A Counter-Strike: Global Offensive Gallery

By Jim Rossignol on August 26th, 2011 at 10:17 pm.

Help, my gun is on fire!
Valve just released a batch of screenshots for CS:GO, so here they are. Click for full size. Some of them seem to have already been released in some capacity, but others are new to me, at least. I do like a good balaclava.






__________________

« | »

, , .

118 Comments »

  1. jellydonut says:

    No, dudes. Just no.

    You’re doing to CS what you tried to do with Team Fortress before you scrapped it and came back with something genius.

    Valve, y u no genius here? y u no reinventing?

    • p4warrior says:

      I think there’s a difference in that CS is highly regarded in the e-sports scene, so tweaking it would lose more followers than it would gain, at least in Valve’s eyes.

    • Sergey Galyonkin says:

      I second that. We already had graphic upgrade with CS: Source, do something more interesting :)

    • Mr E Meats says:

      Personally I think CS is one thing that is better left unchanged, I don’t think any other style would fit CS than the style it already has. Can’t wait for this one.

    • Sergey Galyonkin says:

      p4warrior:

      Hardcore crowd (13-years olds with foul mouths) will skip it anyway, like they did with Source.

    • PaulMorel says:

      I think that there will be more changes, but they will be under-the-hood … or at least they will be peripheral to the main gameplay.

      For instance, I am sure that Valve are putting microtransactions in here somewhere. Vanity items will surely get in there somehow.

      And the weapon system seems to be getting some significant additions, while leaving the originals in place.

      And has anyone else wondered why Hidden Path (or whoever) is developing this? It’s a company best known for a tower defense game. There might not be anything there … but it’s hard to say.

      Anyway, this is pure speculation, but I suspect that there are more changes than Valve is letting on.

    • blackjackshelak says:

      Reinventing would probably hurt this game more than it would help it. The changes they are making (Updated Graphics, New Guns, New Modes) are good, but they don’t shake the existing gameplay too much. TF2 added a lot of EXTRA things on top of what TFC was, but as far as gameplay is concerned, it kept a lot of what made TFC so popular. At least initially, the biggest change in gameplay was the removal of grenades. Adding on new content and improving what’s already there is really the aim of games like this that seek to continue an established series. A more significant change in gameplay isn’t always your best bet at maintaining an existing playerbase. That said, they are introducing new game modes. Until we have more information on what that entails, and if there were any significant changes made to how the game runs (e.g. different accuracy/damage/recoil/penetration calculations) we won’t really be able to know just how much has changed.

    • hosndosn says:

      While I agree in general, I think you have your history mixed up: TF2 was originally a very different game from TF/TFC, a realistic military shooter, Battlefield style, which was pretty damn fresh in 1999 or so. TF2 2007 turned out to be a (very well done) reskin of TFC with hand-drawn style and a few balance tweaks, but essentially almost the exact same game.

    • kyrieee says:

      I think there’s a difference in that CS is highly regarded in the e-sports scene, so tweaking it would lose more followers than it would gain, at least in Valve’s eyes.

      Well the problem is that Valve aren’t catering to the e-sports scene at the moment. I don’t know who this game is for, trying to please everyone will never work.

    • blackjackshelak says:

      I was aware of the earlier phases of TF2 during development, and had that been what we got at release I could see your point. Changes made during development aren’t the same as changes made between one release-version of a game and any sequel thereof, however. So while “originally” the game was looking like a very different beast, we never had a chance to actually play that version. They eventually chose to alter the game’s aesthetic much more significantly than its gameplay and you can see how successful that decision was. If anything, I’d count the changes they’ve made to the game after it was released. All of the various pieces of kit that have been created and changed in that time made for a decent shift in the metagame away from what it started out as. I for one, would never have imagined the possibility of being stunlocked by a baseball to the head, nor would I expect a rocket aimed at a Pyro to return to me based on what TF2 looked like coming out the door.

    • MultiVaC says:

      “TF2 2007 turned out to be a (very well done) reskin of TFC with hand-drawn style and a few balance tweaks, but essentially almost the exact same game.”

