Talk:Counter-Strike: Source/Archive 1

dec 13 edit
Whom ever edit this page on dec 13 add some random crap so i removed it hope no one objects —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vafhudr (talk • contribs) 03:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Merge?
Might want to merge this into Counter-Strike. CS:S is basically just the advancements of the Source engine combined with gameplay that is nearly identical to 1.6. If no one objects, I'll merge them in a few days. --Mrwojo 17:31, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * I added what's in this stubbly article to the more thorough info at Source engine and Counter-Strike. Making it a redirect. --Mrwojo 20:29, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Seeing as the CS:S article has grown, i've given it it's own page, header, info and notable releases. it's too big to stay part of CS. Any edits would be much appreciated due to poor programming skills! :)

I think it deserves its own page. Leave it as it currently is.--R6MaY89 01:12, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with R6MaU89, there are way to much differences between CS:Source and CS 1.6. If we are going to merge those two, the content can become confusing. --Your_Neighbour 18:12, 19 Oct 2006 (GMT+10:00)

Indeed, Counter-Strike: Source and Counter-Strike 1.6 are two different games with two seperate information to be said about. Mehicdino 07:14, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooobs

lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.228.94.47 (talk) 13:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Related Links
I removed a few links that had no business being there. For example, weapons in FPSs and Cheating in FPSs are not relevant if there's a CS Weapons page, etc. Also, the one shown below doesn't have an article. Why bother linking to a non-existant article? --R6MaY89 01:15, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Counter-Strike language

I also removed several links that were questionable at best. A womens CSS clan site, a general gaming site, a utility/downloads site and a few more that weren't related to CS directly. --Abbynormal1 00:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
I've started doing a few edits so it doesn't look like that there's a schizophrenia problem with "it's better" and "it's suckier" back and forth at various points in the article. Wikipedia articles aren't about whether something is really good or not. They are about background (history) and other specific information that will inform the readers. Most of the article doesn't have this problem but it pops up enough to confuse readers as to what is fact and what is not. (Example, at one point in the article it was stated as fact that the physics were improved, in another that they were worse)

Also, criticism is fine in the criticism section but it shouldn't be "just sucks because" types of statements. Most people who use Wikipedia as a reference expect specific statements and good linked sources to look at.

Nice one. I'm glad someone's cleaned this up.

Monchberter GMT 0800 03/1/2006

Whats with this statement in History "It is a fun game for the young ages despite the M rating." Sounds like a stupid thing to have in there! Insaneassassin247 20:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, hadn't noticed that amid all the vandalism. I've removed it. --Habap 21:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Criticism
I'm interested in seeing more in-depth criticism. Not too detailed, but the current explanation for why CS:S isn't widely accepted by classic Counter Strike players seems a little vague. Mike Flynn 02:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I have seen more people in Source than 1.6. That critisims looks like need an Update. I will put a thread in Gamespot, because I see in X-Fire more people in CSS.


 * This was in the Criticism section:


 * "Being able to shoot the opposing player in the head region will result in a one-hit-kill in most situations. The standard kevlar obviously offers no protection to the head area, however if a helmet is purchased, it will aid in the protection of the instant-kill headshot. However, the Desert Eagle, AK-47, and sniper rifles will still kill in one hit, unless from extremely long (50m+) distances, not found in the official maps, or while being shot through a wall. Calibers such as the .50AE from the game's now iconic representation of the Desert Eagle pistol will be effectively stopped by a helmet from mid to long ranges, leaving the user with little health left as opposed to dying instantly. The helmet is usually bought to avoid being killed by an enemy in an "eco round" (in competitive play), where they will most likely be using weapons doning the 9mm ammunition (Glock, MP5) or the .45ACP from the USP pistol, the latter which is lethal againt a target without helmet, from close."


