How to get a new Wolfeinstein Multiplayer

Is it possible to creat a petition and request new Wolfenstein multiplayer strongly based on RTCW and ET? Has anyone ever done this before? I don't say this is the solution, but maybe the developers would see the demand and our burning desire for a playable Wolf Multi.

Maybe petition is not the best word, instead I mean a tool or platform where we could catch their attention.

Stopwatch mode with simple abilities like constructing barriers and defusing bombs, nothing like a MOBAFPS.. (I don't mention reviving, it has never been simple for none of you.)

Someone creat it and lets sign it!
Comments
71
Quote(I don't mention reviving, it has never been simple for none of you.)

image: 32vHITu
I love this guy nejm <3
Parent
I think we have "new Wolf Multi".
Dirty Bomb
http://store.steampowered.com/app/333930/Dirty_Bomb/
Indeed. It is a dead game like ET :D
Parent
while the game was born 10 years after ET ! DB is a fail..
Parent
you didn't even play it lol
Parent
No and will never do, I knew from the beginning it would be a fail !
Parent
average number of players in DB is higher than quake champions, battalion 1944 and ETpro combined
stfu
Parent
Lies.
DB is shit. Fact
Parent
Then it's a total fail..
Parent
What you talkign about? There was already new Wolfenstein multiplayer game, sadly it sucked ass. Then there was Brink, Dirtybomb. Yeah, all those games been bad, but as if they will go for it one more time to waste money&time :D People are not interested about those kind of games anymore, maybe in 10 years it will be a hit again. Right now there aint even room anymore for more teambased fps games, when csgo ow and battalion rolling over.
"What you talkign about? There was already new Wolfenstein multiplayer game, sadly ..."

Do you mean the Wolfenstein version of Star Wars XMas special? :) :"D
e: not canon
Parent
No I, I dont mean ET:QW, tho I even forgot about that. I mean this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cp4J_CLSCEU
Parent
I mean the game you linked. It is absolute bs. We were so hyped when they released it, but it was massive fail
e: but thats just an opinnion...
Parent
Yes, it's a failure =(
Parent
People nowadays are searching for easier games.. when I say easier I mean a game where they can get correct pretty fast, where everyone can kill everyone..
ET / RTCW / Quake and co are too "elitist" games as they require brain, aim, moves, placement, aiming while moving someone that moves and hit you with the recoil.. etc..

sad people don't like difficulty
Parent
Even if they made a real ET 2.0 (no bullshit clunky dirty bomb, qc and failcraps like that) noone on earth would play it, and heres why

- People who played ET in its active years got old, everyone is close to 30s I guess, hence not as much time to play
- hard to attrack new players in a skill based FPS games (CS,R6 are way too easy and random , thats why the huge playerbase)
- developers would fuck up anyways, look at QC, DB, Brink and other failures.

To make an FPS succesful u have to make it "random" so casuals and lowskilled people can enjoy the game too, they are the ones who make the numbers, but then a game with random 1 taps and stuff is not skill based, so it cannot be ET.
If this was hltv you'd have your inbox full of shit right now :D "REEEEEEEE cs is the most skill based fps in the world because onetaps"
Parent
R6 are way too easy and random
wat
Parent
CS is one of the few games with a lot of players I would still consider decent. I have a lot of complaints about that game too, but "too easy" is not one of them. Too random, perhaps, but so is ET.

A game has to be relatively simple to get any kind of meaningful competition going in my opinion. Once you add explosives, luck factors, too many different weapons or abilities and too many players in one team, it becomes nearly impossible to play against your opponent rather than playing against the game mechanics. Like playing public in ET.