      That’s not true at all. Almost all the classes’ weapons, movement, and roles are completely different, many of the weapons have been replaced, the Medic, Pyro, Spy, and Engineer were essentially redesigned from scratch, grenades are completely gone along with several other mechanics and/or exploits, none of the same maps still exist in their original incarnation (except maybe 2Fort), game modes are radically different, and primary game elements like crits, scout double-jumping, spy cloak, and ubercharge never existed in TFC in any way. And that’s just what was there on day 1, not counting the past 4 years of updates that have brought such drastic changes to the game.

      The kind of extensive reboot TF got is what I was really hoping Valve would do with DOTA and CS. I’m pretty disappointed that it seems that they are going the direction of making “DOTA: Source” and “Counter-Strike: Source: Source”

    • Agaetis181 says:

      If you’re a true Counter-Strike player, you’d know that this is the true sequel to the first one. Source didn’t act or look like Counter-Strike whatsoever. It was far too clunky! CS:GO is the REAL sequel, so no, they don’t have to reinvent anything. Looks awesome as is.

    • mindlessrant says:

      MultiVaC: You cant compare what classic Team Fortress used to be with what Counter Strike or Defence of the Ancients are nowadays. They have player bases in the millions and are being played competitively around the globe in pro leagues. Team Fortress never had that. When it comes to games that are being played professionally, you cant just go and change everything around just because you feeling funny.
      kyrieee: Oh is that so? Then why are they flying in pro 1.6 and CSS players in to test their beta build? Its the right thing to do because at the end of the day, those are the players that really know what they are talking about.

    • edit says:

      I’m more interested in the new things Valve do in general than new things they could do with Counter-Strike. CS can definitely use an update to bring it into the current generation and it looks like a nice job has been done of that. This is for people who play (or people who might want to play) Counter-Strike. A lot of people like that gameplay and it just wouldn’t be CS if it was deviated from in any creatively significant way. It’s not Valve’s next magnum opus and doesn’t need to be.

      Heck, Valve are handing much of the work to another dev team (Hidden Path). Valve are probably working internally on all their more forward thinking stuff right now.

    • Arca says:

      We are getting some new stuff with this like new game modes and the like, pretty much all you should expect from a new CS game.

      People who expect the game to become a COD clone are stupid. This is counter strike, the game isn’t going to change at all apart from a few extra additions. I gladly welcome an updated graphics engine.

      I still play counter strike source with friends every now and then, it’s a great game. This game will expand the audience and give old hardcore players a refreshing look at the game without changing the core functions and style that the original and source have.

    • I4C says:

      If by genius u mean, dumbing it down for consoles and selling hats…

      Btw 1.6 has more users then source, because source has really bad movement, recoil and hitboxes.

      Why u think 1.6 still has more players playing and is still alive in the esport scene, while neither source or TF2 are?

      Everyone in the cs 1.6 community is frowning upon go, because all the data out there makes it look worse then source already was(from a gameplay perspective, even the devs themselves admit to focusing on consoles).

    • mindlessrant says:

      Why all those arrogant lies, I4C?

    • Rushko says:

      @p4warrior 1.6 was highly regarded in the esports scene, not CS:Source, which this looks much more like. So “keeping it more of the same” would be a bad thing. They really need to go back to the mechanics of 1.6 which actually allowed for a high level of precision play. Source was no such thing, and this looks no different, just they have helicopters and more boxes now.

    • caicaiaa says:

      Fashion brand products, low prices and reliable quality. Welcome to:

      http://tinyurl.com/3wvabn3

    • Shooop says:

      They don’t want to mess with it too much because so many people love it the way it is now. So they’re just making little steps forward to keep the crusty veterans happy.

      Better than CoD “progress” you do have to admit.

    • mR.Waffles says:

      We don’t want a reinvented CS. You cannot re-invent perfection.

  2. p4warrior says:

    GO GO GO

  3. xavdeman says:

    http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/images/11/aug/csgo4.jpg
    Low poly environments, and those don’t look like dynamic geometry shadows to me. Also, the objects like crates don’t seem to cast shadows, at all. The engine they’re using is seriously lacking in the lightning department in general. Also: low resolution textures. This may be acceptable on consoles. If this is the upgraded Source engine then I don’t even WANT HL3 done in it.