 * I don't believe that this is criticism, more of an explanation of how headshots work in the game. Perhaps it should be converted into a separate article, even if it creates a stub.--WaltCip 22:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I have several reasons why CS:S remains unpopular compared to 1.6, also Xfire does not mean anything. Steam keeps track of how many players are playing a game at any time . CS:S rarely has more than half of the 1.6 at any given time. For anyone who feels like beating me to a write up the reasons are
 * Not fit for competition: a very large reason since one of the major reasons for counter strikes longevity was the constant tournaments and international events.
 * Several bugs at launch: although most of them have been fixed players still refuse to play because of bugs
 * No Walling: In every version of counter strike until source you could shoot people through almost any wall (no matter what it was made of). It became central to the play of counter strike, and was removed.
 * Changing weapons: very minor changes that vastly affect the way counter strike is played. In 1.6 it was possible to shoot people without visably scoping in with the AWP, it was very difficult and only experienced awpers could do it. It was removed in source completly. Several other minor changes to the weapons have been made Skeith 02:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Although it is an explanation, which could merit it two seperate sections (a hitbox section?), it is fine in criticisms. One of the reasons I hear alot of people complain about CSS is because of this.  (odd to me because it seems like the head is in proportion with a normal human body) And I think we should move away from "some do not enjoy this game because it has/had many bugs"  And just state "At Sources release it contained (some/X/Many) bugs, (list examples)"  "Also with the release of Source, it fixed some bugs with CS1.6" Rubbergovernment 23:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It's still possible in CS:S to shoot the AWP without using a scope. People who show exceptional skill with "no-scoping" are almost always using macros; they aim using the pistol crosshair, and to fire the AWP they have a macro which will toggle to AWP, fire a shot, and toggle back to pistol.  This happens instantly, does not invoke the scope, and makes it look like the player has exceptional skill.  I and many others consider this to be unintentionally possible and dishonorable at the least, exploitative or just plain cheating at the extreme end.  Nonetheless, it remains possible in CS:S, and accounts for most of the perceived "skill" of the executors.  I don't think any of this deserves a mention in the article, but I did want to respond to the claim that it's no longer possible to no-scope with the AWP.  All of this applies for the Scout as well, but generally players do not employ this tactic with the less-deadly Scout. James A. Stewart 12:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It is possible to shoot someone unscoped, but it takes alot of skill, or alot of luck. I've done it before, and it's just luck. YazzaMatazza 14:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No-scoping was effectively removed in one of Valve's update. I can't find the exact date, but the update line went something like "Weapons not fully scoped and shot during the zoom-in time period no longer have 100% accuracy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.26.21.7 (talk) 08:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC).


 * no-scoping is easy.


 * Yes. Scope-guns have more accuracy when the scope is zoomed in, but it would be once in a blue moon that you would get a headshot unscoped. YazzaMatazza 09:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The effectiveness of no scoping was removed as far back as the betas. Gooseman stated himself in a post about an upcoming beta that AWPs, along with removing the crosshair while unscoped, would be receiving an 80% miss rate from the designated shooting field. I call for the Criticism section of the article to be removed altogether. Also, I have never heard of any official or verifiable source acknowledging a difference in hitboxes from Counterstrike to CS: Source. This can most likely be chocked up to placebo, such as people who insisted upon every new beta release back when Counterstrike was an unofficial game that the recoil for all the guns have been changed, even though Cliffe and Gooseman have stated firmly that the last weapon recoil changes were back in beta 7.5. Aside from the Galil being toned down before its official inception, there have been no other weapon changes.

Equipment
What now, that the equipment page has been deleted? There's no mention of the weapons or equipment used in the game, or their prices etc? Should we remake a page? King nothing 18:45, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Cleaned up
Ok, i've done a clean up of the page in anticipation of the announced changes forthcmoing in September '06, lets keep it clean and I hope I've made the page more readable! Monchberter 19:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

System Requirements
I would like someone to post CS:S's system requirements, please. Hoodie 12:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

It already was posted, but whoever did it messed up the format. I went ahead and fixed it. It should show up now. --Averross 18:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * including the sys requirements may not be too accurate, as many updates have effectively raised the minimum requirements, so the original ones aren't correct anymore. but then again, there are no "credible" sources for this, so maybe it's moot. geoff 02:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Dynamic Weapon Pricing
Valve Software introduced a Dynamic Weapon Pricing system for CS:S, the Prices of the Weapons bought in the game depend on the Market Demand, value in the CS Weapons Market

The system was met with much more Criticism. Someone please edit the Main Article..