Even 6on6 is a bit on the edge, in my opinion, but with decent teams it was possible to have some kind of teamwork back in the day. Now it's just a messy pile of spammy shit, with the team who has the better aimers almost always winning the game.
Parent
I don't know mate, I played ET "competitively" until 2010 and I remember it as one of few games that had the perfect balance of aiming and teamplay. You could win with either sick aiming skills or very structured teamplay. I can't remember it being "too spammy". But then it could be the years messing with my memory. All I know I never enjoyed a game as much as ET/QL.
Adding RNG and 1shot 1 kill stuff into a game makes it noobfriendly, since random (not intended) stuff will be awarded with a kill. It wasn't a big deal in ET, I mean getting a kill with a random nade, cause you had the ability to revive, and spawns in 20/30 secs. Random things in round based games (CS, COD whatever) take it to another level, and a random running headshot can decide rounds. So when u are supposed to be punished cause you made a stupid move but somehow u land a lucky stray bullet and get awarded with a kill then playing the game makes no sense, atleast* for me.
There will always be moments in CS when you get* random 1 tapped by someone far worse than you, but this is how the game is designed, it favors worse players in some situations.

In ET you couldn't just get random 3 headshots, that was extremly RARE.
In Quake you can't just land 3 random facerockets like that.

Less stack = lower skill ceiling.
Anyways I find CS a decent game, I got like 3k hours in 1,6, CSS and GO together. Just not my style.
Parent
I agree with you that ET is a better competitive game than CS. Quake is far superior to both.

My point was that out of all the other popular games, CS stands out as one that's clean enough to allow people to actually compete against other teams (aim, strategy, teamwork) instead of just finding the best ways to use the abilities given to them by the developers.

There are probably other games like this, but for example Overwatch is goddamn terrible and it was made with only money in mind (all them lootboxes you can buy and stuff...)
Parent
Why exactly Overwatch is terrible? Thought ET players would definetly choose overwatch over csgo, based on the fact Ow is designed ultimately on teamplay and aiming, whereas csgo.. pretty much aim only and some random bullshit "teamplay" if people want call that some serious teamplay game. The only real booring thing about overwatch is the heroes abilities, which rules fully your mobility so there is nothing like strafejumping et cetera. Tho rocketjumping, for some heroes :) And of course the fact everyone can not play dps if u want to win games
Parent
I can see why Overwatch would attract a lot of ET players, especially 6on6 players. I don't like the game because it has always appeared way too chaotic for me.

It's somehow the wrong way around. In ET, the objectives are complicated and the classes are simple. In OW, the objectives are simple and the classes (heroes?) complicated. It makes it feel like I never have to think what I have to do to win the map. I just have to think what I have to do to be able to kill someone.

Then there's also the playerbase... I never met such a community before... So much screaming, trolling and arrogance. I can't stand it. I suppose if I joined a proper team I might actually be able to enjoy the game for a while.
Parent
Community is shit yeah, the worst I've ever seen. Play on group, less retards :)

Yeah, objectives are plain simple, the game is based more on map structure which forces your team to do those different teamcomps :)
Parent
Thing is CS is a commercial game, made to attract people and be a popular game so how to get popular ?
-> game everyone can play
-> reduce the frustration of being rekt without being able to kill
-> increasing the random actions to satisfy everyone

and many point I cba to approach cause I don't like CS ^^
Parent
I'm sorry, but who are "they"? Splash Damage? id Software? Game developers in general?

Did you know that these days developers tend to make products that make the most money? The market is ruining it for people who actually enjoy good games instead of addictive games with in-game purchases. It's not really the fault of any developers.

I would say your best bet is the FOSS community, if you want to get this kind of an idea going.

It doesn't take flashy graphics and a billion different abilities to make a good game, as anyone who has ever played ET would know. Keep it simple. If anyone made a game and focused only on gameplay, minimal RNG and community effort (mapping, modding), I would pay more for it than any modern game... The sad thing is, not many others would.
Agreed with what you said

You must think who are the most kind of player (age) and what do they really search
2018, a high % of players are bellow 20 yo and most of people are searching for a beautiful game cause it looks hyper you know... you must be glad to say to your friend you play to the lastest game, it sounds better.. (imo when i talk about games to my friends i'm proud to mention ET, RTCW and Quake)

(sorry if all my sentence are not really clear, I'm still a little bit under my yesterday party ahah)
Parent
QuoteDid you know that these days developers tend to make products that make the most money?


