For over two decades, Counter-Strike has offered an elite competitive experience, one shaped by millions of players from across the globe. And now the next chapter in the CS story is about to begin. This is Counter-Strike 2.
Ok.
CS:GO, a game released in 2012? Runs well on a 2016 laptop.
CS2, a game released in 2023 can run well on a 2027 laptop.
I don’t think that’s the argument you want to make?
And I still don’t think it’s enshittification.
No, the argument is CS has been CPU reliant before CS2. This is what should have been kept, allowing for democratised CS gaming even on potatos, which has been a tradition since forever. CS2 seems to have been made GPU reliant, which is the reason for reported performance differences from CSGO.
This is the basis of my argument.
CS is not a game or a competitive FPS, it is a tradition, unlike most games. It is what Unreal or Tekken or KOF or many Arcade classics used to be.
CS:go required anything DX9 compatible with 256mb VRAM. Which would be an NVidia 6600, a midrange GPU from 2004 - around the time CS Source was released.
CS2 minimum spec is a GTX650. Which is a mid range GPU from 2012, around the time cs:go was released.
Something of a pattern there…
If CPUs didn’t have integrated GPUs, this whole “cs is CPU dependent” thing wouldn’t apply, because you would STILL need a GPU.
It’s just that intel bundled a barely passable GPU alongside the CPU.
TBH, I think you are missing you’re argument.
You should be arguing that there is no way to play cs:go now that cs2 has released. Meaning a potential hardware upgrade requirement.
That is a bummer. That’s pretty shit.
But it is NOT enshittification.
That does not claw back value/money from customers to valve or its investors.
Unless you can show me, beyond reasonable doubt, that Valve is making money from giving away CS2 for free to anyone that has purchased cs:go through the requirement of a hardware upgrade.
Until then, this is not enshittification.
Ok.
CS:GO, a game released in 2012? Runs well on a 2016 laptop.
CS2, a game released in 2023 can run well on a 2027 laptop.
I don’t think that’s the argument you want to make?
And I still don’t think it’s enshittification.
No, the argument is CS has been CPU reliant before CS2. This is what should have been kept, allowing for democratised CS gaming even on potatos, which has been a tradition since forever. CS2 seems to have been made GPU reliant, which is the reason for reported performance differences from CSGO.
This is the basis of my argument.
CS is not a game or a competitive FPS, it is a tradition, unlike most games. It is what Unreal or Tekken or KOF or many Arcade classics used to be.
CS has always needed a GPU.
CS:go required anything DX9 compatible with 256mb VRAM. Which would be an NVidia 6600, a midrange GPU from 2004 - around the time CS Source was released.
CS2 minimum spec is a GTX650. Which is a mid range GPU from 2012, around the time cs:go was released.
Something of a pattern there…
If CPUs didn’t have integrated GPUs, this whole “cs is CPU dependent” thing wouldn’t apply, because you would STILL need a GPU.
It’s just that intel bundled a barely passable GPU alongside the CPU.
TBH, I think you are missing you’re argument.
You should be arguing that there is no way to play cs:go now that cs2 has released. Meaning a potential hardware upgrade requirement.
That is a bummer. That’s pretty shit.
But it is NOT enshittification.
That does not claw back value/money from customers to valve or its investors.
Unless you can show me, beyond reasonable doubt, that Valve is making money from giving away CS2 for free to anyone that has purchased cs:go through the requirement of a hardware upgrade.
Until then, this is not enshittification.
Is it shitty? Sure.