    • Grygus says:

      Maybe I’m being stupid. How can you tell whether shadows are dynamic from a screenshot?

    • Rhin says:

      Don’t worry, everyone who plays Counterstrike seriously will have the graphics dialed down to the bare minimum to keep a steady FPS anyways.

    • p4warrior says:

      Honestly Source has always looked better than it had any technological right to. It’s got a muted, understated look that makes it look loads more impressive than contemporaries which pile on the crazy bloom and shading effects. The real world just does not look that way.

    • Stupoider says:

      Aztec looks great in the lightning department.

    • jay35 says:

      xavdeman is on point: For 2011, this looks like ass. What a joke. If they want to re-make CS:Source with a new engine, that’s one thing. This? This is more like a half-baked mild graphical iteration and at the same time a bone thrown to consoles.

    • ResonanceCascade says:

      Normally I don’t care about graphics, but since this game is pretty much just a graphics update…I don’t really get it either.

      It’s an XBLA/PSN title, so I guess they’re not really going for the triple A crowd, but that kinda makes the PC version seem pointless.

    • goosnargh says:

      To be fair, some of these shots don’t have any AA or AF and were probably taken by a bad person.

    • Muzman says:

      You all remember how one of the secrets of Counterstrike’s long term success and popularity was how it would run on fucking anything though right?

    • Tom says:

      these look like console shots to me…

    • soldant says:

      The Source engine was never about the latest and greatest technology, it’s always been slightly behind. That’s one of the reasons for why Valve games are so popular; they run on a wide variety of hardware. Doom 3′s engine, which came out the same year and featured full dynamic lighting and shadows, also happened to run like a dog for most people with hardware of the day. In a Doom 3 map you’d place the lights and jump straight into the game. In a HL2 map you’d place the lights, wait for it to build a lightmap, and then see all sorts of weird lighting artefacts and things like shadows for items on top of shelves appearing on the floor, without the shelf casting a shadow. That said, it sported some fantastic facial animation. Even level clutter was thicker in Doom 3.

      It’s got nothing to do with consoles and everything to do with how Valve operate and what their priorities are. It works for them, and I’m glad there’s somebody out there not taking the Crytek route of “Oh screw it, just wait for video cards and CPUs to catch up, besides we need to fuel those hardware wars!”

    • Arca says:

      It’s in development and these are development screenshots.
      You can’t judge graphics at this stage.

    • Noblaum says:

      Just pointing out a slight misjudgement on your part: you can see the shadows from the opposite building, meaning the shadows on the crates would be going the opposite direction. So the crates probably have shadows, you just can’t see them. The player models, however, don’t have shadows.

  4. B0GiE-uk- says:

    Counter of Duty: Strike Warfare

    • Daiv says:

      It’s a moving tale of unionised delicatessen workers at Tesco, engaged in acrimonious industrial action over pay and working conditions, trying to balance the conflicting demands of employers and their own families.

    • Bilbo says:

      That was beautiful, Daiv

  5. Schmung says:

    Characters very nice. Environments v nice for source. Weapons fucking horrible. In a game about guns they still neglect this.

    Without even introducing my rabid hatred of CS into this, I can’t understand why Valve are doing this since the people who truly love the game still play 1.6 and thus don’t want this re-invention and I don’t see what this offers Johnny Normal gamer that BF3 and MW3 does not.

    It’s valve, yes, but in this case I can’t quite get it. I don’t quite see their angle or their selling point on this.

    • Stupoider says:

      Consoles?

    • kyrieee says:

      1.6 actually does need a reinvention, but this won’t be it.
      Many people still play it but the scene is dying. Slowly, but dying non the less.

    • mindlessrant says:

      people like you have been saying this about 1.6 for years now, but have a look at the numbers:

      Current Players Peak Today Game

      54,140 66,542 Team Fortress 2
      40,410 46,380 Deus Ex – Human Revolution
      32,959 53,370 Counter-Strike: Source
      ———————————————————————————————–
      32,584 57,099 Counter-Strike
      ———————————————————————————————–
      16,941 27,565 Football Manager 2011
      16,709 19,157 Sid Meier’s Civilization V
      13,055 29,309 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 – Multiplayer

      Doesnt look like dying to me. 27.08.2011

    • Radiant says:

      FORTY MILLION people bought deus ex?!?!?!

      Forty MILLION

    • Radiant says:

      MEEELION!

    • Muzman says:

      Psst. Note the commas. Those numbers are ranges.

      (edit: or rather current vs peak if one actually reads the misplaced column headings)

    • mindlessrant says:

      I though most people where familiar with steam stats….of course its current players vs peak players, at a given time that day.

      http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

    • Kadayi says:

      Yeah not quite 40 million Radiant. Still for a new SP to have some many people playing all at once is quite encouraging.

  6. Gormongous says:

    Yep, looks like Counter-Strike. Too bad I already own it, so there’s no need to buy.

  7. lucky says:

    Not a huge CS fan, but I’m even more turned off by the screenshots. Source is really showing its age, despite having been continuously updated. Look at the muddy textures in the Aztec screenshot. Bummer.

  8. JohnnyMaverik says:

    I’m interested in the chopper… were there choppers in CS or CS Source? I’ve hardly played either so I wouldn’t know.

    I wonder if it’s a cod style kill streak reward, just some background animation (looks a bit more than that) or if players get airlifted into battles… that’d be pretty frigging sweet.

    • Xiyng says:

      I don’t think it means anything. AFAIK there weren’t any in 1.6 or Source and if there were, they didn’t do anything.

    • Starky says:

      It’ll just be a cool little round start animation to explain why all the CT are standing around at the start.

      As in the round will start and behind you the heli will be flying away.

  9. Ham Solo says:

    The e-gaming community will bitch and moan no matter what valve does, so no point in listening to them.
    Do to CS what you did to HL in terms of a sequel. And by that I mean HL2/EP1/EP2 as a whole, not the episodic releases.

  10. Eclipse says:

    The question is:
    will it be “oldskool” or will it feature lean, crawl, and iron sight?

    • p4warrior says:

      If the trailer is anything to go by, it’s pretty much old school as far as the shooting mechanics. The guns zoom the same way they have since the first game, no leaning or crawling apparent.

    • 4xis.black says:

      The latest information is that there are no iron sights or sim-style leaning/prone elements. It is Counter-Strike, with rebalanced weapons, a few minor new mechanics and rebalanced maps.

    • Bilbo says:

      Which is in equal measures making people nerdrage for being not different/innovative enough and for not being 1.6 (i mean really, the people who are saying “not worth playing because it’s not 1.6″ can suck a cock – what are they supposed to do, sell you 1.6 again? get real)

    • Legionary says:

      @Bilbo: is there any need for the casual homophobia? Except of course that we’re talking about CS.

    • Starky says:

      Please, there isn’t any homophobia in that phrase, no more than “go fuck themselves” or any number of synonymous insults.

      So why don’t you go suck a bag of dicks.

    • Bilbo says:

      It’s been said, but in no way is “suck a cock” homophobic. Get a life Susie

  11. stovepipe says:

    5 years after the original CS we get CS: Source, a graphical update to CS. Now, nearly 7 years later, we get … a graphical update of CS:Source. I’ll look at it once it goes beta, but so far this smacks of rehashing, which is unlike Valve.

    Gaben doesn’t care about CS people.

    • skinlo says:

      Yes he does, thats why he’s not changing anything. CS people are very limited in their likes.

    • The_Great_Skratsby says:

      Cue the screaming about Left 4 Dead 2, the Half Life 2 Episodes and Portal 2.

  12. Moni says:

    I like that half the comments are worried that the game will be different and the other half are complaining that the game is exactly the same.

    • Jambe says:

      That is odd, isn’t it?

      I found my favorite multiplayer community in Counter-Strike and I fondly remember it, and I have friends who still play CSS quite a bit, but I haven’t had the urge to get back into it and this doesn’t really entice me much.

      Maybe as more stuff comes out, though… I dunno.

  13. AlexW says:

    Say what you will about the screenshots, those maps are instantly recognisable. de_aztec; de_dust; …uh, what’s-it-called, de_nuke? (I didn’t play much of that one, but my general point stands); de_dust; cs_office; de_dust. It’s actually a little strange that there are none from dust2, considering how popular said map is and how they have three from the first dust.

  14. Novotny says:

    Imma gonna stick my neck out and guess there’s gonna be motors in some form, maybe in new maps. Assault could be back.

    *sigh* I can dream

  15. The_Great_Skratsby says:

    Honestly as far as a kick in the rear of the CS formula for a current audience goes, while treading that fine line of pleasing an e-sports crowd that still leans on 1.6, this seems quite promising; it seems like everything TF2 isn’t.

    It’s no ‘CS2′, but for what it is I’m interested – saying that as someone who played the original from its first beta, then burned out years after Source.

    However the gun sizes and modelled arm supporting them look rather, well, poor.

  16. Ataraktika says:

    This looks like a joke. Seriously, it looks worse than CS: Source visually and that was 6 goddamn years ago. Valve, you playin’ with mah emotions, I’m sorry to say. I wanted the CS community to rise again, now it’s going to suffer some more.

    • skinlo says:

      I hope you are the one joking? In no way does it look worse than the 2004 version.

    • mindlessrant says:

      Dont feed the troll, OP obviously has no idea what Counter Strike is.

  17. sana says:

    Valve has been surprisingly mediocre lately. Another Counter-Strike graphical update… another contestant in the Aeon of Strife standalone game market… why?

  18. drcancerman says:

    Valve, why…why no episode 3? I mean, really, Gordon must be losing his balls now after waiting so long for an episode!

  19. Wozzle says:

    Pfft, COD clone.

  20. 4xis.black says:

    Isn’t calling this a Call of Duty clone a bit like calling Everquest a WoW clone?

    • Moonztrider says:

      Yeah, and Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat and other fighting games are just clones of Heavyweight Champ (1976 arcade game), because it was the first game in the genre. The same happens to Need for Speed, which is a clone of Atari’s Enduro. LOL

    • Bilbo says:

      No, it’d be like calling heavyweight champ a street fighter clone. ie Counter-Strike came first, not Call of Duty. No Counter-Strike, no Call of Duty – at least not in the multiplayer-focussed form it takes these days – I think it’s basically that simple

  21. El_MUERkO says:

    As anyone noticed the growing habit of games companies hiding the faces of enemies behind, masks, balaclavas, sun glasses or anything else they can think of?

    ‘Lazy Artists’ or ‘Age Rating Fluff’?

    • mickygor says:

      Dude, it just looks like updated versions of the same character models in both the other games.

    • Tatourmi says:

      Actually it might be for the player to identify better with the character. I, for one, always take faceless skins.

    • Dozer says:

      If the faces were visible you’d be seeing the same face over and over and that would look odd. Or, you’d be seeing a wide variety of low-quality faces (Oblivion). Or, the artists would spend ages making a wide variety of high-quality faces and the game would cost that much more to develop.

  22. msarge says:

    Looks fun to me!

  23. Bilbo says:

    Top screenshot’s fairly purdy, although he looks like he may have just nicked that machinegun from a shop in manchester

  24. Derpentine says:

    Heh, I guess the lack of normalmaps from environmental materials means that it’ll be PS3/PC and no XBL(since it is already claimed to not have the cross platform MP). All dem texture budgets.

  25. KBoogle says:

    What the hell is Louis doing in the second screenshot? Did he get on the wrong stage?

  26. Moonztrider says:

    I’m sensing another fail, just like Condition Zero. You can’t please vanilla CS fans with a new game; they will complain about any changes at all, and they don’t care about graphics. And now Valve has also screwed the game for players who want innovation; not only CS, but all Valve games could really use a ADS (aim down sights) button instead of the HUD crosshair on their next versions. This is, in no way, copying CoD or Battlefield, since they haven’t invented it. It’s about realism. The ADS feature is a must in any serious FPS game.

    Why would I buy a game that has exactly the same gameplay as CS:S? Just because of a tiny difference on the graphics? No, thanks.

  27. InsidiousBoot says:

    For those who say real cssers play on low to get more fps are dumb, I get 300 fps easily with high settings, I limit it to 110 or something to keep the load of my gpu.

    And the screens do look bad.

  28. Real Horrorshow says:

    I have to be honest….this looks lame.

    Why did Valve have to outsource the development to South Korea? If they did it themselves we might have something truly revolutionary on our hands.

    • drcancerman says:

      I have to agree with you, this looks lame… I’m one of the original players, who played the 1.5 and 1.6 to death. Who spent 2 days trying to download the mod . I’ve got to say, the screens look really, really disappointing. Maybe because we are all used with the details from TF2, BF3(played the alpha) and god forbid, COD series! I’m not a fan of COD, but BLOPS seem to have more detail and graphical quality than what we are seeing there.

      Granted, it might not even be in alpha those screenies, but… I’m not holding my breath on this one.

  29. krenzo says:

    Does the Source engine not support ambient occlusion yet? These graphics are pretty pathetic. Those up close shots of the player model and weapon in the 2nd and 3rd shots seem really low res. I just don’t see the point.

    • Bilbo says:

      Counter-Strike’s always been about cutting edge graphics. That’s why the fans are still playing 1.6 today – there’s simply nothing that can compare with the visual fidelity of that game

      tl,dr: you’re right, you really don’t see the point, do you

    • Zyrusticae says:

      I’m sorry, but all the apologetic “CS ISN’T ABOUT GRAPHICS” claptrap is really getting old.

      Why is it so wrong for people who AREN’T hardcore CS pros to hope for a game that is at least a visual upgrade over the previous one? And who are you to decide what the game is about and what it isn’t?

      People have different priorities. It’s about time you learned that. And you’re just going to have to deal with it.

      It’s a part of growing up, you see.

    • krenzo says:

      @Bilbo: So what is the point then if not to improve the graphics? Retexture Dust for fun and profit?

  30. thedavehooker says:

    I’ll try it at the very least, I can’t be any worse at it than I am at CS:S currently.

  31. Tams80 says:

    Hip shooting?! AAARRHH!!! GET IT WAY! GET IT WAY!!!

    *leaves article Ah. Much better.

  32. sleep_crime says:

    A.V.A feels more like a natural continuation of counter-strike than this shit ever will, and its free to play.

    Also, I can’t speak for all 1.6ers, but I’m not afraid of progress in the form of major gameplay changes. I just don’t want this “progress” favor the casual gamer.

  33. garlandgreen says:

    All i wanted in 2007 was a realistic re-skin of TFC. But they went and ruined it with cartoon gfx(for me anyway).

    With BF3 on the horizon I think this looks way too dated and doesnt excite me much.

  34. Dozer says:

    –reply fail–

  35. VIP0R says:

    I hope Valve give it their last minute super polish like they did with Left 4 Dead.

    With another team working on CS:GO and another on Dota2. Makes you wonder what Valve themselves are actually working on other than Portal 2 DLC. =]

  36. noclip says:

    Those men sure are shooting.

  37. Ruffian says:

    y’all be nuts. I think portal 2 was one of the best looking games I’ve played in a while. it’s not always about the tech guys. it’s what the teams working on the games can do with said tech. If you’re too busy having fun/being amazed to notice that the tech is slightly behind, then who cares? I don’t. I didn’t even notice the quality of the txtures in p2 until I went back a while after playing to specifically examine them for mapping purposes. so quit bitchin about the quality of graphics made with it. everyone knows it’s technically behind but when they make such great games who the f cares?

  38. disperse says:

    Didn’t I read that they are going to have auto-matching based on skill with appropriate difficulty bots filling in when there aren’t enough players? If they manage that, it will be a big improvement, forget about the graphics.

  39. Ira Aduro says:

    I thought the second screen was Louis from L4D until I realized that was a mask.

  40. killerprime29 says:

    I think Global Offensive will be a great addition to the Counter Strike series. Counter Strike was the world’s No. 1 combat game in the world (now being replaced by Team Fortress 2), and Counter Strike: Source has over 50 million players and counting. I hope this makes a good continuation to the Counter Strike storyline.

  41. Turbinator says:

    Why. Can’t. They. Just. Work. On. Episode. Three?