
Posted by Rob at 17:04 13/8/2002.
That's the question raised in an article written by 'Amer Ajami' on Gamespot. He discusses whether or not Counter-Strike really was/is good for the benefit of the gaming industry."When you look at the case of Counter-Strike, its competition wasn't selling nearly as well because those games were spawned by Counter-Strike itself. You remember how it was. Everybody got into the mod-making craze in an attempt to cash in on some of the Counter-Strike fever--games like Global Operations, Tactical Ops, Gunman Chronicles, Opera, Firearms, even Day of Defeat. They all wanted to be the next Counter-Strike--maybe not in content but certainly in context--though none saw nearly the same amount of success that Counter-Strike did. They're copycats, and as anyone will tell you, you can't beat an original."The article is entitled "So Good, It's bad?". I believe Counter-Strike has been beneficial. It's set a standard which other games have to aim for after all - which can't be a bad thing?
Comments
Rush!
17:14 13/8/2002
Saviour of UKT
UKTerrorist
18:50 13/8/2002
19:24 13/8/2002