Hi, game dev here, that is not really true. Most of us don't care one bit about making "the most" money, but about making "enough" money. And what's enough depends on your budget expectations.

I could make a game with ET-like gameplay and potato graphics, no problem. But how many of you would want this, let alone pay for it? I'd still have to cover my development time and maybe a couple of hired hands, which would come to at least a low six digit figure per year.

If you expect AAA graphics for a modern take on the ET formula, then the money required is exorbitant. Even with hugely successful crowdfunding, you'd end up having to get more loans from major publishers, who of course want to have some say in how you develop the game and what your target audience is. Adding to the difficulty is that highly detailed graphics are often difficult to combine with the fluid, floaty movement style of older engines that we all love so much.

If you want anything in between, it's not easy. It's a huge risk, as you will either have to front hundreds of thousands from your own pocket, or at least run a successful crowdfunding campaign (which is expensive to begin with) or convince a small publisher that your project will at least be a niche success.

This is not as simple as "hey let's make ET 2.0". ET was successful because it had that certain spark, the right combination of smooth gameplay and (for the time) great atmosphere. It just won't feel the same if you'd tried the same thing with a similar budget today.

With multiplayer games there is the additional complication that you really need a critical mass of players for it to be an enjoyable experience. If there aren't enough players then the project will be considered "dead" and nobody will care much about it, even if you do everything right for a small niche of players.

So the challenge is to come up with an original concept, that captures the core of what made games like ET great but adds a spin on it that makes it relevant for modern times. PUBG is an example of how a game can be a huge success despite a modest development budget, but it's successful because it provides an experience that is still new to most people. Back in the days, RTCW/ET also felt new and fresh to people, in a way that a simple remake wouldn't.

Then you need to figure out how to do the same. How to do a lot with a modest budget that matches the size of the niche audience you are going for. This is particularly challenging when you go for something like a WW2 theme, which draws a lot from authenticity and detail. It's much easier with stylised or abstract themes. But would you play "Minecraft the FPS"?

Finding the secret sauce is by no means easy, and the only reason I am not currently working on a game like that is that I haven't quite found it yet. But I will keep looking...

As for FOSS, I'd say don't hold your breath. It's incredibly hard these days to find people willing to put the amount of time in that is required to see a project like this through from start to finish. In the old days there was no better way to get into the game industry, but nowadays people can just join some small indie team instead and get paid for their work or at least have a better chance of getting noticed.

Then you have the problem that volunteers won't follow a leader who doesn't pay them (it wasn't a problem back in the days when a single person could basically do it all in a mod), so you most likely end up with a mess designed by committee.

Not saying it's impossible, but again the major challenge is that you would have to find that "special something" formula that rallies people together and makes them want to give up their free time for it. And if you do find this, you might as well make it a proper indie game.
Parent
I admit, I was more or less pulling what I was saying out of my ass. Thank you for the reply. Very enlightening.
Parent
I don't understand why you mention possible reasons of fail, or why we talk about people who might hate the game becaues it requiers too much skill and practice. Who cares?

Would you play a decent new wolf multi or not? If someone feels the spirit open a topic/ petition and the rest who feels like yea i support this will sign it.

But of course I agree with all of you who say players don't prefer ET style games. People are whiners, they wan't to be the best, get everything but they don't want to work for it :)

Side note:
https://www.hltv.org/forums/threads/1655813/csgo-easiest-fps-ever
I will sign some petition if you make one, sure. But I honestly think it won't help you.

Also, read my reply to Adze about that post.
Parent
Someone make id sell the license and we're good to go
Parent
The license to use the name? You know the name of the game is trivial...

I doubt they're gonna sue anyone for making a game with similar gameplay.
Parent
No, it isn't about the game
Parent
What license are they supposed to sell then? Am I missing something? :D
Parent
I think he meant the sourcecode
Parent
It's under a GPL license now. It's not necessary to buy it if you want to keep it opensource after you edit it, and that was my suggestion, more or less...

If you wanted to actually make a new game, I don't think you should start with the existing ET source code but rather start from scratch. But I doubt anyone's gonna do that.
Parent
/msg madscientist
RtCW is very much alive for Multiplayer though, all you guys need to do is actually get on and play. There's OSP servers still running, and a shrub server. There's even an upcoming tournament, check it out: www.rtcwcups.com
1.0 only unfortunaly
Parent
It depends on what you like, but 1.0 AoD DM and Chicago DM aren't really bad at all. It is almost solely aim-based, the gameplay is much faster than usual, and there are a few old and experienced players still there regularly. And on top of that, both of them are quite active, and I see them being so in foreseeable future as well.
Parent
No, not just 1.0. 1.4 is very much alive, and there is even a tournament on the horizon.

1.0 has AOD which is a DM server that is EURO and is usually used a lot through-out the day. As it gets later there is a Chicago DM server that is used into the early mornings. Last night we got to tryout maps for DM like tram, tundra, sub, and more so not just base anymore.

1.4 has OSP OBJ nights which are every week on Thursday and Sunday starting at 9pm EST. If you wish to still play the competitive OBJ side of RtCW, you still can as the game is free and so is the key. We have many different players join us, whether your NA or EURO.

Discord link for RTCW channel that is used for tournaments or OSP nights:
https://discord.gg/SSSZDGa
Any questions you have can be asked on this discord, and someone will help you get rtcw setup and ready to go.

Rtcw Tournament info:
http://rtcwcups.com/index-draftcup.htm

People have to stop saying 1.4 is dead when there is tournaments every year, regardless of it's size or teams.
Parent
People need to realize the main problem lies in their heads, not in the games they play.
Why even wish for another game when RtCW and ET already exist? To draw the masses to it by shiny graphics? You will never achieve anything by it, they will linger on for some time, but the part of community which takes it seriously will be small as always. Not to mention that such a game is unlikely to ever come, as it simply would not be profitable to its maker.

You think the problem lies in the fact that RtCW/ET are old? It doesn't. Take CS 1.6 as an example. It is just as old, yet millions play it over the world, with hundreds of different competitive scenes (yes, the main e-sports events have dropped it, but we are not talking about monetary gains here), with almost each country having its own. What is the reason for its persistence, you may ask? Of course, it is being noob-friendly. I do not say that CS lacks any skill to begin with, just that it takes way less skill, and that the randomness factor is still high enough to make a new player comfortable.

You need to understand that the amount of people playing the game (in serious manner) exponentially drops the more skill game requires. If you want to enjoy a difficult and highly skilled game, then you have to pay price for it, and that is the small playerbase (in comparison with other games). It was, is, and will, always be like that.

Being elitistic about the choice of game is not anything bad- on contrary, it is a very positive trait which ought to be encouraged.
What ought to be shunned, however, is the condescending demeanor towards new players who want to become better at game. They very well understand the difficulty that becoming proficient at it poses, and are willing to take it up and actually find joy in the process, but the last thing they need is a shithead demeaning them as they do it, or snobs playing a totally random and casual 3v3/6v6 mix and acting with such importance and pseudoelitism like they are playing a World Cup in football or something similar. Such demeanor actually tells more about the person having it that about the one onto which they unleash their pathetic betarage. That, among aforementioned things, is one of the reasons why already small community (there is not anything bad in it being small) fails to even sustain its low numbers (in RtCW at least, haven't played ET long enough, but I reckon it can't be much different).

On an semi-related sidenote, if you are looking for another highly skilled and competitive game, there is not a single one beyond RtCW, ET, Quake (and similar) which will give you enough satisfaction, period.
But, if you wish to try something different, albeit almost as skilled, try your hand at Mount&Blade: Warband (multiplayer, and multiplayer mod "Mercenaries"). I know, it sounds ludicrous to someone who plays shooters, but trust me, it really isn't. There are some servers filled with persistent noobs looking for fun, but competitive scene is almost as small as that of ET, and it takes a lot to become truly proficient in it. The combat system is relatively simple to begin with, but the amount of variation which can be applied to it is what makes it so highly skilled. Good reflexes, real-time decision making, and muscle memory are certainly needed. There is a part of community which focuses extensively on 1v1 duelling as well. I knew of a Quake 3 CPMA player who played, and at best he could be described as middling in it. Not saying that it takes more skill, of course, just mentioning an example.
There aren't that many team-based shooters that are worth playing, especially if you're a fan of games like ET. DB could've been something but competitively the game has always been hot garbage. It's an alright game if you just want to play casually though and the mechanics are quite fun. The game is definitely easier than ET however, which takes away some of the fun.

CS:GO is probably the best team-based competitive FPS and the scene reminds me a lot of the gaming communities of old. Don't get me wrong, CS:GO used to awful. But it has improved gradually and it's pretty good now I'd say. Sadly, CS:GO is a round-based game which is fucking boring to play. I like watching it, but I can only play 1-2 matches before falling asleep. If CS:GO was played in Chargers Only mode I'd honestly be interested in playing it more. For those who aren't aware, Chargers Only was a game mode in the original CS that was played in the early 2000's in which the main goal was to get most amount of rounds within a set-time frame and then the other team had to beat that score. There's a video about it here:

The only hope for ET fans is if something drastic changes with DB or if Bethesda decides to do something with the (ET/RTCW) Wolfenstein franchise like they did with QC. I think there's a place for a game like ET in today's market, but it wouldn't be huge or anything. It just doesn't have global appeal like mobas etc. But if done right, with the proper branding and marketing it could do well I think.
How exactly would you define "a game like ET"? Splash Damage has been trying it several times now, so what exactly do you think they are missing that makes the original so unique? Are there any changes you could imagine for Dirty Bomb that would make it good enough? Hypothetically speaking, even if you know that SD would never make those changes.
Parent
Engine pretty much, game feels clunky in general
Parent
Dirty Bomb and Brink were all takes on ET, they weren't exactly ET. In addition, I think actually having the Wolfenstein branding would be huge. It is still very known in the gaming community. People forget but ET was actually the 3rd most played shooter after 1.6 and CS:S at one point so there's a lot of people out there that are familiar with W:ET but have no clue about Dirty Bomb. It actually reminds me of a show I used to watch where the host (to my surprise since ET wasn't widely played in Sweden) started talking about ET and how awesome it was to use the MG when the allies were storming the beach, lol (probably referring to Battery or et_beach). Do you think this guy has any idea that Dirty Bomb exists and that it shares a lot of similarities? Probably not.

There has also been a huge craving for WW2 or WW1 games recently after years of CoD and Battlefield titles taking place in modern times and there's been a bit of a missed opportunity there imo. I was kind of disappointed that DB decided to opt for the "hero-shooter" route personally and I even voiced my concern about that after the closed beta and as predicted we see a lot of people who are now tired of the emphasis on abilities over gunplay.

Dirty Bomb is actually all right for what it is. The game has consistently been keeping an active player-count of like 1.5-2.5k for a few years which isn't even that bad for a FPS game nowadays. Unlike many other ET players I think the game is actually fairly decent for public/casual play. But the game isn't suitable for competitive play like ET is with etpro. First of all, spectating is garbage (engine related) When spectating everything is delayed, if I tuned in to a Dirty Bomb stream for the first time I wouldn't even be able to tell that the players are mechanically skilled because of how laggy it is. Add to that all other features that we have in ET that are apparently deemed luxurious nowadays (dedicated servers, demos, map editor, sdk etc.) and you've got a game that just isn't very suitable for a prosperous community.. and the community is what helps shape the game, not just the developers.
Parent
Sure the Wolfenstein branding has a lot of pull, but it's not attainable for indies and anybody with the money to get it would not make a niche game. It's similar with the WW2 theme, if you pick this you are going against the big boys and if you make a niche game, you will be drowned out. Ultimately those games are about immersion, and it's hard to do immersion better than AAA. The only time you still see some indie success in these areas is in hardcore simulation that is too realistic/punishing for the mainstream, but that is pretty much the opposite of what ET is.

It's also important to note that ET was completely free (not just F2P). It was essentially a gift, and based on a high profile franchise at the time, so it's not really surprising that it was popular. That doesn't mean that it was a viable or repeatable business model.

I think that if the core spirit of ET is to live on, then it needs to be outside of those mainstream options. And that requires distilling it down to the core aspects that really make that game unique. If it ends up that the brand and theme are essential to it, then I am afraid that it's probably doomed.

adze mentioned the engine and that Dirty Bomb feels clunky, which is vague but comes closest to how I feel about it as well. The simplicity (and some might call it brokenness) of older engines in many ways add positively to the feel of the game. And it's not like we can't replicate those mechanics, even on modern engines, it's just that most don't choose to because it has gone out of fashion in favour of more realistic/sensible (but also boring) movement mechanics.

So I guess the question is, if somebody took the gameplay of ET(Pro), polished it up a good bit, but completely removed the theme in favour of something more abstract or unique. No AAA graphics, just solid high performance visuals. Would there be a reliable niche market for it?

This is the kind of project I am interested in, and I do have concrete plans for something along those lines. I just don't know if it's even worth aiming for the ET style gameplay since so much of it seems to depends on the theme and license.
Parent
Well, I agree with most of what you were saying. Is there a niche market for this sort of game? I would argue that that already exists in Dirty Bomb. It's pretty much the only modern shooter with this sort of game-play and it has a small but dedicated community that specifically enjoy games like this. These people could easily play Overwatch or Paladins (if they wanted a free shooter). But they choose to play Dirty Bomb specifically (even with all of it's flaws) because they like the gameplay. So I definitely think that there would be a market for an ET 2.0.

As for the WW2 theme, the reason why I mentioned it was because there was a huge gap of time where there was a lack of WW2 shooters in the market and there was a big demand for it. It wasn't until just recently with CoD: WW2, Battlefield 1, Battalion etc. that they started coming back. That was a missed opportunity for Splash Damage to attract new players to their game imo. I say this without even having anything against Dirty Bomb's art direction. I think you're probably right that it's not a good theme to go for right now though, unless you have the Wolfenstein brand to go along with it.

I agree that the engine plays a huge part of it, physics and optimization specifically and then there's netcode as well. Dirty Bomb actually feels all right to me and that's saying a lot since I'm someone who hates UE3 engine games with a passion. It took a long time but SD managed to optimize the game fairly well and the addition of wall jumping was a nice touch. But yeah, nothing beats idtech3 games like ET, Q3 etc.

I think most people would like to see something along the lines of what you're talking about, but it wouldn't be easy to pull off for sure. But good luck if you do attempt to take on such a task, would definitely be a great initiative. 'Reflex' kind of did this with a spiritual successor of Q3: CPM with all the modern perks like matchmaking and skins added to the game. The game has an insanely low player-base though which kind of proves that it's hard for games like these to break through nowadays. But then again CPM was even a niche in the old days since most people just played OSP or Vanilla. I think a game similar to ET would have a bit more potential. Reflex probably did all right in terms of sales though, since I know a ton of people who bought the game.

