Monday November 23 2009
Counter-Strike
Official Design Partner
Story Header

Counter-Strike: Bootman's Source Rant

By: Chris Boutte - Published December 31, 2004 at 4:32 PM EST - Writer Archive
Well it is about time that an analyst opens his mouth about Counter-Strike: Source, and who better than bootman?! Come inside to see what bootman thinks about the changes from 1.6 to Source and his views on it being used in competitive play.
Bootman Source Rant

This is more or less an analyst’s rant about Counter-Strike: Source. Don't expect me to change the views of everyone in the community by talking about the hitboxes, interp, or anything crazy like that. I am here to discuss the obvious reasons why this game should not even be considered to be played at any large tournament.

The first subject that I must stress is the fact that this is NOT Counter-Strike, this is Source. This is a completely different game. Just because it has the same guns and concepts does not make it the same game. Remember all of those modifications like Urban Terror and such for the Quake 3 engine and Soldier of Fortune engine. We never called those Counter-Strike. Why start now?

Now for articles supporting source, such as alchemist's, and using the line about the old changes and how everyone learned to get used to them, that's like apples to oranges. I can honestly say that when all of the changes happened like the AWP losing the crosshair and the biggest change that people actually said they would quit over, the jump lag. These were all updates and moderate changes to the game that no real Counter-Strike enthusiast would quit for, and none did.

Now we have a completely new game and I am supposed to believe I should get used to it like jump lag? Come on.

Recently I have played a couple source scrims out of pure boredom on de_dust2 and if the greatest and most popular map in the game is this messed up, something is wrong.

First off there is the shortened routes and more wide open areas. All this is, is noob-friendly. Have you tried to snipe middle? It is like a flood gate is open rather than a skilled narrow shot.

Next the replacement of boxes for source items. I love the new half-life engine. I love shooting barrels around, but not in Counter-Strike. When I first heard about these interactive items, as an analyst it added a whole new dimension of tactics, but then you realize how they are just there for show. These have no reason to be in the game. I recall trying to play long A and not being able to watch my spot because a barrel was rolling me out of position. I don't think that should happen to two top teams competing for $50,000.

The new flashbangs. No problem. Great effect, definitely a keeper.

One of my biggest tiffs with the decision to switch to source is the fact that there are no maps for it yet. We have a bad de_dust2 and the rest of the maps are unused currently(prodigy and Aztec), or not the best competitive maps(cbble). Maybe CAL/CPL have all of the other big maps like nuke, train, and inferno in the makes, but who knows.

One of the biggest arguments is about the fact that sponsors don’t want to sponsor a 6 year old game. I was just talking to an acquaintance of mine Craig “Torbull” Levine and he brought up a great point. Well think about it from a sponsor’s perspective. Sure you don’t need the latest cards or chips to run 1.6, but who cares? Are sponsors advertising to Counter-Strike players…or gamers. Coca-Cola doesn’t have billboards at baseball games to have baseball fans drink coke, but to have their logo seen by a large audience. Eyeballs are eyeballs.

How many Counter-Strike players do you know that only play Counter-Strike? Counter-Strike players are gamers. When they see these ads and see the latest cards and chips they get them not for Counter-Strike, but for Everquest 2, World of Warcraft, Half-Life 2, etc. It is a pointless argument and all of the big sponsors understand this.

But we are now straying off of the subject. The point of this article is to merely explain that this game is NOT the game that built the community. It is nothing like it, so why change games? These tournaments have plenty of other games to grab these sponsors with, but we all know the largest numbers are coming from Counter-Strike. There is no reason to kill a community, because a new game came out.

These tournaments need to step back and look at the future of eSports rather than what car they are buying next fall.

User Comments

1
35% Ranking 35% Ranking 35% Ranking 35% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

i agree
4
76% Ranking 76% Ranking 76% Ranking 76% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

Hmmm.. Nice coca cola comment.. Intresting point
5
16% Ranking 16% Ranking 16% Ranking 16% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

good read, some good valid points
Got Milk?
6
157% Ranking 157% Ranking 157% Ranking 157% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

bootman! good to see you still love 1.6 =]
7
24% Ranking 24% Ranking 24% Ranking 24% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

Good stuff.
neat-o gang
8
36% Ranking 36% Ranking 36% Ranking 36% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

everyone jump on the bootman bandwagon now!
you get the "lol loser" - [b]Hooman[/b]
9
29% Ranking 29% Ranking 29% Ranking 29% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

good writeup
10
13% Ranking 13% Ranking 13% Ranking 13% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

lets cry about it
11
20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

" One of the biggest arguments is about the fact that sponsors don’t want to sponsor a 6 year old game. I was just talking to an acquaintance of mine Craig “Torbull” Levine and he brought up a great point. Well think about it from a sponsor’s perspective. Sure you don’t need the latest cards or chips to run 1.6, but who cares? Are sponsors advertising to Counter-Strike players…or gamers. Coca-Cola doesn’t have billboards at baseball games to have baseball fans drink coke, but to have their logo seen by a large audience. Eyeballs are eyeballs."