---User:Subbu.exe 2:33, 13 October 2006 (GMT +5.5)

I agree


 * added! Thepineapplehead 21:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Also in the dynamic weapon pricing part it says Beretta 92fs when the in game guns say the caliber is .40 SW making them Beretta 96 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.0.149.121 (talk) 19:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Pop Culture
An addition of a Pop Culture section would help people who have never played the game, or have not played often, to understand how Counter Strike affects the internet gaming community. A popular character in coining the term "Boom Head Shot!" is PurePwnage.com's "FPS Doug" in episode 5 (aka "M8s") of their internet TV series. Since Counter Strike has had the ability to perform head shots, this may be how this quote became popular with the CS:S community. When explaining this, it maybe hard not to bias it with personal favoritism. If someone could add this info, and any other popular pop culture about this game, that would be an improvement to the article, in my opinion.

There's a huge cultural phenomenon in this game that appears to be starting to appear in the mainstream media - AWP is one such, as well as "camper", etc. Mostly it appears that these popular epithets are negative, but whether that's a humanistic idiosyncracy or just related to the game genre I don't begin to guess. There is also a "professional" group of CSS gameplayers (some of whom appear to make their living from playing the game), but I can't find any legitimate references to actual members of such a group, only "pro gamers" mentioned time after time. That sounds like a fascinating study. SiliconDreams 03:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I want to add in more detail about CS: Source in popular culture but I feel that much of it would be more suitable to either FPS shooters in general, or more suited to the original CS culture. For example, FPS Doug plays CS: Source, but his attitude is not specific to Source, it is the general stereotype of any sort of FPS gamer.


 * There has been some online cultural references specific to CS: Source however; but most deal with the updates and changes from 1.6. For example, Concerned (the online comic, hlcomic.com) have several issues where the protagonist gets warped into CS: Source, although the jokes would be applicable to any FPS. Only things like HDR blinding the characters are specific to Source. Thepineapplehead 19:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Weapons?
Hey, can we add a list of weapons with their descriptions? I've never played the game myself, but I think it'd be useful in this article. Druss666uk 22:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * They've tried that before. It always gets deleted. 65.87.33.53 04:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Similarly, whenever someone creates an article listing the weapons it get deleted. There have been 3 or 4 such articles this year alone. Unless you want to play the game, nothing is really added by listing the weapons. If you want it in order to play the game, then you're looking for a game guide. Wikipedia is not a game guide. --Habap 15:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Missing parts of Customization?
I don't normally edit Wikipedia, but it bothered me that under the customization section, there wasn't a section for surf maps. I know that surf maps aren't a complete mod like zombie mod or gun game, but I think that it differs from the original gameplay of cs that it deserves to be put in. I'd appreciate if someone changed that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.124.174.54 (talk) 02:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC).


 * I padded out the customization section, adding in three parts - maps, mods and skins/models. In "maps" I specified about surf maps, texture maps, etc, but it was pared down into it's current revision. Likewise the 'mods' section has been pared down.


 * I still have the original I wrote, if anyone wants it ;) Thepineapplehead 20:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

