W take - CSGO looked better than CS2

[76561199554591837]

People who are saying CS2 looks better and source 2 update was worth it to lose your 50% fps, tell me how they looks any better than go maps ?

70% of cs2 maps are CSGO made maps which change nothing other than 50% Brightness and 50% more vibrance. Which you can do same in CSGO with Nvidia filter and best part was you didn't lose 50% fps on the process.

Not to mention these CSGO made maps originally meant to look depressing and gloomy which fits the aesthetics much better than current CS2 which just wannabe trendy with the bright and colourful artstyle. The maps not supposed to look Vibrant and Shiny. It's like Painting " Taj Mahal" pink in 2024.

The hottest take is, There are maps exist in CSGO ( which don't exist in CS2) looks better than any CS2 maps like Tuscan, Favela, Museum, Insertion 2.

So that means if you are good level designer you could just produce better looking maps in source 1 without ever needing source 2 engine. As proven by better looking maps existence in CSGO.

so yeah. Source 2 update didn't make the game look better and neither it didn't improve the gameplay but instead it took away

- 50% more FPS
- The snappy and crispy movement of CSGO
- 25 more maps
- Multiple game modes
- and 30% active players

Good job. It was worth it

[76561199149692366]

CSGO artstyle felt serious. Like the action really happening in war affected locations.
The early CSGO maps were even more Depressing and I liked them even more

Old dust
Old cache
Old Nuke
OG Inferno

Current CS2 maps are meh and feels like I am fighting in Barbieland.

Just an attempt to be trendy instead of actually be distinct like CSGO.

[Zubi Fett]

I agree.

I play with an old GPU (GTX 1070) that could run CS:GO so smoothly, allowing me to make the most of my 144hz monitor. Now I can't match that performance even at low settings, I have to settle for a stable "enough" 120 fps and I am getting a game that doesn't look as good in exchange.

Furthermore, I can't comprehend why older games that handle much bigger maps and player numbers that look stunning (e.g. Battlefront 2) can run so much better than CS2. I guess it comes down to optimization for older GPUs not considered by Valve or NVIDIA.

[󠁳]

Originally posted by Contii ❤:

W take - CSGO looked better than CS2

Absolutely wrong:
https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/166y41x/de_inferno_comparison_between_csgo_cs2/

[Jo_Mei]

i dont think at all graphics are the reason for cs2 being that hard on hardware , its the increased (cheater) bloatware that came with cs2

if graphics would be the issue , fps would be either high or low , not constantly fluctuating between high and low

[Zubi Fett]

Originally posted by Jo_Mei:

i dont think at all graphics are the reason for cs2 being that hard on hardware , its the increased bloatware that came with cs2

if graphics would be the issue , fps would be ether high or low , not constantly fluctuating between high and low

Interesting, what type of bloatware are you referring to?

When I began to faff about with the option I was on a practice round without bots and I managed to get 144 fps more or less stable as I ran around with mid-low config. But when playing with bots or players it was going down to 60-120 fps, fluctuating in that range for the most part.

With most settings set to low, I get 120 mostly stable fps during live rounds.

[Jo_Mei]

Originally posted by Zubi Fett:

Originally posted by Jo_Mei:

i dont think at all graphics are the reason for cs2 being that hard on hardware , its the increased bloatware that came with cs2

if graphics would be the issue , fps would be ether high or low , not constantly fluctuating between high and low

Interesting, what type of bloatware are you referring to?

When I began to faff about with the option I was on a practice round without bots and I managed to get 144 fps more or less stable as I ran around with mid-low config. But when playing with bots or players it was going down to 60-120 fps, fluctuating in that range for the most part.

With most settings set to low, I get 120 mostly stable fps during live rounds.

game stats recording in real time ,demo recording , weapon skins , custom models , trustfactor , vac, cheaters, machine learning , bots algorithm ,dynamic game difficulty balancing (DGDB) etc

[Fientelo]

You're on to something, but you're twisting it.
CS:GO did not look better, however it performed better.
CS:2 looks better, but is harder to perform, theres a lot of bugs and it seems like the overall workflow to get it fixxed is going really slow.

Another reason why I did not like CS:GO, was the whole performance crap going on.
Why would you have to run 800x600 to get a aim benefit along with fps increase? Why should this matter? If you ask me, minimum resolution should be fixxed at minimum 1920x1080 anyone running with a PC that cant handle that, is already messed up with the FPS anyways.

[76561199149692366]

Originally posted by Fientelo:

You're on to something, but you're twisting it.
CS:GO did not look better, however it performed better.
CS:2 looks better, but is harder to perform, theres a lot of bugs and it seems like the overall workflow to get it fixxed is going really slow.