If you're a developer you could always apply for Splash Damage if all else fails. We probably need more people from the ET community working on their games, I'm not sure many of their new devs are familiar with ET or what made it great.
Parent
Kinda funny to see how many people want to have a "new ET" and even more miss ET.
What about everyone stops this hypocritical bullshit and just starts playing the original again? Then ET would be active af.
But no, instead people prefer crying about how bad all the other games are and that they want a new ET.
All good things come to an end eventually. Even CS 1.6 had to die off eventually and make way for CS:GO.
You're right though that it's possible to make something great out of an old game. Fighting games like SSB:M have proved that it's possible. But it would take one hell of a community effort.
Parent
CS 1.6 is far, far from dead, as it is still being played by hundreds of thousands. It being dropped by esports events to promote CS:GO does not mean it's "dead", and if you add players of non-Steam version to it, it has a larger playerbase than GO by orders of magnitude.
Age of the game is not a very important factor here.
Parent
You're right, it isn't dead as in people have completely stopped playing it, I know this. I wasn't even referring to the actual game as a whole, but simply the competition. I probably shouldn't have used the term 'die off' anyways, trust me I don't like to label games as dead either. There's no doubt in my mind that people will still be playing older titles years from now, because they're genuinely good games and time will not change that. But there's nothing wrong with a reboot. I'm talking about actually getting a game like ET into the spotlights. CS:GO was a necessity, CS 1.6 had reached a stalemate (especially in terms of actual competition) it just wasn't as interesting anymore. And even though CS:GO was a complete mess of a game at the start it got there eventually and brought some actual improvement and innovation along with it as well. Even though ET is the best game ever made in my mind, there could still be improvements made to it to streamline the game to a new generation of players.

By the way, the reason why 1.6 still has a ton of players isn't just because it's an excellent game. It's also because of hardware requirements and cost of the actual game. They're still very popular in countries where people simply cannot afford to buy a good computer and a bunch of games. Not to mention all the people that are running these games on school computers and such. Interestingly this kinda adds to my point about optimization, which is one of the most important factors about a game in my mind. People always talk about graphics when the idea of an ET 2.0 is brought up and that's fine but it needs to run well so that as many people as possible can get involved and actually play the game to begin with.
Parent
Though there still exists a CS 1.6 competitive scene- in fact, almost every country has its own internal scene. It has only lost its place (and monetary awards) on large e-sports events due to necessary promotion of CS:GO (devs have to make money).

But even if CS 1.6 dies (and I don't see it happening in the next half a decade and even more), it still has GO, which is basically the same game with some frills added.
On the other hand, RtCW/ET has no other quality alternative, and that is why we simply have to play what we have, not sit around trying to find a way to "get" a game that no one even has the incentive to develop.

The reason CS 1.6 is popular is (among other things, which you have already listed) its moderate amount of skill. You have to possess it to play on higher levels, but, as has already been said, the level of random factor is still high to grant many lucky kills. On the other hand, you need extreme luck to 3hs someone on full health in RtCW/ET, and it is not common occurence even among highly skilled.

People tend to gravitate towards games which require less skill, and this is more than evident by the fact that ET, as an objectively worse game, is/was more popular than RtCW (even though it is still more skilled than any other FPS bar RtCW and Quake).

As I said before, a comparatively small playerbase will always be the price one has to pay for playing games like these. Not something that ought to be moaned about, just plainly accepted. RtCW, for example, had only 2-3k players left playing it worldwide in late 2003, which is extremely small for such a young game it was back in then.
Parent
I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but I'd argue that there should be an incentive to create a new game like ET. That game could and should have been Dirty Bomb, as much as people like to trash it. The fact that the game has maintained a player-base, (small or not) in a pretty competitive market since 2015 proves that there is a niche market for games like this even nowadays. With all of it's flaws I would still play it if it wasn't for the fact that it has a non-existent competitive scene. I'm actually kinda surprised that more ET players didn't try it out, even though I would completely understand why they didn't stick around :D

Games nowadays just aren't the community driven games that we were used to in my opinion. Developers want almost totalitarian control over their games and they seem extremely reluctant to add the features that would allow a community to actually thrive. Both a competitive and a casual one. I'm hoping the game 'Diabotical' will do well, because they look to solve these issues. Allowing the community to contribute more with the right tools already built into to the game itself.

That's the beauty of games like ET and CS. A game like Dirty Bomb dies the day that Splash Damage decides to pull the plug and shut down their servers. But ET and CS can be played forever.
Parent
Back to top