You heard it from team3d.
Sponsor arguement is dead sorry.

What are you kids gonna argue now? Gameplay is better?
Yeah ok.

What else, maps are better?
Good joke, you can block a long a rush by shooting a barrel over.

What else? Hitboxes?
Yes hitboxes must be better because I forgot shooting the chest was a HS.

This comment was edited at 12/31/2004 5:24 PM
If you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything.
12
36% Ranking 36% Ranking 36% Ranking 36% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

The sponsor paragraph was really the only new/useful one.

It was good though.
13
39% Ranking 39% Ranking 39% Ranking 39% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

finally a good article about source
Alpha Team Clan Shabba Krew Gaming Royalty Syndicate Two Thousand
14
4% Ranking 4% Ranking 4% Ranking 4% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

I don't understand why they are just moving all the cal-i teams from 1.6 to source cal-i. Everyone should play and be expected to preform and then be placed accordingly.

I know for a fact there are unheard of source teams that will dominate cal-o but deserve to be in cal-i.
15
27% Ranking 27% Ranking 27% Ranking 27% Ranking
-1 Frags
+   -

Meh, I don't care what you say.. it's just 1.6 with better graphics and different maps. The gameplay remains the same.
"I thought smoke grenades shrouded my appearance." - GamerCo | Medias on 16-bit
16
10% Ranking 10% Ranking 10% Ranking 10% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

bootman, this is appropriately titled a rant, i would hardly call this an article. it was just complaining from an "analyst." were you even around when the community dealt with other changes?
_\|/_
18
29% Ranking 29% Ranking 29% Ranking 29% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

great article...

and i rarely agree with 1927 but he's right the sponsor arguement is DEAD.
Every team has a noob..he's the one who mm1's the most DOoD.
19
47% Ranking 47% Ranking 47% Ranking 47% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

I just can't imagine Source playable as a competitive game. I played it on LAN with some friends at residence, and it felt like I had a 500 ping trying to play 1.6, nothing was the same. Recoil is all messed up and you can't hit your shots like 1.6, and you can't stand still if you are within 5 feet of a random tire or barrel, and this is on LAN.

These friends had never played counter-strike before, and they thought Source was AWESOME. I think it really proves how noob-friendly the game is. The only other guy that had played 1.6 felt exactly the same as me, it was not the same game.

This comment was edited at 12/31/2004 5:28 PM
AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ ~ ATI Radeon X850XT
20
20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

#14's post is the #1 reason why source is a bad game. THERE IS NO SKILL GAP ANY IDIOT WITH NO BRAINS STRATS OR AIM CAN BE GOOD.
If you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything.
22
20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

#16 you talk like you are good at cs, sorry.
If you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything.
23
14% Ranking 14% Ranking 14% Ranking 14% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

good write-up, source blows
24
29% Ranking 29% Ranking 29% Ranking 29% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

#11 needs some help thinking.
highfive called me a prick over the internets =/
25
26% Ranking 26% Ranking 26% Ranking 26% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

I like source.
#veracity-css CAL-Main 6-1
26
20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

#15 you've either never played 1.6 with under 500 ping or never played source, you pick.
If you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything.
27
19% Ranking 19% Ranking 19% Ranking 19% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

It's pretty safe to say that #15 is a total moron.
28
7% Ranking 7% Ranking 7% Ranking 7% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

This is definately more like a rant than an article. Everyone has, and is entitled to an opinion. The only problem is CPL has a different one than Bootmans which will sway a lot of "gamers".
.isolated
29
19% Ranking 19% Ranking 19% Ranking 19% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

Not true #20

Try playing source before you make stupid comments. I like 1.6 better than Source but if you're going to say something about the game, at least make it true.

And make it out of CAL-IM, nub.
angst
31
46% Ranking 46% Ranking 46% Ranking 46% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

I think CPL is shooting itself in the foot by moving to source. The game really is not teamplay friendly, and the reason people watch CS 1.6 is to watch the teamplay.
#deadbolt
32
29% Ranking 29% Ranking 29% Ranking 29% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

so what are the chances that the cpl realize they made a mistake?

This comment was edited at 12/31/2004 5:23 PM
Every team has a noob..he's the one who mm1's the most DOoD.
33
24% Ranking 24% Ranking 24% Ranking 24% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

i have to agree with this rant
34
13% Ranking 13% Ranking 13% Ranking 13% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

good points.
35
20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

#24 needs an opinion, so I can explain why hes wrong.

