Valve's Counter-Strike tweaks to level pistol prices [update 1]
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Dec 11th 2006 at 9:15PM }
Counter Strike: Source's dynamic pricing system has raised the Desert Eagle's cost to a point that Valve has admitted to be "somewhat out of control." As the only viable pistol option, the "Deagle" has become one of CS:S's most expensive items, since the pricing system raises and lowers costs according to popularity. Valve hopes that by tweaking the effectiveness of the Five Seven, P228, and Dual Elites pistols, players will cash in for these decidedly cheaper options, in turn driving the Deagle's price back down.Update: the new modifications have already been introduced.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Night Elve @ Dec 11th 2006 9:22PM
Such a great game!
Gotta love Counter Strike :)
awesomeo @ Dec 11th 2006 9:31PM
It seems that cs has been tweaked to death at this point. The latest build seemed so watered down that it is hardly fun anymore. Also, with more in-game ads on the way for 1.6, cs is becoming less and less desirable for my headshot fix than ever before, which makes me sad.
Kritz @ Dec 11th 2006 9:35PM
Wasn't, at some point, the Deagle around $24,000? When the max amount of money you can get is $16,000?
Man. *Goes back to Roller Coaster Tycoon*.
>> Kritz
ben @ Dec 11th 2006 9:37PM
deagle is NOT the only viable pistol option. i almost actually prefer the 5-7. it's quite simply one of the most accurate guns in the game, with such little recoil that popping off two consecutive headshots is nearly no problem at all. similarly, i find utility in the USP for its overall balance as well as stealth potential. what counter-strike needs is less stubborn players, not constantly modified weapons.
Mark @ Dec 11th 2006 9:42PM
Barely news. CS:S is still being played is the real issue here. Don't get me wrong, it's a beautiful game, but the wonky gameplay turns me off.
*Goes back to FEAR Combat."
Neccy @ Dec 11th 2006 9:46PM
you know that #4 actually speaks sense.
Yes last time I gad a game it was definatly around the 20,000 mark so 24,000 sounds about right.
I think some of the CS:S tweaks and upgrades have been fantastic, and at the very least keeps the good ol' ageing fps game we know fresh and new.
Jon @ Dec 11th 2006 9:49PM
"The new modifications are scheduled to be introduced this week."
Actually, they were introduced four hours before you posted this, Joystiq. ES57, Compact 228 and Dual Elites are now 25% more effective. :)
CYRiX @ Dec 11th 2006 10:02PM
I love how valve wants the system to balance itself out when they could of just left CSS as it was and people would still be playing it.
Kiey @ Dec 11th 2006 10:07PM
I was always a fan of the 5-7 too. It was such a quick shot, and with so little recoil it made it easy to squeeze off a couple of shots without affecting your aim too much. Plus it has a pretty large clip, which is always nice.
pathwarden @ Dec 11th 2006 10:12PM
That audience would shrink over time. This is more of a case of injecting new life into the game, rather than letting it stagnate (as well as to make it more than just a graphical upgrade of CS 1.6). You could potentially get new gamers involved doing that. It's also good business on valve's part, showing they have a commitment to improve upon their games. Either that or they love to screw with diehards. :P
Duby @ Dec 11th 2006 10:14PM
Shouldn't they be able to introduce some element of "supply" into their equation, rather than relying on just demand? Rather than tweaking the effectiveness of the guns, can't they pretend the "virtual manufacturers" of the guns adjust their production lines to accomodate the increased demand? Of course, that will basically just lower the price of the deagle, perhaps until it is ubiquitous. But, darn it, if that's the gun I want to play with, I don't want to be told I can't afford it just because everybody else wants one.
