of the cheap ability based kills.

[Bandit]

引用自 Nutsnut：

Played valorant for approximately 5 months upon launch instead of Csgo. Grew tired of the cheap ability based kills.

^^^ this, its boring and takes less skill

[mikksies]

Yeh

[张显允]

I played VLA too,but i think flash and smoke are more interested than RINA and PHOENIX

[Shiro♌]

I'd like to know, PlamAtom, why haven't you responded like that, with the detailed response and properly formated text yesterday?
I am, obviously, not gonna bother responding to it all as I do value my time better than that, but it does really make no sense to me.

Was that just an attempt to provide a response without any details to confuse the rest of the people participating in this thread, or what made you to go ahead and respond like that, considering your past experiences with Valorant?
I'd say, if it's clear that you do know more than the rest of us, why'd you bother?
What's the motivation and your goal by givin' a .. cut first response and expecting others to catch up?
It's not like you're even giving a lot of room for some real discussion with such a response.. It's like a day and night in comparison with your first response here.

[⎛ PlamAtom ⎞]

引用自 Shiro♌：

I'd like to know, PlamAtom, why haven't you responded like that, with the detailed response and properly formated text yesterday?
I am, obviously, not gonna bother responding to it all as I do value my time better than that, but it does really make no sense to me.

Was that just an attempt to provide a response without any details to confuse the rest of the people participating in this thread, or what made you to go ahead and respond like that, considering your past experiences with Valorant?
I'd say, if it's clear that you do know more than the rest of us, why'd you bother?
What's the motivation and your goal by givin' a .. cut first response and expecting others to catch up?
It's not like you're even giving a lot of room for some real discussion with such a response.. It's like a day and night in comparison with your first response here.

Well, basically you have to ask yourself what is an appropriate answer to the theses put forward by others. In my eyes, the answer to this is quite clear: a detailed, complete analysis of all aspects.

I also like to debate, and it is also easy to refute certain very obviously wrong thesis, this is due to the fact that people think that something has to be a certain way, mostly because someone else said so.

a very simple example, when you say that many CS Pros have gone to Valorant, that is a very gross simplification. If someone knows the factual context of the NA scene, for example because he has been following it or has read an article about it, things in the factual context do not make sense. Of course, you could just write "that it was mainly NA pros who went over because of the situation", or you could bring the whole context so that the other person sees that it is inconsistent.

Here, for example, is an article about it, so even you can easily refute such a thesis.
https://earlygame.com/no-category/is-na-csgo-dead

I mean this is all about video games, but a reasonable and factual answer is never wasted. Let's imagine we are talking about conspiracy theories, radical ideas or simple emotionally stirring lies - such things can radicalize others and oneself very quickly. That's why it's important to respond cosistently to information with a neutral assessment, just as when you have a point where I was wrong it's more than important to correct it for me.

Maybe it was a little unfortunate that the other person you were trying to debate with couldn't sleep for a week because he has drawn every single angel on maps like nuke for 2D Stratbook / Radar Maps. I'm still bothered by the width of the railing on CT Spawn, or which angels got invisible sliding corners and which didn't.... Garage entrance... Ladders as decoration, they are not all the same length, there is not a roller-gate on Outside T-Spawn... Catwalk on A-Site has a weird edge - the silos on A are not round but an octagon shape.... it's hell. Oh god, it's all creeping back up.

POV (*Insert aforementioned circumstances): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6dd_bus03c

[󠁳⁧⁧ Itmol]

cap