Another reason why I did not like CS:GO, was the whole performance crap going on.
Why would you have to run 800x600 to get a aim benefit along with fps increase? Why should this matter? If you ask me, minimum resolution should be fixxed at minimum 1920x1080 anyone running with a PC that cant handle that, is already messed up with the FPS anyways.

this is a very bad opinion. Sorry mate but you should go to CHINA and join the communist party

[♥♥♥♥ Dies]

https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki/Japanese_(Age_of_Empires_III)

[♥♥♥♥ Dies]

Originally posted by CJ:

Originally posted by Fientelo:

You're on to something, but you're twisting it.
CS:GO did not look better, however it performed better.
CS:2 looks better, but is harder to perform, theres a lot of bugs and it seems like the overall workflow to get it fixxed is going really slow.

Another reason why I did not like CS:GO, was the whole performance crap going on.
Why would you have to run 800x600 to get a aim benefit along with fps increase? Why should this matter? If you ask me, minimum resolution should be fixxed at minimum 1920x1080 anyone running with a PC that cant handle that, is already messed up with the FPS anyways.

this is a very bad opinion. Sorry mate but you should go to CHINA and join the communist party

we are not chuinese we elctrocute rocks ,,...

if that doesnt makes sense please study culture shock and go to school ,,... offended please dont go to canada

[Zubi Fett]

I changed some settings to mid, now I get 144 fps that are stable... I don't understand this game, but I'll take it

[Fientelo]

Originally posted by CJ:

Originally posted by Fientelo:

You're on to something, but you're twisting it.
CS:GO did not look better, however it performed better.
CS:2 looks better, but is harder to perform, theres a lot of bugs and it seems like the overall workflow to get it fixxed is going really slow.

Another reason why I did not like CS:GO, was the whole performance crap going on.
Why would you have to run 800x600 to get a aim benefit along with fps increase? Why should this matter? If you ask me, minimum resolution should be fixxed at minimum 1920x1080 anyone running with a PC that cant handle that, is already messed up with the FPS anyways.

this is a very bad opinion. Sorry mate but you should go to CHINA and join the communist party

You're not making any sense... But then again a lot of people seem to cry a lot about this and it's really just a madeup thing that isn't really true. Just like the "peekers advantage" that so many people cried about however not even 1% of them noticed it after the fix and shamefully didn't comment. People are being crazy with these tinfoil hats in this game.
Honestly think people should start putting some effort into upgrading their PC, sure performance could be better and probably will be in a year or two, but this was the same issue with CS:GO when it came out.

[76561199149692366]

Originally posted by Fientelo:

Originally posted by CJ:

this is a very bad opinion. Sorry mate but you should go to CHINA and join the communist party

You're not making any sense... But then again a lot of people seem to cry a lot about this and it's really just a madeup thing that isn't really true. Just like the "peekers advantage" that so many people cried about however not even 1% of them noticed it after the fix and shamefully didn't comment. People are being crazy with these tinfoil hats in this game.
Honestly think people should start putting some effort into upgrading their PC, sure performance could be better and probably will be in a year or two, but this was the same issue with CS:GO when it came out.

You are really smooth and process some of most bizzare opinions i have seen so far

- you are asking for anything below 1080p resolution to be banned ? What are you ? Lost your mind ? 90% of pros and 60% of playerbase plays in this res. There are millions of potato users to play low RES to squeeze more fps. Why you want to restrict that for your pathetic selfish idea ?

- You said people didn't believe peekers advantage exist where are were 10 post made on subreddit everyday to fix the peekers advantage. It was most common demand to fix before the patch and vast majority of playersbase used to aware of it. Thats why valve fixed it, which also confirms it exist. You cant fix something if it doesn't exist

You talking about TINFOIL hat when
- community said it an issues
- 100% of the pros said its an issue
- Valve admitted its an issue and fixed it

But here you wearing your tinfoil hat and saying it didn't exist

[SLIME]

can you guys just comment silly things about how im a god at cs on my profile (im stuck in silver elite)

[Candyy]

Originally posted by Fientelo:

You're on to something, but you're twisting it.
CS:GO did not look better, however it performed better.
CS:2 looks better, but is harder to perform, theres a lot of bugs and it seems like the overall workflow to get it fixxed is going really slow.

Another reason why I did not like CS:GO, was the whole performance crap going on.
Why would you have to run 800x600 to get a aim benefit along with fps increase? Why should this matter? If you ask me, minimum resolution should be fixxed at minimum 1920x1080 anyone running with a PC that cant handle that, is already messed up with the FPS anyways.

I think csgo looked better, just the lighting now looks more realistic... V: