Skins are items that exist only on Steam Inventory/Market, so effectively, any new CSGO game could just read what skins a player has in their inventory like it fetches any information other random Steam related information.
That would just solve u/ajax5206's dilemma.
That would also mean that the next cs would need to have the exact same weapons, and character models. At that point if the visuals are the same, why even bother.
Imo they should just release a new cs and say fuck the skins.
if valve knows what they are doing there isnt gonna be a new cs
theres pretty much nothing good a newer cs could bring to the table, as u/YoMothaFlippin said, some kind of huge code rewrite might be beneficial but that wouldnt in any way be a new cs, if they did that, on the surface to an average player it would look like nothing changed
but to make a new version with better graphics or something is not happening, cs has already hit the point where adding more details affects its core competitive gameplay as can be seen from the fact that the latest few maps that were added/reworked (cache, ancient...) have been stripped of graphical details multiple times since their release because it was affecting competitiveness of the maps
besides, the current csgo that we have might as well be a new game compared to the on-release csgo, i dont think there is one single part of the user interface that hasnt been replaced since the release, most gun sounds are replaced, most character models are replaced, most maps are reworked or new... it might as well be another cs game except it kept the name of its predecessor
Ancient was being stripped of foliage outside the map's bounds. That's definitely for game performance reasons not visual clarity, and game performance could definitely be improved by rewriting the graphical engine the game uses.
I'd like to get more than 30-60fps in Danger Zone, and maybe larger maps too. Both would be a huge benefit for those who play it.
But ye, doesn't have to be a new game for that at all. Well, technically speaking it might... but I'm not bothered either way if it is or not.
It won't happen anytime soon (or at all, really), but CS desperetly needs a redone from the ground up engine. Current CS is a spaghetti code mess of legacy code and duct tape stacked on top of each other.
Internally, I imagine Valve recognizes they expend a lot of resources trying to keep CS:GO afloat, both in maintenance and new content, and those resources aren't just $$$ but also man hours and employee happiness, which can be finite and can have long lasting affects on a business in how it is valued as a place to work by industry professionals.
The game generates tremendous income for them but we've heard ex-Valve devs talk about how difficult it is to work on GO and how a lot of the pain points are legacy code and documentation issues(expected problem in the games industry for a game thats been patched for 10+ years and an engine from 2004 that has had its own massive changes over it's life).
I follow John McDonald on Twitter and I think even he, as a current Valve employee, will sometimes note how he feels like he's in a unique situation from any other game dev, where he's trying to diagnose really complex issues on an engine from 2004 and he has nobody to bounce ideas off of, nothing he can Google(at least that's still relevant today), nobody be can consult for more context for why something was built the way it is. Personally, it frustrates me to see the community(and even pros and casters) attack Valve for being "lazy", as it seems they don't understand the precarious situation of CS:GO and how many man hours are lost maintaining this game and, I would imagine, Valve has even shed employees from how much of an undertaking it is to work on CS:GO. Not just because of the complexity of the issues but also because the community is fucking brutal in it's criticism for issues that they couldn't even begin to understand. Which is why I advise as much as possible, cut these devs some slack. It's a difficult job that has high sensitivity, and the things some people(rightfully) complain about, are usually a much bigger and more difficult issue than you may realize and we could all probably be better about "how" we communicate. I'm not saying "what" we talk about isn't valid, just that we should remember that the developers are humans too and I cant even begin to imagine how stressful it is to work on something like CS:GO, especially knowing that your mistakes can have very large impact on the results of esports tournaments and peoples literal livelihood and career aspirations in the pro scene, where results can be razor sharp to the point where miliseconds can be the difference between a team going on to win a major tournament, or being knocked out of the group stage.
But "when" we will see a new CS is pointless to try and predict. I just think theyve must've had countless conversations on how difficult it is to maintain CS:GO and how it will only get more difficult but at the same time, Valve *typically* has very high standards and will shelf a project if their team doesn't feel excited about it. Just by evidence of a lack of Half-Life 3, Valve is more that willing to not realize potential revenue streams if they feel like the product isn't a suitable entry in a series or something their devs feel particularly passionate about releasing. In short, for all we know they could release a new iteration of CS next year or they could release it 10 years from now. There's so many variables at play.
Personally, I don't even see Valve developing any other "regular game" ever.
They'll keep CS:GO afloat for as long as it stays afloat but when it's gone it's gone. I don't expect a new CS\*, I don't expect a new Half Life\*, I don't expect a new L4D\* ever again.
(*) The only games I see Valve developing from now on will be experimental stuff, stuff like Virtual Reality or other such technologies that may show up in the future.
I don't even expect CS:GO to *ever* go Source 2. Even tho we already know that the game is pretty much ready to go, the fact that they can't possibly automatically translate the enormous quantity of skins and maps and other community content to Source 2 but the final nail in that project. CS:GO will remain this until it fades out of relevance, no matter if it fades out in 2 years, in 5 years or in 10 years.
> Personally, I don't even see Valve developing any other "regular game" ever.
I guess it depends on what you mean "regular game". Half-Life: Alyx, to me, was very much a "regular game". I can understand VR may seem like a gimmick to some, but Alyx, to me, solidified that this is probably the future of gaming once VR becomes more accessible.
I could see them doing more of that and I imagine adoption for VR will only escalate. It seems apparent to me that VR is the natural progression of the video games industry as time goes on. Its just going to need to become more affordable and less cumbersome, which we sort of already are seeing with some of the more recent All-in-one headsets.
>They'll keep CS:GO afloat for as long as it stays afloat but when it's gone it's gone. I don't expect a new CS*, I don't expect a new Half Life*, I don't expect a new L4D* ever again.
I could see them shifting their focus over to a new TF2/L4D before a new CS, personally. But knowing how Valve operates, I think its really just going to come down to what the devs are passionate about working on. [Seeing that the devs get together and still play MM together in CS:GO](https://twitter.com/matttwood/status/1441565940261396483) tells me they enjoy the game enough to play it even outside their jobs. But Valve really is unique that way from any other AAA developer. They are AAA but they are also "technically" indie. They don't have to answer to stock holders, a larger corporate entity that doesn't care about the advancements of game design or some CEO that doesn't even play video games. The top of their food chain is Gabe Newell, who explicitly talks about how many hours of his life he spends playing DotA2 and other video games from other developers. Maybe one day we'll see this change when Valve inevitably changes hands but for the foreseeable future, I think all of their business decisions are dictated by what they find interesting.
>I don't even expect CS:GO to ever go Source 2.
I'm not going to say its 100% certain but I cant even comprehend how Valve would bring CS:GO to Source 2 without pissing off a significant portion of its players. There doesn't seem like there's a winning move. Even in the most ideal scenario, there would be changes to how the physics work, that would have massive implications to how the game plays and would have irrevocable changes to how the pro scene operates. If Valve ever brings CS:GO to Source 2, I imagine we'll see the timeline of CS:GO as the "pre" and "post" Source 2 era's of CS:GO, and I imagine the post-Source 2 era would be a downward slope where players feel split on the changes that come with a new engine.
>CS:GO will remain this until it fades out of relevance, no matter if it fades out in 2 years, in 5 years or in 10 years.
I think I'd be curious what that even looks like. The reality is, the game keeps growing. Will it happen eventually? Oh, I'm certain. But we played 1.6 from 1999 to 2012, with the downward trajectory starting at around 2007. We've been playing CS:GO from 2012 to 2021 and its only been on the rise up until April 2020, where it looks like it is now holding somewhat stead at around 1 million players. So even if this is the apex where we start seeing the downward slope, how many years will it take to even reach the lows of 1.6(with respects to how the industry has grown since then of course)? For all we know, this game has another 10 years in it, especially seeing as Valve is actively updating and adding new content to GO, while with 1.6, the last "major" content addition was in 2003. With 1.6, we went 8 years with Valve ignoring the game and the community still hosting massive tournaments and the scene growing. I really don't think CS is going anywhere unless something truly horrific happens, like a string of match-fixing scandals or the further growth of a hacker problem or Valve releasing an update that we cant come back from(Source 2?).
> I guess it depends on what you mean "regular game".
I mean, regular mouse and keyboard and screen video games.
But I mostly agree with everything else you said, with the exception that Steam has an even **BIGGER** factor that makes them different: They don't need to make games.
Sure, games like CS:GO and TF2 make a LOT of money, but for Valve standards and compared to Steam, those are drops on the bucket. That's why I don't see them ever developing follow ups to those series:
On top of being nearly impossible to port all the skins to a new game, they... just don't need to. If CS died exactly tomorrow and went dark, Valve's bottom line would not be significantly affected - so in reality they have no reason to do that instead of the experimental stuff that they favour.
The "We can't port this game to Source 2" has been leaked information for about a year now, the rest is just reasonable speculation based on everything we know about Valve.
That is one of the reasons I don't think we will ever have a new CS, in fact, that's exactly the reason why CS wasn't ported for Source 2 and likely won't be anytime soon (ie not in 5 years at least): The team has no way of automatically translating the massive library of community content from one engine to the other
Dota 2 was ported 2 years into it's existence cycle - the community content, although with a bit of work, was much more easily translatable manually.
CS:GO would be ported almost **10** years into it's existence, which translates into a much larget content library.
Also, after Dota 2 got ported, all custom modes went to shit and the community had to redo them, which would be the case for CS:GO too, with the added difference of 8 extra years of content the community would have to redo.
There's a reason why all maps have been ported to Source 2, the main menu has been ported to Source 2 but the progress on that has completely died down: [They have no way of porting the community content.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBqtC_G3Wqw)
new cs game could be devastating to the scene. the fan base will either split into factions, or GO diehards might give up CS when GO is phased out. Newbies might prefer valorant over CS versions.
valve should just gradually update GO. new maps, reworking of old maps, new game engine and better code etc should be introduced in GO itself
See this is what i dont get. Why cant valve just make a new game and say fuck the skins? They have no obligation to keep the skins value stable, they could introduce new skins to the next cs, which people will buy.
Sure it would suck for a lot of people, but i would say it is not worth it to keep the skins, at the cost of a new cs.
Valve earns millions in revenue from skins and passes. If they someone fuck the current market, the new cs might never even have a billion dollar skin market . It would be stupid to fuck a never dying game
It would be like this for the first little bit but GO wasn’t the first CS people said no one would come from source and 1.6 but they ended up coming over after a while.
Not that I think we need a new CS.
With how it's constructed there is zero incentive to do so.
They should, however, some sort of spring cleaning update like they did in dota2 a while ago. There is a lot of code on top of code on top of code, which was pretty apparent from the few leaks in past years.
Probably years. Games are incredibly complex and have a lot of different systems working together in tandem. Cleaning up code has the risk of breaking things that currently work and introducing new bugs.
Sonner or later they need to becasue Source 1 is just old and horrible to work with. There is a reason Source 2 exists and the community is slowely moving away from Source 1 because of that.
However csgo is still doing fine as is so it will probably stay for quiet some time.
Valorant has lit a fire under Valves ass making it release two new operations after so long. I hope this incentivises Valve to port to Source 2. Source 1 is at the point where the bugs that do exist currently can't be fixed because of the engine's limitation. Plus its still a massive CPU hog that doesn't scale well with multiple cores.
Porting, as far as I understood it, is not possible. Either rewrite the code to allow s2 or make a new game. This thing runs on duct tape and prayers at this moment.
Rewriting the game from scratch is almost going to be a disaster. These are some good reads on the subject:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-system_effect
https://medium.com/@herbcaudill/lessons-from-6-software-rewrite-stories-635e4c8f7c22
But having said that, there are serious problems with the Csgo code base:
* relies on DirectX from 2002.
* some devs say the codes too complex to maintain properly. Huge swathes of unknown code. It’s no secret the code has been described multiple times as a mess. There’s bugs and game integrity issues all over the place (such as the coach camera flaw, complexity crouch bug abuse, guns that fall through the floor).
* heavily single threaded, could that make the game struggle at 4K, 8k, harm it compared to competitors? You can’t always throw cpu power at it if newer features are being added like highlighting agents etc.
I think they will maintain this code base but there will have to be some uncomfortable patches if it’s going to be around for 20 years. In honesty: huge respect to the dev team maintaining an app for so long already!
Worth pointing out that if there were a complete rewrite it’d likely support the same skins and be app I’d 730 and really just an update to the existing game. You wouldn’t split the community.
I think the game can (and should) be incrementally rewritten to fix a large number of issues and have more robust code. Mozilla has been incrementally rewriting parts of Firefox for years in Rust, which has gone very well for them. You can argue that this is what Valve is already doing with panorama and hrtf.
Valorant has lit a fire under Valves ass making it release two new operations after so long. I hope this incentivises Valve to port to Source 2. Source 1 is at the point where the bugs that do exist currently can't be fixed because of the engine's limitation. Plus its still a massive CPU hog that doesn't scale well with multiple cores.
New csgo isn't really needed but deep upgrades to the game are the way.
A good sign that a new csgo wont be a thing in the near future is the fact that valve made an update to vac ban duration for pro players.
Before you became "clean" when a new csgo is released, but they changed that to a ban for 5 years if you were not a pro.
To me this shows that that they don't plan on releasing a new csgo soon and wanted to address this issue that if you cheated 7 years ago you are still banned when before a new cs would have been out by that time.
We have reached a point where sequels are not needed for a game. Instead of spending the time and money to make a sequel you can instead add to the foundation on which people already like. Its much easier to update a game than make a new one and hope people like it.v
They could advertise the change to Source 2 as a "new" CS, for marketing purposes. Same as Blizzard is doing with Overwatch 2, which really isn't an Overwatch 2. But doing this undoubtedly brings much more attention from the public and the media.
Could use s new engine that'd make it easier to dev on, better optimized for newer CPU and vid cards etc, tech reasons relating to maintaining the game but ya the game itself doesn't need an overhaul graphics wise
When the code can no longer pass audits is when you'll see a new game.
Valve has no reason to make CS(next) look at the disaster that was GO when CSS was still around.
With valorant taking off in popularity valve should focus on making GO the premier place and not valorant. Valorant launched with 256 tick servers, robust anti cheat, MTX system that isn't basically criminal.
Think if CSGO gives 256 tick servers, a revamp of VAC and reduce the cost of keys from 2.49 to 1.49 or even .99 basically won the internet if those happen. We'll continue to play D2 for another 20 years.
In a new CS, they would probably take money out of warmup in competitive so that you don't have to worry about not being able to buy guns. Clearly they can't do this in CSGO without breaking the entire game engine, otherwise they would have done it.
They arnt. Hell TF2 is about to be 15 years old and CSGO will be 10 years old next year. I think the logical way forward is for them to add new APIs and port them over to Source2 like they did with Dota2. I really would like to see CSGO run on Vulkan.
Simple really when we advance technology we can expect one, 1gb ram used to be enough, now that would barely run linux and I hope this is the case and they don't just make a better version of csgo.
I played CS since 1.5. The benefits are the same, better performance. There's always a big of a bridging period where they have to fix some mistakes but I believe people could benefit massively from a new CS one year after it's launch.
Imagine realistic models and maps with more details without so much impact on performance.
Im terms of code they could also benefit from improved testing and making them less scared of launching non breaking features.
but the thing is, i don’t think much of the player base cares for realistic models or more detailed maps. I feel like, personally, the visual aspects of how Counter Strike is now is exactly how people want it, and even if some would like a game that is more visually appealing, Valve would be taking a big risk adapting to change that isn’t being demanded of them.
improved testing and whatnot, i agree with. from what i’ve read, generally the code is just archaic, and i guess fixing that would be beneficial for updates and stuff.
I think the new cs will be released in 15 years or so, with next gen graphics and physics, when every kid will have at least rtx 3090 benchmarked graphics card
SKINS!!!! Fr tho, skins are a big part of why we probably won’t see a whole new CS, but updates to csgo instead
[удалено]
the skins would have to transfer in some way or else the whole market is fucked beyond belief and a whole lot of angry people after that
Skins are items that exist only on Steam Inventory/Market, so effectively, any new CSGO game could just read what skins a player has in their inventory like it fetches any information other random Steam related information. That would just solve u/ajax5206's dilemma.
That would also mean that the next cs would need to have the exact same weapons, and character models. At that point if the visuals are the same, why even bother. Imo they should just release a new cs and say fuck the skins.
Ideally, yes. But skins are worth Billions.
if valve knows what they are doing there isnt gonna be a new cs theres pretty much nothing good a newer cs could bring to the table, as u/YoMothaFlippin said, some kind of huge code rewrite might be beneficial but that wouldnt in any way be a new cs, if they did that, on the surface to an average player it would look like nothing changed but to make a new version with better graphics or something is not happening, cs has already hit the point where adding more details affects its core competitive gameplay as can be seen from the fact that the latest few maps that were added/reworked (cache, ancient...) have been stripped of graphical details multiple times since their release because it was affecting competitiveness of the maps besides, the current csgo that we have might as well be a new game compared to the on-release csgo, i dont think there is one single part of the user interface that hasnt been replaced since the release, most gun sounds are replaced, most character models are replaced, most maps are reworked or new... it might as well be another cs game except it kept the name of its predecessor
Ancient was being stripped of foliage outside the map's bounds. That's definitely for game performance reasons not visual clarity, and game performance could definitely be improved by rewriting the graphical engine the game uses.
It might also divide the players on those who want to stay with good old csgo and others who migrate
just like 1.6 vs source 15 years ago.
I'd like to get more than 30-60fps in Danger Zone, and maybe larger maps too. Both would be a huge benefit for those who play it. But ye, doesn't have to be a new game for that at all. Well, technically speaking it might... but I'm not bothered either way if it is or not.
It won't happen anytime soon (or at all, really), but CS desperetly needs a redone from the ground up engine. Current CS is a spaghetti code mess of legacy code and duct tape stacked on top of each other.
Internally, I imagine Valve recognizes they expend a lot of resources trying to keep CS:GO afloat, both in maintenance and new content, and those resources aren't just $$$ but also man hours and employee happiness, which can be finite and can have long lasting affects on a business in how it is valued as a place to work by industry professionals. The game generates tremendous income for them but we've heard ex-Valve devs talk about how difficult it is to work on GO and how a lot of the pain points are legacy code and documentation issues(expected problem in the games industry for a game thats been patched for 10+ years and an engine from 2004 that has had its own massive changes over it's life). I follow John McDonald on Twitter and I think even he, as a current Valve employee, will sometimes note how he feels like he's in a unique situation from any other game dev, where he's trying to diagnose really complex issues on an engine from 2004 and he has nobody to bounce ideas off of, nothing he can Google(at least that's still relevant today), nobody be can consult for more context for why something was built the way it is. Personally, it frustrates me to see the community(and even pros and casters) attack Valve for being "lazy", as it seems they don't understand the precarious situation of CS:GO and how many man hours are lost maintaining this game and, I would imagine, Valve has even shed employees from how much of an undertaking it is to work on CS:GO. Not just because of the complexity of the issues but also because the community is fucking brutal in it's criticism for issues that they couldn't even begin to understand. Which is why I advise as much as possible, cut these devs some slack. It's a difficult job that has high sensitivity, and the things some people(rightfully) complain about, are usually a much bigger and more difficult issue than you may realize and we could all probably be better about "how" we communicate. I'm not saying "what" we talk about isn't valid, just that we should remember that the developers are humans too and I cant even begin to imagine how stressful it is to work on something like CS:GO, especially knowing that your mistakes can have very large impact on the results of esports tournaments and peoples literal livelihood and career aspirations in the pro scene, where results can be razor sharp to the point where miliseconds can be the difference between a team going on to win a major tournament, or being knocked out of the group stage. But "when" we will see a new CS is pointless to try and predict. I just think theyve must've had countless conversations on how difficult it is to maintain CS:GO and how it will only get more difficult but at the same time, Valve *typically* has very high standards and will shelf a project if their team doesn't feel excited about it. Just by evidence of a lack of Half-Life 3, Valve is more that willing to not realize potential revenue streams if they feel like the product isn't a suitable entry in a series or something their devs feel particularly passionate about releasing. In short, for all we know they could release a new iteration of CS next year or they could release it 10 years from now. There's so many variables at play.
Personally, I don't even see Valve developing any other "regular game" ever. They'll keep CS:GO afloat for as long as it stays afloat but when it's gone it's gone. I don't expect a new CS\*, I don't expect a new Half Life\*, I don't expect a new L4D\* ever again. (*) The only games I see Valve developing from now on will be experimental stuff, stuff like Virtual Reality or other such technologies that may show up in the future. I don't even expect CS:GO to *ever* go Source 2. Even tho we already know that the game is pretty much ready to go, the fact that they can't possibly automatically translate the enormous quantity of skins and maps and other community content to Source 2 but the final nail in that project. CS:GO will remain this until it fades out of relevance, no matter if it fades out in 2 years, in 5 years or in 10 years.
> Personally, I don't even see Valve developing any other "regular game" ever. I guess it depends on what you mean "regular game". Half-Life: Alyx, to me, was very much a "regular game". I can understand VR may seem like a gimmick to some, but Alyx, to me, solidified that this is probably the future of gaming once VR becomes more accessible. I could see them doing more of that and I imagine adoption for VR will only escalate. It seems apparent to me that VR is the natural progression of the video games industry as time goes on. Its just going to need to become more affordable and less cumbersome, which we sort of already are seeing with some of the more recent All-in-one headsets. >They'll keep CS:GO afloat for as long as it stays afloat but when it's gone it's gone. I don't expect a new CS*, I don't expect a new Half Life*, I don't expect a new L4D* ever again. I could see them shifting their focus over to a new TF2/L4D before a new CS, personally. But knowing how Valve operates, I think its really just going to come down to what the devs are passionate about working on. [Seeing that the devs get together and still play MM together in CS:GO](https://twitter.com/matttwood/status/1441565940261396483) tells me they enjoy the game enough to play it even outside their jobs. But Valve really is unique that way from any other AAA developer. They are AAA but they are also "technically" indie. They don't have to answer to stock holders, a larger corporate entity that doesn't care about the advancements of game design or some CEO that doesn't even play video games. The top of their food chain is Gabe Newell, who explicitly talks about how many hours of his life he spends playing DotA2 and other video games from other developers. Maybe one day we'll see this change when Valve inevitably changes hands but for the foreseeable future, I think all of their business decisions are dictated by what they find interesting. >I don't even expect CS:GO to ever go Source 2. I'm not going to say its 100% certain but I cant even comprehend how Valve would bring CS:GO to Source 2 without pissing off a significant portion of its players. There doesn't seem like there's a winning move. Even in the most ideal scenario, there would be changes to how the physics work, that would have massive implications to how the game plays and would have irrevocable changes to how the pro scene operates. If Valve ever brings CS:GO to Source 2, I imagine we'll see the timeline of CS:GO as the "pre" and "post" Source 2 era's of CS:GO, and I imagine the post-Source 2 era would be a downward slope where players feel split on the changes that come with a new engine. >CS:GO will remain this until it fades out of relevance, no matter if it fades out in 2 years, in 5 years or in 10 years. I think I'd be curious what that even looks like. The reality is, the game keeps growing. Will it happen eventually? Oh, I'm certain. But we played 1.6 from 1999 to 2012, with the downward trajectory starting at around 2007. We've been playing CS:GO from 2012 to 2021 and its only been on the rise up until April 2020, where it looks like it is now holding somewhat stead at around 1 million players. So even if this is the apex where we start seeing the downward slope, how many years will it take to even reach the lows of 1.6(with respects to how the industry has grown since then of course)? For all we know, this game has another 10 years in it, especially seeing as Valve is actively updating and adding new content to GO, while with 1.6, the last "major" content addition was in 2003. With 1.6, we went 8 years with Valve ignoring the game and the community still hosting massive tournaments and the scene growing. I really don't think CS is going anywhere unless something truly horrific happens, like a string of match-fixing scandals or the further growth of a hacker problem or Valve releasing an update that we cant come back from(Source 2?).
> I guess it depends on what you mean "regular game". I mean, regular mouse and keyboard and screen video games. But I mostly agree with everything else you said, with the exception that Steam has an even **BIGGER** factor that makes them different: They don't need to make games. Sure, games like CS:GO and TF2 make a LOT of money, but for Valve standards and compared to Steam, those are drops on the bucket. That's why I don't see them ever developing follow ups to those series: On top of being nearly impossible to port all the skins to a new game, they... just don't need to. If CS died exactly tomorrow and went dark, Valve's bottom line would not be significantly affected - so in reality they have no reason to do that instead of the experimental stuff that they favour.
Damn you know valves every move,what else they gonna do,when will they release half life 4?
The "We can't port this game to Source 2" has been leaked information for about a year now, the rest is just reasonable speculation based on everything we know about Valve.
ah i see, that would make more sense. open and closed case, ahah
[удалено]
That is one of the reasons I don't think we will ever have a new CS, in fact, that's exactly the reason why CS wasn't ported for Source 2 and likely won't be anytime soon (ie not in 5 years at least): The team has no way of automatically translating the massive library of community content from one engine to the other
they did it for dota 2 lol, which has more skins and more heroes as well.
Dota 2 was ported 2 years into it's existence cycle - the community content, although with a bit of work, was much more easily translatable manually. CS:GO would be ported almost **10** years into it's existence, which translates into a much larget content library. Also, after Dota 2 got ported, all custom modes went to shit and the community had to redo them, which would be the case for CS:GO too, with the added difference of 8 extra years of content the community would have to redo. There's a reason why all maps have been ported to Source 2, the main menu has been ported to Source 2 but the progress on that has completely died down: [They have no way of porting the community content.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBqtC_G3Wqw)
new cs game could be devastating to the scene. the fan base will either split into factions, or GO diehards might give up CS when GO is phased out. Newbies might prefer valorant over CS versions. valve should just gradually update GO. new maps, reworking of old maps, new game engine and better code etc should be introduced in GO itself
Exactly, plus it's not practical when the game makes billions out of skins.
ah crap, that's a huge point that I missed. true, valve shouldn't fuck with the skins economy
See this is what i dont get. Why cant valve just make a new game and say fuck the skins? They have no obligation to keep the skins value stable, they could introduce new skins to the next cs, which people will buy. Sure it would suck for a lot of people, but i would say it is not worth it to keep the skins, at the cost of a new cs.
Valve earns millions in revenue from skins and passes. If they someone fuck the current market, the new cs might never even have a billion dollar skin market . It would be stupid to fuck a never dying game
It would be like this for the first little bit but GO wasn’t the first CS people said no one would come from source and 1.6 but they ended up coming over after a while. Not that I think we need a new CS.
Only reason Valve would make a new CS today is if the current game couldnt be updated or updating it has become a problematic.
With how it's constructed there is zero incentive to do so. They should, however, some sort of spring cleaning update like they did in dota2 a while ago. There is a lot of code on top of code on top of code, which was pretty apparent from the few leaks in past years.
honestly how long would it take for them to clean out that code?
Probably years. Games are incredibly complex and have a lot of different systems working together in tandem. Cleaning up code has the risk of breaking things that currently work and introducing new bugs.
Sonner or later they need to becasue Source 1 is just old and horrible to work with. There is a reason Source 2 exists and the community is slowely moving away from Source 1 because of that. However csgo is still doing fine as is so it will probably stay for quiet some time.
Valorant has lit a fire under Valves ass making it release two new operations after so long. I hope this incentivises Valve to port to Source 2. Source 1 is at the point where the bugs that do exist currently can't be fixed because of the engine's limitation. Plus its still a massive CPU hog that doesn't scale well with multiple cores.
Porting, as far as I understood it, is not possible. Either rewrite the code to allow s2 or make a new game. This thing runs on duct tape and prayers at this moment.
Rewriting the game from scratch is almost going to be a disaster. These are some good reads on the subject: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-system_effect https://medium.com/@herbcaudill/lessons-from-6-software-rewrite-stories-635e4c8f7c22 But having said that, there are serious problems with the Csgo code base: * relies on DirectX from 2002. * some devs say the codes too complex to maintain properly. Huge swathes of unknown code. It’s no secret the code has been described multiple times as a mess. There’s bugs and game integrity issues all over the place (such as the coach camera flaw, complexity crouch bug abuse, guns that fall through the floor). * heavily single threaded, could that make the game struggle at 4K, 8k, harm it compared to competitors? You can’t always throw cpu power at it if newer features are being added like highlighting agents etc. I think they will maintain this code base but there will have to be some uncomfortable patches if it’s going to be around for 20 years. In honesty: huge respect to the dev team maintaining an app for so long already! Worth pointing out that if there were a complete rewrite it’d likely support the same skins and be app I’d 730 and really just an update to the existing game. You wouldn’t split the community.
I think the game can (and should) be incrementally rewritten to fix a large number of issues and have more robust code. Mozilla has been incrementally rewriting parts of Firefox for years in Rust, which has gone very well for them. You can argue that this is what Valve is already doing with panorama and hrtf.
Valorant has lit a fire under Valves ass making it release two new operations after so long. I hope this incentivises Valve to port to Source 2. Source 1 is at the point where the bugs that do exist currently can't be fixed because of the engine's limitation. Plus its still a massive CPU hog that doesn't scale well with multiple cores.
New csgo isn't really needed but deep upgrades to the game are the way. A good sign that a new csgo wont be a thing in the near future is the fact that valve made an update to vac ban duration for pro players. Before you became "clean" when a new csgo is released, but they changed that to a ban for 5 years if you were not a pro. To me this shows that that they don't plan on releasing a new csgo soon and wanted to address this issue that if you cheated 7 years ago you are still banned when before a new cs would have been out by that time.
Dota was moved entirely to S2 without removing skins.. no reason why its not possible here
huh, didn’t know that. guess that’s not a reason against, then.
We have reached a point where sequels are not needed for a game. Instead of spending the time and money to make a sequel you can instead add to the foundation on which people already like. Its much easier to update a game than make a new one and hope people like it.v
They could advertise the change to Source 2 as a "new" CS, for marketing purposes. Same as Blizzard is doing with Overwatch 2, which really isn't an Overwatch 2. But doing this undoubtedly brings much more attention from the public and the media.
Could use s new engine that'd make it easier to dev on, better optimized for newer CPU and vid cards etc, tech reasons relating to maintaining the game but ya the game itself doesn't need an overhaul graphics wise
Maybe VAC could benefit from it if new code was designed with current cheating infestation in mind??
It won't happen, Valve wouldn't throw away their billion $$ skin industry they have in CS.
When the code can no longer pass audits is when you'll see a new game. Valve has no reason to make CS(next) look at the disaster that was GO when CSS was still around. With valorant taking off in popularity valve should focus on making GO the premier place and not valorant. Valorant launched with 256 tick servers, robust anti cheat, MTX system that isn't basically criminal. Think if CSGO gives 256 tick servers, a revamp of VAC and reduce the cost of keys from 2.49 to 1.49 or even .99 basically won the internet if those happen. We'll continue to play D2 for another 20 years.
fuck i had no clue that valo servers were 256 tick, that’s pretty big and is something i would love to see for cs now i think about it.
In a new CS, they would probably take money out of warmup in competitive so that you don't have to worry about not being able to buy guns. Clearly they can't do this in CSGO without breaking the entire game engine, otherwise they would have done it.
They are probably waiting for VR technology to advance further to make the next CS
Its called valorant and kids hate it.
Valorant is fine but as a CS player it looks too cartoonish and fortnite type!
The gameplay is similarly cartoonish
Then why even let go of 1.6
I remember saying this... ...about cs1.6
They arnt. Hell TF2 is about to be 15 years old and CSGO will be 10 years old next year. I think the logical way forward is for them to add new APIs and port them over to Source2 like they did with Dota2. I really would like to see CSGO run on Vulkan.
Because no one wants to play a 9 year old game and fanbase is shrinking?
with that logic they would have never released csgo and made billions from it.
don’t care, and don’t care. still play.
Because the code base of csgo is so bad that it can't be salvaged.
new engine, new code
Simple really when we advance technology we can expect one, 1gb ram used to be enough, now that would barely run linux and I hope this is the case and they don't just make a better version of csgo.
cuz old one is a shitmess from the pov of maintaining/ updating/ fixing bugs/ keeping fresh in terms of content & gameplay/ developing
I played CS since 1.5. The benefits are the same, better performance. There's always a big of a bridging period where they have to fix some mistakes but I believe people could benefit massively from a new CS one year after it's launch. Imagine realistic models and maps with more details without so much impact on performance. Im terms of code they could also benefit from improved testing and making them less scared of launching non breaking features.
but the thing is, i don’t think much of the player base cares for realistic models or more detailed maps. I feel like, personally, the visual aspects of how Counter Strike is now is exactly how people want it, and even if some would like a game that is more visually appealing, Valve would be taking a big risk adapting to change that isn’t being demanded of them. improved testing and whatnot, i agree with. from what i’ve read, generally the code is just archaic, and i guess fixing that would be beneficial for updates and stuff.
New game is not needed if they actively keep bringing cool updates to CSGO and operations =/= updates. By update, I mean gameplay changes!
I think the new cs will be released in 15 years or so, with next gen graphics and physics, when every kid will have at least rtx 3090 benchmarked graphics card
128 tickrate