"Clan gaming"
Someone, please, keep it removed if more admins are coming to revert my edit before even taking a look on what the hell is going on. That section is plain useless, if you know something about Wikipedia and have experience with competitive FPS gaming. Cpt. Obvious.. I mean, there's an article on firearms, compare it to online games, we can also compare M4A1 to Counter-Strike: Source, or AK-47 to Enemy Territory, or even a Desert Eagle to Far Cry. Now, do they mention on the firearms article that what a weapon is, even though it reads there already that it is one, it is a common, known word, and it can be looked up seperately since it if the reader thinks he needs. Same goes for online videogames, does it need to explain beyond the fact that it is a videogame? Well, on the M4A1, do they mention anything about how the gun is USED, like it isn't obvious enough already that this can be looked up on the firearms article if the reader is ignorant on the subject? Is it mentioned in the AK-47 article that "some people group up and go to competitions". CAPTAAAIN OOBVIOOUS! Same point as previously. So why the hell would Counter-Strike: Source or Enemy Territory need a damned explanation that it can be played "online, competitively". Not only is the section - by the way - very stupid, it's poorly written and uses regional terminology (scrimmage? Sorry, Cpt. America, but it's called "clanwar" in Europe, and most people play through IRC or Clanbase) I hope you got my point :) --84.249.252.211 01:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It is legitimate content related to the article and it should stay.-- Andeh 19:09, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * You didn't really read what I wrote? Then let's fucking shove it up every multiplayer article. I'm removing it. I'm pissed off because you didn't respond to me LEGITIMATELY. "Related to the article"? OF COURSE IT IS, BUT FOR GOD'S SAKE, THAT WAS NOT MY POINT! --84.249.252.211 18:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm putting it back. No matter what you think, it's still legitimate content.--WaltCip 00:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The man has a point, besides, the section has been tagged since December 2006. I really despise people who use special cards such as "legitimate content" to pull out when they seem to fear to counter arguments like those presented above. His talkpage already has a mention by a user to create a discussion to reach consensus after removing the section several times and being warned. --194.251.240.116 20:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

This article needs serious cleaning. --84.249.253.201 22:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Be bold and edit it yourself instead of just writing things here. Or be specific and lets us know what needs to be changed. --Habap 18:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

lasercage and office screenshots
Lasercage features a non-standard weapon skin, which could be confusing to readers. Office is an old screenshot from before the radar change so that should also be redone --⁪froth T C  21:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I uploaded a nice "cinematic" screenshot of texturecity with no gun or HUD blocking the view of the level. --⁪froth T C  21:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

lol noobs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.228.94.47 (talk) 13:08, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Iceworld
Anyone else think the maps section deserves a brief mention of the fy_iceworld map? It's extremely popular, with hundreds of fy_iceworld-only servers up at any given time. Along with cs_office, it's one of the only maps that sees single-map dedicated servers. It's also a pretty distinct style of play, given the small field size, lack of objectives (beyond eliminating the opposing team), common central buy zone, and pre-placed weapons at spawn points. I don't think the article needs to go into much detail about specific maps, but a paragraph about iceworld is worth mentioning. There are many other arena-style maps out there now (cs_deagle5, fy_funtimes, etc.), but fy_iceworld is by far the most popular, and one of the earliest (if not the earliest). If there's general agreement that it deserves mention, I'll write up a few sentences about it and a very brief mention of arena style maps in general and add them to the article. James A. Stewart 12:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, we need more detail under "player created maps" and iceworld (along with the texture maps) pretty much represents the best of player-created maps. That whole customization section is looking pretty lean; it's mostly section headings --⁪froth T 20:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

There are an awful lot of "single map" servers appearing (with "de_dust2" as one of the most popular (lately - to April 2007)). Perhaps this single map phenomenon could be discussed? It could also fit under a "Culture" heading, I guess, as there appears to be a vivid (!) discussion re: users who play just one map over and over. SiliconDreams 02:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

This article has 1 source
wtf --Jecrell 10:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add more sources! I agree it needs more, but editors need to add sources in to help the article become better sourced. -- Kesh 03:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Should These Be Mentioned?
Should the betting system and sprays be included in the article? --ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever 23:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sprays are in Counter-Strike culture. The betting script, no. --⁪froth T 07:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI - the Counter-Strike culture page no longer exists. It is redirected to Counter-Strike. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.130.8 (talk) 19:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Customization
It seems like important content as relates to counter-strike but looking at the scope of the article, the customization section seems way too detailed and crufty. Any suggestions? I hesitate to delete it outright, but at the same time right now I think the article would probably be better without it --⁪froth T 07:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone know how to get different characters in your player name? When you see some peoples names, they have X's that are different to the rest of the text, anyone got any ideas?


 * Um, that has absolutly nothing to do with questions about the article. Look it up on google or somthing, not on Wikipedia. And about your question, no. --ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever 01:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * customisation section re-added. Much of my original was modcruft and pared down. I think it's good as it is now ;) Thepineapplehead 20:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

LAN center play
I'd like to see a section added on LAN center play of this game. BigTimeGamer 05:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not really notable. Same game, different place. BJ Talk 06:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Ranking
I'm just asking, is there any kind of ranking in CS source? Chessmanlau 04:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I think only for each server, for example you may be rank 30 in one server, and rank 190 in another server.

