| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (26)

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:08PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Awesome idea, but this will kill competitive play in leagues.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
thats stupid.

ill just play on servers that give a crap load of money to play with the guns i wanna play with.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:21PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
With all of the "AWP only!" servers currently running, there's going to be very few AWP users in regular play.

I fully support this upgrade to the system. =D
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:21PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Pretty stupid idea to mess with a gameplay mode and concept that has worked for years.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:44PM medeasin said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh, Vlad is going to be pissed that you stole his 133t graphs idea.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:28PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Just another reason why 1.6 is 10x better.
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2006 3:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Just another reason why 1.6 > CSS
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Holy shit the deagle is almost 1.5k
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Im with commenter #4. I've played CS on and off since the early Beta's. If it aint broke dont fix it, I'm guessing that were going to start seeing max cash servers just so people can play with the damn guns they want to. I dont see how the feedback from the CS community is going to be positive on this change. I play CS on and off but this definitely removes any desire to play i've recently had.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:36PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow, now THIS is smart! I've always wondered why statistics did not play a greater role in shaping our gaming experience. Detecting cheaters using statistical analysis of player performance is EASY AS CAKE. I still can't understand why a player can load up a hack and start scoring 4 or 5 standard deviations above the mean and not be instantly perma-banned.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think that's a great idea, weapons/price will not only be balanced, they will be autobalanced!!

I hope other companies will find similar algorithms for other games and genres, as RTSs. Although prices shouldn't change too often or players will feel like noobs needing to check all the prices everyday.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:41PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This balances the game and forces people to try different strategies. Instead of just whoring one weapon and being good at just a couple of things, people will now have to be more strategic.

Strategy is largely missing from a game that's supposed to be "Squad-based."
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 5:00PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Does this mean my FAMAS will be cheaper? I never see people using it.

Sweet.....
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:53PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
As long as they don't go fuxing around with 1.6...
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:57PM Telprydain said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is, perhaps, the best idea I’ve ever seen. It would be of great use in games like Warcraft 3, where people tend to get set patterns of behaviour based solely on min-maxing. Allowing a game to autobalance is the future of competitive gaming – no more can people whine that their favourite unit/race/gun is over/over priced.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 4:59PM Kiey said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's possible that eventually all the guns will end up in an equalibrium, but its also very possible that some guns could greatly vary in price week to week. One week it could be just too expensive to buy, and then the next week everyone buys it since it ends up being super cheap. Then the price sky rockets again, etc.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 6:57PM Twist said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I just wonder how long it will be before someone makes a stock market like game based off of these stats. Everyone starts with like $10,000 and they can buy/sell shares in each weapon with the share price being the current weapon value.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 5:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Too bad they stole this idea from UT Austin's programmers.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 5:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow, GG Valve. Instead of actually, you know, developing a more extensive gameplay environment outside of THREE MINUTE ROUNDS that are consistently reset to fixed positions, you take the more obvious course: dynamically scale the most pointless and anal-retentive addition to the "experience" of CS, that of microeconomics.

Sorry, I've played CS since Beta One, and I quit shortly after they bought the game and put out 1.0... Valve has done nothing except noobify this title to the nTh degree, sitting it on the backburner and raking in the cash. Way to kill of Action Half Life so you can have a single rising mod star that is tactically inept and conceptually retarded. Screw Goose for letting it happen and not forcing them to flesh out the concept after they purchased his ass, too. Weaksauce.

Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 6:06PM Firegrl said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ah, just another reason why I don't play CSS and stick with 1.6. You know there will be jerks out there skewing the system or something...
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 6:14PM mercuryswitch said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What's to stop people from loading 100 instances of the CS:S Dedicated Server, creating a script that will admin the server, make bots that buy an item, admin script restart the round, assign $16000 to every bot, and make them buy the same item over and over, just to mess with the economy?
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 7:15PM JoshMilewski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is pretty cool. It changes things up a bit and keeps the fresh.

And the Bullpup is probably my favorite, too.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 9:55PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have to respect Valve for having the balls to piss off the hardcore CS players.

Things like this are 5 years overdue. But like an earlier poster implied, some people are going to mess with the economy with bogus servers. And others will set server variables to circumvent the new feature.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2006 11:13PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I haven't played CSS recently, but with the information given to me so far, I find that it is completely ridiculous that this is a required "upgrade", not a option for servers to turn on and off (or potentially set weapons costs to whatever the admins want, not what Valve wants).
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2006 12:46AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is the old "good in theory, questionable in practice" change.
Reply

Posted: Dec 20th 2006 6:36PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm sorry but your graph is inaccurate, what you have shown is a shift in the demand curve, while it should be a shift ALONG the demand curve. Your graph states that a higher price in bullpups would result in a higher quantity of bullpups supplied, while in actuality, the higher price of bullpups would result in a lower quantity supplied.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW