Totaly agree! the map has a story in its setting, but also a meta-story in its gameplay changes. Very charming! De_Inferno is my all time favourite official map since Source.
I dunno a lot of these feel like helping casual players too, like the barrels reducing visibility of enemies and etc, something more experienced player may be more savvy and prepared for than a casual.
Why do you care about the aesthetics of maps? Layout and gameplay matter way more. What do you define as "quirky"? Yes, you could say poor visibility in a competitive game is "quirky" but that doesn't mean it's a good design philosophy.
Wait till you realize that alot of pros, wannabepros and even semi casual players use very low/competitive settings, stretched 4:3 resolution for less input delay and more fps for better gameplay.. so.. in short, they couldnt care less about the new details valve had to offer for them...
Changing water pump into a single small pot is like the only change that really feels odd and disappointing, it makes very little sense now, everything else got some environmental storytelling to it or is pretty subtle and subdued without ruining what was there originally.
Glad you covered this topic , ever since cs2 came out i feel like the player models blend too much with the overall environment no matter the map . Honestly I think they need to work on player models rather than maps for better visibility.
CS fans: NOO! This three pixel gap in the wall is too dark! Enemies are too hard to see! Valve MUST fix this immediately! TF2 fans: ah yes, the enemy can shoot through my spawn in this 17 year old map, splendid, I shall wait patiently for 7 eons for a patch, I love this game
Idk if you know, but they removed the seagulls from the map. I didn't mention it in the video because the update happened after I had already finished it, but apparently it looked to similar to a flashbang. 🤷♂️
@@LEDs im not that updated on cs news, so map changes would mostly go under my radar, tho as a mapper, i see changes made to maps that i play often in other source games, but mostly all i find are silly mistakes that normal player would never find, but a mapper would in a matter of seconds
@@puskamuha9000 You just told the person with the skill set to make the maps you 'need experience for' to not talk about the thing they would literally be responsible for creating. Mappers absolutely have just as much say in map design as the people who play the game with that map. You sound ridiculous. literally gonna tell mappers not to make maps since they don't know the game and literally nobody gonna be left to make maps for your game at that rate.
That's what happened with CS:GO the maps would release full of life, detail, color. And slowly all of that would be plucked away to make the maps more "competitive"
My old mapping community i just rekindled with, this was one of the heaviest thing we mostly agreed on. It becomes so easy to become distracted in something thats meant to be competitive in reflex and skill. If this game was some longer drawn out conflict in rounds, as the round time is reduced so much from older versions of the game it really matters. As a mapper id say make contentious decisions when designing. Its too easy to be swept into the camp of more details these days but keep your maps use case, ie deathmatch maps could have more detail but timer constraint on maps like de_ should be simpler in design practices.
I've been playing recently with a modified longer timer and it gives you the opportunity to experience the game at a slower pace which helps to appreciate the maps more and tiny details don't matter as much.
As someone who has been playing a lot of the new CS2 inferno maps I honestly couldn't tell a difference between the the visibility on the older and new version, I play on 1080p and I still had no trouble discerning enemies from backgrounds, these changes don't alter much in my opinion and just seems like busy work for Valve when they have other things to worry about then if a milk crate needs to be removed.
0:08 Ugh, it hurts man. This was "my" counter strike (Not that I ever stopped playing, I still play to this day, but the memories of this era is still incredibly vivid and still what I think of when people say "Counter Strike") and brother, it hurts realizing that so much time has passed, lol.
Appreciate you covering the topic! was a good watch. and yeah, reading all the backlash to the post was very interesting 😅main motive is that CS maintains that balance between map design and competitive gameplay
I think all the maps that is in the competitive pool needs to be kept simple and competitive. They are definitely going in the right direction with all these changes. For more visually appealing maps I think we need to wait until they release a new operation. That’s usually when those types of maps gets their time in the spotlight, and since they are made to play casually most people don’t care about stuff like player visibility or weird clipping
I think the complaints about detail being removed are absurd. I doubt they'd be thinking about those spots or details if it was like that from the start. All that's taking people out of the game, are themselves. To complain on Twitter. There's nothing "unimmersive" about a single wall out of many not being packed with distracting objects. Kudos to Valve for all these changes! Even ones like windows being removed. It's not just about players not being directly obscured- it's about being able to quickly parse everything that's onscreen. Surrounding clutter adds just that teeny bit of extra time for your brain to interpret things. Even more-so for some autistic people (*like me*) who can struggle deciphering and navigating cluttered, visually-noisy environments. I consider this an accessibility win with zero downside to anyone. I personally struggle with most modern games due to this and wish more games gave the slightest of a damn.
It's not that black and white. A wall isn't either "detailed" or "not detailed." Some parts can be extremely detailed with no gameplay implications, while others need to be thought about carefully. Counter-Strike has always tried to look real, so it only makes sense to make maps look as real as they can.
One big point to make. Over-detailing in games is becoming an accessibility issue. I'm visually impaired, and in newer games I often have issues where I can't see what's going on amid all the details. It's much harder for me to play something like Halo MMC's new graphics vs the original graphics option for this reason. It's also difficult because any accessibility feature you add in options to increase readability will be an advantage for people who don't necessarily need it, which will lead to community backlash over it becoming optimal play to have it enabled.
Just like all visual assets in video games, maps are a work of art. As long as the originals are preserved, I don't mind them being updated to be less clutered.
I feel like most of the changes are rather minuscule and don't harm the visuals. In fact for most of these I highly doubt that if you never showed me the before and after I would even notice the changes aside from "library". As for the windows removal I don't think the window even looked good anyways but it is an odd removal since it's really not even part of the problem presented.
Hey LED, You should refrain from deleting comments that point out you using Wolfcl0ck's footage at 0:34 without his permission. Instead, you should record your own footage or get footage from someone else (make sure you have their permission this time!)
@@M.F.Hafizhan You missed the point, it's not about legality, using someone else's work without crediting or giving permission is quite distasteful. It's even worse that LED deleted Wolfcl0ck's comment and blocked him so he couldn't speak about it.
I used one second of his footage, and it falls under fair use. I would've credited him if he asked nicely, but he decided not to do that, and instead left a very hateful comment both here and on Steam. I will not tolerate that kind of behavior on my channel.
@@LEDs Refer to my reply to M.F.Hafizhan. Whether someone asks nicely or not doesn't determine whether you give that person credit or get their permission to use their work. The comment wasn't hateful either, it was aggressive and he did come across as angry, sure, but he was justified because it was his work. Wolfcl0ck is the type of person who hates it when you use his work without permission, that's how he is and you should respect that. You deleting his comment was a not a good look because it makes it look like you're trying to hide something. What was even the point of that, actually?
Good video, but the reason for switching to source 2 was more that source 1 was older than a sizeable chunk of the player base. The engine was a mess and horrible to work with, and would break frequently. The bonus is allowing for more detail 😁
I hate when crybabies on Reddit takeover and force valve to change unnecessary stuff to only have them say it was better before and valve is left scratching their head. As a map maker myself, while feedback is appreciated and I am always open to them, I’ve come to realize that most people that provide feedback don’t know anything about maps and I rarely do make changes on feedback.
It's ultimately your map and your choice, and there are certain quirks/gimmicks that can be erased if one listens too closely to what others have to say.
Maybe a hot take but here we go: For official tournaments and in premier mode, each map should have a set of default agents with good visibility for that specific map theme to avoid these issues popping up as much in general. No green agents hiding in a bush in a random corner. Then for the more casual modes let people use whatever agents they want. Hopefully this would mean less changes needed to the map details themselves for visibility in competitive scenarios, though I think realistically whatever the art style there will always be case where changes might have to be made for visibility.
yeah there is potential in that idea. the problem is, that these spots are often an accident. it would be way better if there was a clear intentional spot, where that kind of mechanic is part of the map. additionally, the maps in this game are like 20 years old, so i think this gimmick should only be added to new maps
I think that the game needs to balance the player visibility more but keep the style of the maps intact. some clutter can be seen as bad but I think as long as important sightlines have decently flat walls and a contrasting colour on them you can keep geometry detail.
I think the problem with CSGO 2 is part of why tf2 works well. The CSGO character are using much monotone shades of color, which blends in extremely easily with background that has much more shade in the area, its similar to a camoflage effectiveness in a deeply vegetated area. The right balance to make someone stand out yet not make it feel empty is crucial. So to make sure that it feels like you're in a forest but yet making you spottable is the main goal. Translating that to the map, i think the detail isnt the problem but rather how well the detail hides the player. Since some detail can still let player be easy to spot nonetheless
And with TF2, being noticed usually doesn't mean instant annihilation (unless you face a sniper), which is why running around with unusual effects doesn't ruin the experience
In my opinion the detail shouldn't have been removed. I am not 100% on that, for example the wooden panel in Library is fine, but casing the barrel so people can't climb is damaging to gameplay and tactics. Also the rail WAS on CS:GO and nobody actuly cared. I rly think that people are ranting on everything in CS2 just because there is nothing else to rant about. Subtick is fine for gunplay but the >ANIMATIONS< are off. Maps are ok and, unless you're blind and can't see the fifference between dark blue/dark brown and middle gray you should not be the one complaining :/. CS2 is amazing. What I think Valve should focus on is, in this order, Anti-cheat, Matchmaking, removed maps, visual feedback for hitting/missing(for better info's) and subtick animations
I’m late to the discussion here but if competitive players solely cared for how a map plays and how well it runs then they’d be playing on untextured maps with bare bones lighting. But that makes for a dreadful experience when viewing tournaments and for casual players where visuals do matter more. The reason why details exist above and out of the level where they don’t affect gameplay is to make the viewing experience better
I like more minimalistic designs. I think it does have too much details. It feels more like Source 2 grapchics showcase then actual Counter-Strike. Back then Valve did the same thing on Ancient becouse there was too many rock models that was on the floor. Then got update, removed a lot (sure it looked worse) but you got a lot more fps.
On one end I'm not fan of mp maps being sterelized in videogames, on the other hand CS has been doing this for years already. A good example is the classic traffic cone kill in Halo 3, whereas recently in Infinite most props have been removed from maps. Interactive detail can help to mix up gameplay. For CS it allows for players to use the environment in more creative ways, standing on crates, crouching on backgrounds etc. It may feel unfair and it might be, but maybe it's just part of the game to also be aware of your environments too. Pretty sure similar cases have happened irl. Of course, then there are things like hiding in a dark corner never to be seen, which is rather overpowered. I guess for CS it's a bit hard to say, while competitive is a core gameplay of CS, and comp match making was officially added on GO, I think CS wasn't meant to be such originally. But what do I know.
@@LEDs I think players do similar things on all games, be hiding in a corner of a doorframe or standing on top of something. I think the best way to put it is like playing Spy in TF2, taking advantage of the environment to sneak around and surprise enemies. I think it's a matter of how easy is to pull off vs how fair is it. Hiding in a bad lit corner is not the same to be exposed while jumping on top of a box. Hiding in plain sight can be weighted on CS by map asymmetry (easy for CTs but not for TS, etc) bit still a controversial take. At best make geometry and detail a different color I'd think.
I think way Valve's handling changes so far is completely fine. All the changes still make sense in the context of the world and there's no part of the map's design that is only justifiable in a competitive context. If it doesn't undermine the art direction and doesn't look out of place I see no reason to complain about anything that provides a better gameplay experience. Detail for detail's sake doesn't make a game better, but being able to see the guy who's capable of one-shoting you certainly does.
I think those final parts you talk about around 5:12 were more to guide players in the right direction, instead of with regards to visibility. For example, the cubby outside of boiler appeared just large enough to crouch in, when in reality was completely clipped off. It seems that by making the cubby shorter, this eliminates any confusion for newer players who think they can crouch underneath it.
It seems like most competitive cs players don't like it when there are hiding spots and would rather the game devolve into reflex based reactions in an environment where the players are easy to see. It's why all the maps are so overly bright, any properly dark areas with actual grit to them are not deemed "competitive"
Situations where you cant see your opponent clearly, like dark spots, blending in, etc are often unintentional and are left in without thought. This causes these situations to feel like your opponent had an unfair advantage or feel more random because they didn't consciously make a decision based on being hard to see. The problem with dedicated spots on a map is that one-way vision while being able to damage your opponent is too strong of an advantage that isnt fun to fight. And if it was something as simple as a spot on a map, it wouldn't be earned with any real effort, you simply just go there. One-way smokes in CS:GO arent too different from this and were hated for the same reasons. Not much effort, too strong, not fun to fight against. It feels undeserved for someone who plays a lot because they dont really require you to outsmart your opponent or outplay them with your mechanics.
@@surdukks2219 Depends on the player. Some people just like to goof around casually. I remember back in the old version of Train, there was a dark corner next to the stairs. Everyone from my team was dead and there were like 5 guys going around in a group searching for me. I stood in the dark spot facing away from the stairs so that my gun wouldn't poke out. Then I heard footsteps, I waited for a bit and poked out of the dark spot. To my surprise it was the entire enemy team in a conga line snooping around trying to find me. Their situational awareness was so bad I managed run up behind them and stab all 5 of them with a knife. Everyone had a laugh about how ridiculous it was. Good times.