There is a global ranking system, called HLSTATSX, but the server administrators have to have it installed. Its not automatic like battlefield 2 or anything like that, and it seems most servers dont have it, so its not really worth mentioning in the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.130.8 (talk) 23:44, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Helmet Comment
"The helmet is usually bought to avoid being killed by an enemy in an "eco round"" That seems a bit of a stupid comment. Seems to imply helmet is best used in the first round that is pistols only. The problem with this is of course that you cannot purchase helmet is the first round, because you don't have the funding to.

The eco round isn't pistol round, Its a save round.--Clownfart 06:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * what happened to this bit? Thepineapplehead 20:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

All Game Guide
How is it that a game as popular as this has almost no entry at All Game Guide? --Wasted Sapience 19:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Mani's Admin Plugin
I think there should be some mention of Mani's plugins popularity in CounterStrike Source since most popular public servers use it. ME 70.247.24.230 15:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I added a line in the mods section Corpx 05:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Map list
Not so long ago I remember this article containing not only a list of maps for cs:s but more importantly a list of maps released for the game for free since it was released. It was a small box of information if I recall. Why was this content removed? I would find this information extremely useful yet instead we have a multi paragraph section on havok physics which is really an extremely minor part of the game. I guess should expect this kind of culling when things like patch lists are removed from other game articles because for some reason it's not what wikipedia is even though it's an encyclopedia.nutcrackr 00:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Mods
There are no published sources about some counter-strike mods (unless you count the mod-creator's website), but this article would be much better with that info. The no original research policy needs a bit of revision. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.126.246.122 (talk) 09:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

Banking Betting
I added a section about the Betting and Banking aspects of many servers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.40.12.147 (talk) 00:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC).


 * I dont think it belongs here, because its part of manimod Corpx 05:20, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

2007 updates?
I felt this warranted a new section in the Talk Page, otherwise any comments/replies would be buried between the comments of years gone by :D

I've re-written parts of the lead paragraph, as much of it was badly worded (for example the use of "as well" THREE TIMES in one paragraph :P).

I plan on adding a small section on purchasing, to split it away from the main lead section and give more detail, as well as add information about Valve's DWP system, and the bad reception it first got (as well as a link to the marketplace, if it still exists).

Also possible additions are maybe a small section on graphical/physics enhancements between the original Goldsrc version and the Source version (although I gather the Havok section was removed?). I may beef up the customisation section - as there has been a rather large increase in the amount of fan customisation sites - FPSBanana, CDG, CSDL, etc - and the community that has sprung up around Source customisation.

I see the main image has been through a few changes; the current version (as of May 2007) seems to show the box art from the retail Source multiplayer pack, which imo is unnecessary and should be changed?

What about a mods/scripts section, like the CS article has?

Thepineapplehead 18:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I've cleaned up much of it. The mods and maps section was highly non-notable, and entirely original research. Also some of the grammar was off. Yes, I know I spelled grammar wrong in my edit sum. Also, fansites do not belong in this article: due to the extreme popularity, we need to limit it to just the official websites, and the professional (i.e. for profit) leagues. Source customization is not a suitable topic for this page. &rArr;   SWAT Jester    Denny Crane.  05:17, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * good stuff, thanks ;) What sort of stuff would be eligible for inclusion? I would like to pad the article out a bit more but obviously some of the things I put in yesterday aren't necessary in the article. Thepineapplehead 11:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to say that doing a Google search on "Counter-Strike Source box" does not return an exclusive box art for the game - just for the "Source Multiplayer Pack".ThunderPower 13:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


 * That's because, AFAIK, there is no singular CS:Source retail edition. You can only get it at it's most basic form in the Source Multiplayer Pack, which is the current image. Thepineapplehead 20:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CSS.JPG
Image:CSS.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Current info?
What's the meaning of the tag? What exactly is outdated here? Corpx 01:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * One reason could be that some the info supporting it's popularity from 2002, 2004, and 2006. --ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever 14:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The popularity section is talking about 1.6, not CS:S's popularity. These are 2 different games Corpx 17:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * So, I removed that section because it is talking about a different game. Corpx 17:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Many of the weapons available have changed in name, for example the D. Eagle is now the Night Hawk. (please sign your posts)


 * They haven't changed in name. IIRC, since 1.6 (or was it 1.5) the weapons have always used fictitious names. However we can't refer to the deagle as a "night hawk" as that's just silly. Thepineapplehead 18:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cs comparison new.jpg
Image:Cs comparison new.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cs comparison new.jpg
Image:Cs comparison new.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

"noobs"
This article constantly mentions "noobs" and "horrible players" and the like. Not very encyclopediac. It needs a rewrite in these instances. --Ihmhi 03:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a noob and a horrible player to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.88.255 (talk) 21:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Source differences?
Isn't it worth noting the more serious differences Source has over normal CS? That is, virtually all guns are more accurate both standing still, moving and ducking, almost all guns do much more damage, flash bangs are much more effective, and the shotguns have a much tighter spread? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.107.97.26 (talk) 23:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Pictures
I'm new to wikipedia, we have pictures here that are to be removed by the 25th, would that be fixable by reducing the resolution a great deal? I would try it but I'm at work right now.Vtrickzv 04:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CS radar comparison.jpg
Image:CS radar comparison.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 15:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Gameplay Changes
I've added the gameplay changes back in if there is a reason why it should not be in here please explain why?

123.243.102.177 08:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Weapon "prices?" Huh?
Having never played this game (or the original CS), I don't even understand what it means by weapon "prices." This article seems to assume the reader knows entirely too much about CS to actually be useful as an article on CS:S. I mean, if my experience with the WoW articles and CS's known fandom is any indication, I'm sure so-called "fan cruft" creep has been a problem for this article, but still... the article is quite lacking right now. It's like a CS:S news page without any actual information on what the game is about or how it's played beyond the absolute basics (terrorists vs. counter-terrorists). RobertM525 07:54, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * if you dont know already, all the items in game cost "money" you start with a knife and a pistol on each team, but each item you buy costs money that you earn by your team winning a round by default, by killing a player, blowing up a target, saving a vip etc...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.160.130.38 (talk) 01:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

ESRB Rating
I'm pretty sure the ESRB rating for CS:S is actually M for Mature (17+). As seen in this image 76.68.111.39 (talk) 02:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Reviews


Here is what I found so far. BJ Talk 21:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Deathmatch Mod
I would like to put a death match section under the mods section. Anyone have any input on it?Funni3fx3 (talk) 04:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd agree to help with putting sections for the popular mods Gungame, Surf, Zombiemod and deathmatch. Possibly a section on Weapons as well. Floorhugger (talk) 20:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Map Types
Do we really need to list all these types? Surely say the 5 most common (cs_, de_, surf_, aim_, fy_) should be fine?

zm_ and gg_ are also common. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.34.8.65 (talk) 22:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Awop Glitches
I found out when using the scout against an awop scout fires simu or before the awop (sound of scout goes off first) and it hits the wall in a body or headshot instead of opponent, while the awop hits the target. Awop glitch. Maybe put a section on Awop glitches. Did this happen in the previous version? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.55.212.187 (talk) 17:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Knife?
Do you actually run faster with the knife? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.107.87.10 (talk) 16:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

only very slightly, but enough to get an edge. Strangely enough you actually run fastest whilst holding the scout.Floorhugger (talk)

Steam "Megadeal"
There was an edit with a link, saying that the link is for people to get counter strike at a massively reduced price, The link is to steam-powered.co.cc, and the .co.cc TLD is a free domain. I think this is a Phishing attempt, but im not sure. I dont know how to report this either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.80.42.196 (talk) 23:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Same, also had a repost of the same site. Taken off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.176.69 (talk) 00:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Now the phishing page back, pretending to be a link to a steam counterstrike league. Removing. Veritron (talk) 02:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I think there should be a reception page or initial reviews page on this article. Anyone else agree? JordanGreen09 (talk) 13:07, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed an ad for servers in the external links
I never registered for wikipedia and I randomly fix small things every so often (I have a dynamic ip so you won't see a history). There was an ad for CSS servers that I removed just now. I checked the users contribs page and every edit was the same thing as this page. Somebody who actually knows what to do might want to warn him or whatever you do here. 75.162.6.61 (talk) 00:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Half Life 2 Deathmatch and Day of Defeat Source
I think their should be a mention of the two other games included in the retail pack of CS:S. Escpecially as they can clearly be seen in the boxart on the page. Sir Fritz (talk) 05:31, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Both of those games are mentioned in other articles, HL2DM is part of the HL2 page, and DoDS is its own article. Mentioning them just because they are on the box is kind of stupid.  As you said, they are clearly seen on the box.  Also you can download CSS off of steam, meaning it doesn't come with those games. Halofanatic333 (talk) 12:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Free Counter-Strike: Source
What are the ways you can legitimately get Counter-Strike: Source for free? I don't see it mentioned in the article. Henjeng55155 (talk) 05:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no way to obtain it for free, you have to pay. Eik Corell (talk) 09:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * you can freeload by constantly getting guest passes. But you must pay to get it. Also getting it for "free" would be stealing.Halofanatic333 (talk) 14:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It was bundled for free with Half Life 2 in open beta form when it first came out —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.76.32.145 (talk) 23:46, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That has nothing to do with the present question at hand, being "Can he still get it for free?" Legally the answer is still no, unless someone buys it for him, or he finds an unused game somewhere (outside of a store).Halofanatic333 (talk) 15:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * First of all, this has nothing to do with the article or intent of editing the article. Also, there is no way to get the game for free. It is currently on sale though. Doshindude (talk) 16:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes it does. It's not mentioned in the article that there is or was any chance that CS:S could be obtained for free, and given that the original CS was free to download as a mod, it may be confusing for people who are new to CS:S. Henjeng55155 (talk) 17:13, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Boxart
Just wondering, but why is the box art on here the one for Australia? Wouldn't it make more sense to have the US Box?Halofanatic333 (talk) 15:19, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

It wouldn't make any more sense. --Jwitch (talk) 17:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I just figure that more Americans play CSS than Aussies. Not to mention, the ESRB logo is a more well known.  But whatever. Halofanatic333 (talk) 15:25, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

The Boxart is the one for England too. This is the art on my copy of CS:S. Twunk (talk) 19:28, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Removed mentions of cheating player
The sentence "Also, a known hacker is "XX" who also has downs syndrome" is just.. stupid, there are thousands of hackers in CS:S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.52.123.37 (talk) 16:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Update to Source2009
To the IP who just copy/pasted the changelog: No. Bad IP. Write it into a continuous text. --Saftorangen (talk) 02:03, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Abbreviation reverted
After fixing the misleading abbreviation description, the article was reverted, nullifying the change. The corrected abbreviation descriptions follow from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Counter-Strike:_Source&oldid=380124433. Apparently, the reverter felt the additional information needed a source (which I believe I had already supplied). Could someone explain why the fix failed to suffice (and why it was reverted entirely rather than updated)? Edited to add signature --Krainert (talk) 14:32, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The stuff that needed a source was the Cascading Style Sheets part. The first part was OK I think. Eik Corell (talk) 15:43, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Valve Task Force Re-vitalization
Attention, all contributors to the Valve Task Force and the articles it constitutes!

I am here to announce that I will be re-vitalizing the Valve Task Force, aimed at universally improving articles constituting Valve Corporation, their employees, associates and products. This specific task force has been dormant for quite some time and with two very notable releases coming out this year, I feel like this is the appropriate time to re-stimulate the general aim of this group. For those who are not already members of the Valve Task Force, feel free to add your name to our members list and contribute to whatever articles you feel your contributions may prove beneficial for. Valve, its products and notable employees have proven to be essential to the progression of the video game industry, so I'd like to make a call of arms for this cause. D arth B otto talk•cont 22:05, 08 February 2011 (UTC)

Bundle
Wasn't this game included with the retail edition of Half-Life 2? Not The Orange Box, the original 2004 release. Worth a mention. JaffaCakeLover (talk) 14:24, 27 February 2011 (UTC)