Thanks for nuking me, the truth about source hurts right?
If you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything.
36
23% Ranking 23% Ranking 23% Ranking 23% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

the last paragraph and sentences sums everything up, why kill the community that brings all the numbers in?
37
47% Ranking 47% Ranking 47% Ranking 47% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

source is good and here to stay
I LIKE CS TO PLAY
38
20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

" One of the biggest arguments is about the fact that sponsors don’t want to sponsor a 6 year old game. I was just talking to an acquaintance of mine Craig “Torbull” Levine and he brought up a great point. Well think about it from a sponsor’s perspective. Sure you don’t need the latest cards or chips to run 1.6, but who cares? Are sponsors advertising to Counter-Strike players…or gamers. Coca-Cola doesn’t have billboards at baseball games to have baseball fans drink coke, but to have their logo seen by a large audience. Eyeballs are eyeballs."

You heard it from team3d.
Sponsor arguement is dead sorry.

What are you kids gonna argue now? Gameplay is better?
Yeah ok.

What else, maps are better?
Good joke, you can block a long a rush by shooting a barrel over.

What else? Hitboxes?
Yes hitboxes must be better because I forgot shooting the chest was a HS.
If you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything.
39
52% Ranking 52% Ranking 52% Ranking 52% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

AMEN this is a very weel written article. the only thing not mentioned is the mass amounts of Lan centers and people from foreign countrys who cant support this new technological update
41
41% Ranking 41% Ranking 41% Ranking 41% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

sorry, but i disagree. I completely agree that 1.6 is the superior game. By leaps and bounds, however, the sponsors don't just want their logo seen, they want their products purchased. Plus the graphics (though I know 99% of the community could care less) are very outdated. We're trying to attract spectators and fans and most gamers who know nothing about competitive gaming will say "Well, Doom 3 looks better, so I'm gonna follow that. I mean Wow those graphics are amazing! CS just looks so bad compared to it." And they'll never get into the game and realize how exciting it is and be stuck with Doom 3, which is a dying game cuz the gameplay sucks. If Valve does ANYTHING with Source it'll be an improvement but I think that that's where our hope lies.
DPAD - Nintendo Department
42
7% Ranking 7% Ranking 7% Ranking 7% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

Guess what, you can still play what you like. No one is going to your home and forcing you to play CS:S by turning your computer on and straping you to the chair.

There are lots of reasons why CS 1.6 can be seen as better than CSS. But saying "Now we have a completely new game and I am supposed to believe I should get used to it like jump lag" is missing the point.
43
18% Ranking 18% Ranking 18% Ranking 18% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

completely agree!
44
30% Ranking 30% Ranking 30% Ranking 30% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

#14 all cal needs is for cal-i teams to play source since they are a good chunk of teams that play at the cpl for all the rest of the gamers to switch over also.
45
20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

#42 you missed the point, people want to compete in CAL and don't want to get used to a new game, it would be like saying, CAL-i is moving to COD, it's wrong.
If you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything.
46
13% Ranking 13% Ranking 13% Ranking 13% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

Most of the articles posted here have brought up great points, including this one. There's still a few subjects not being talked about, though. One of those being the fact that all CS 1.6 players have no one in their corner when it comes to this game surviving. Think about it:

Vavle doesn't want you to play CS 1.6. They want you to buy their new product.

ATI, Nvidia, and Intel want you to upgrade your computer. Hence, buy their new products. (Bootman's argument isn't totally true)

CAL wants to switch to Source there by REDUCING the amount of work they have to do reviewing cheat accusations exponentially (This is honestly the best arguement they have).

Angel Munoz would most likely be happy to keep running 1.6 tourneys IF his organization could find sponsors... but it can't. He has to listen to those who control the purse strings.

Capitolism is based on expansion and growth. There is no monetary rewards for buisness if we are playing a 6 yr. old game -no matter how popular it is.

Ouside of a miracle, wave bye bye to 1.6. I hate it, too but this community is not organized, or mature enough to really understand how to tackle this problem in the legal, financial, or intellectual way required.

This comment was edited at 12/31/2004 5:29 PM
47
24% Ranking 24% Ranking 24% Ranking 24% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

Totally agree
48
41% Ranking 41% Ranking 41% Ranking 41% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

#46 has it. I totally agree with everything bootman and the rest of the community says, but it has to be faced. 1.6 is gonna die.
DPAD - Nintendo Department
49
37% Ranking 37% Ranking 37% Ranking 37% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

hmm the other article was good but so was this .. I CANT CHOOSEE!!!!!!!
[b]im a nice guy[/b]
50
20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking 20% Ranking
0 Frags
+   -

#46, 1.6 has the players, and if everyone is smart enough to realize this, we can change it, don't go to source, what will CAL and CPL do with no competetors? They will have to change, not change the game.
If you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything.

More Pages

Submit Comments

Registered Users Only

In order to post comments, you must be a registered member. If you have not registered, it's free and easy!

Latest Poll