@@hpp676 Yea I get that having silly or broken maps with cool little spots you can go to is fun, insersion 2 for example was a very fun map. But current 5v5 CS is a competitive mode where you try to win, which means things like that can be frustrating. "casual players" who complain about "sweaty tryhards" often neglect the fact that for the people that try to win, its a very fun game to try your best at and feels very rewarding. But i definitely think competitive maps have so much unexplored potential, most of the current pool is just a variation of a dust2 3lane map. Nuke is a very unique map that breaks the mold, and very fun for both casual and more sweaty players.
Less is more. But - you could go valorant's route of removing all details away from sight lines. And that would make stuff boring quickly. There should be details in sightlines, but they shouldn't be super hard to see like those before barrels. And could be not in frequent areas.
The desire for Source 2 was for better optimization and netcode. I'd rather be playing 1.6 maps than have water reflections that tank FPS and extinguishing mollies stuttering.
They can add as much details as they want outside the playable space. Yes it's nice that the game looks "good" now but the core of counter-strike is a tactical shooter.
These are good changes imo, makes the map more readable and helps playablity without just removing all detail and compromising the visuals, more doesn't always mean better, also gameplay > visuals for any game imo
Gameplay > visuals, but also more clutter doesn't mean better visuals. IMO the only odd change to Inferno here was the fountain. Not because the wall is too flat or plain, but because the cubby that replaced the fountain just looks weird to me. I'd rather a mostly flat wall at that point.
In other words: no, it is not too pretty. Actually the comp scene is too sensitive for gameplay elements not established in the narrow meta of the game. This has been seen observed and critized in SSBM community where traditional glorification of horizontal maps like final destination which favors specific gameplay and essentially leaves potential of many characters unrealized. Multiple leagues recently have allowed more diverse stage options: even Poke Floats. This also has affected TF2 at some 2014-ish point; Valve apparently had taken some feedback from some pro TF2 players about weapon balances. Valve then buffed Phlog and Short Circuit based on their feedback, resulting in a catastrophe on Quick Play servers with 12v12 people. The pros had given honest feedback to valve with their own experience which is 6v6 and highlander. There mass spam isn't an issue and matches are highly organized. Takeaway is that comp usually narrows down freedom of expression to a minimum and should be taken as a side dish and not the main course.
If someone genuinely cares about immersion in CS then they should go play a different game. Valve could replace every single map with a dev graybox version and I would not care in the slightest. Of course they would never do that because of player count and viewership reasons, but for me personally I wouldn't care.
most people wouldn't care, the gameplay loop is what's important and the graphics are just sugar on top. just look at the best-selling video game of all time minecraft
@@xandii4694 I disagree, I think most experienced players wouldn't care but a lot of casual players would stop playing. Little Jimmy that plays an hour a week probably wouldn't like staring at gray walls.
I disagree. Keep the clutter. But I’m not a pro gamer so I don’t really care about player visibility due to clutter. They just made these maps uglier and less fun to play in
I disagree with this. Nobody seems to understand the accessibility angle on this. (Or they just refuse to.) I'm autistic and personally struggle with modern games, casual or not, due to excessive detail. Not just stuff directly obscuring things, but clutter surrounding objects can make it harder to see. I can hold my own to some extent against, as an example, unreasonably hard modded Hollow Knight bosses like Any Radiance once you remove the visual clutter through mods, but struggle with even vanilla content due to all the particle effects, glowing, etc in that game. I'll get hit by slow, "obvious" things or lose track of myself because i effectively go partially blind when my brain can't interpret visually chaotic segments of the screen. It's frustrating and disheartening seeing everyone tossing negativity towards these changes that i wish every game would do, while insulting dismissing people who asked for it.
yes and its literally only to showcase how cool their new graphics engine is literally the same thing when they ported 1.6 maps to source and just showered them with breakable windows and random physics props littered everywhere to convince people to play the new (inferior) product of course back then we didn't have cadres of weirdos that dedicate most of their online presence to crying about people who like competing in videogames
I don’t think people should say competitive comes first. The last game that followed that path became horrible and a lot of people left that community.
@@dkskcjfjswwwwwws413It makes rushing way more stupid. It requires you to take every turn, corner, room and sight line seriously due to an increased risk of the enemy seeing you before you see them.
@@dkskcjfjswwwwwws413 Skill issue, coordinate with your team and use a flash/smoke on areas where players can camp. Oh wait, I forgot you're only good at aiming fast on easy to see targets and nothing more.
@@dkskcjfjswwwwwws413 You might get one tapped regardless of the corner. If the corner sucks you adapt. But this is CS we're talking about, people have been playing the same handful of maps for over a decade now and can't fathom learning new strategies.