(I get that enough when I browse the consoles formerly known as nextgen on ebay.)
str33tshark @ Dec 11th 2006 10:18PM
I love the Deagle and i was pissed when i could afford an AWP but not a deagle. Most servers seem to have reverted back to the old pricing stratigy, because even the M4A1 and AK47 are way overpriced
Tobin @ Dec 11th 2006 10:23PM
I think that the prices of guns should change per round, so that the deagle might get cheaper as a match goes on. in a competitive game, money and what round it is is important an axample, the saying "fourth round, awps come out."
busydoingnothing @ Dec 11th 2006 10:32PM
I think the dynamic pricing system in Counter-Strike is a great way to introduce our young to the real world. The rich players only get richer (better weapons = more kills = more money) and retain their power (stay at the top of the scoreboard) while the poor players only get poorer (lousier weapons = fewer kills = greater chance of dying = spending money on weapons every round). If only those poor players had a more powerful PC, faster connection, and a better reaction time (poverty = depression = slow reaction time)...
rom @ Dec 11th 2006 10:47PM
I hate to say this but I never use the 5-7. Why? Its expensive and weak. Not good enough to be a replacemet for a bigger weapon. The Deagle is the only thing I would ever consider buying when my funds are low.
Morale @ Dec 11th 2006 11:13PM
I have been playing CounterStrike for almost 8 years, and it is unfortunate that Valve feels they need to change their stance on the dynamic pricing system. The whole point was to get people to use other guns. Make the price of overused weapons skyrocket, and force people to change their playstyle. If you wanted the benefit of a sidearm to turn the tide of a battle, you'd better damn well learn to use a 5-7 or Duel Elites, or die to someone who actually has another weapon to pull out when you both empty your clips. Your choice.
The dynamic pricing isn't broken. Eventually when deagles and AWPs and Colts and AKs are too expensive to buy, people will HAVE to start using SMGs, shotguns, Scouts and the other pistols, and skill with these weapons and nades will start to matter and their place in the game will have importance. You'll see skirmishes and firefights in enclosed areas, not people trying to snipe each other down hallways. The game will be more interesting, and you'll start to see the people that are more skilled overall at the game at the tops of the leaderboards instead of the lamers who are 35-5 with an AWP every round. CounterStrike would become team- and squad-based combat again.
Unless, of course, you like teams full of awpers w/deagles and the fire-auto-switch-to-deagle scripts, and the lamers with Colts and AKs headshotting you across the map. Woowoo, loads of fun.
Mr, Objectional @ Dec 11th 2006 11:11PM
No compact fans in here? I can't even put a finger on it but it always puts the bullet where I need it to.
cyberfrog @ Dec 11th 2006 11:21PM
Just curious, did they ever solve the hitbox wierdness? I never understood why it was bizarre in counterstrike, but not in the ww2 game? bizarre.
gman @ Dec 11th 2006 11:56PM
fuckin five seven owns all handguns. Anyone who still worships a deagle hasn't played enough cs.
swifti @ Dec 12th 2006 12:03AM
See? Valve's Dynamic Weapon Pricing shows that Adam Smith's Invisible Hand works. :P
FSK405K @ Dec 12th 2006 12:03AM
It's more than watered down...they long threw away the claim to realism that was the original inspiration for the game. Despite revolving part of my life around the game (for instance, this screen name), I left when they introduced radar. Since then it's been becoming more and more of a fantasy game.
If only some other game would implement a dual victory condition system--kill the whole team or accomplish X--I would be hooked to that game like crack.
The Hanged Man @ Dec 12th 2006 12:19AM
Deagles just scream "My penis is WAAAAAAAY bigger than yours."
Therefore they should not be subject to restriction through overwhelming demand.
Tom @ Dec 12th 2006 9:23AM
I've never noticed this problem, but that's because most of the random servers I join are running a mod that gives everyone tons of money. I really wish there were more non-modded servers.
Magical Prawn @ Dec 12th 2006 11:19AM
The point of this pricing system is that people will use other weapons etc etc. But, when one team is really winning, THEY are the ones that can afford the good guns, like the M4 or AK47 or even the Night Hawk or AWP. The losing team will be able to afford the Mac10 and a stupid piece of non-helping Kevlar after 3 rounds of saving. If you ask me, this makes the game even more unbalanced.
sikarios @ Jan 15th 2007 3:41PM
Until steam/valve decide to re-evaluate the buying plans for CS:S I'm going on boycott/vacation and starting my own business. Because valve tweeks mistakes instead of just coming clean and saying they screwed up, this could be a long time. I think all the guns were usefull in their own way. Changing gun performance will only frustrate those that have learned each gun for its pros/cons, forcing them to change tactics and buying strategy to compensate for Valve's stupidity. CS:S was a good game and might be once again if steam rolls back content and makes it less of a resource hog. 1.6 reigns supreme!!