Lessons from Valve’s approach to CS:GO 2 – The Loadout

Lessons from Valve’s approach to CS:GO 2

Prior to the highly anticipated release of the closed beta for Counter-Strike 2 and its announced features, Warzone 2 players looked on with envy. While Infinity Ward reinvented the wheel, making it square and adding horns, Valve rounded out its circle and attached an engine to it. Warzone 2 was a chance for Call of Duty’s Battle Royale to return to pandemic-level popularity after a steady decline in its twilight years. The original game arrived when people needed it more than ever, as friends who hadn’t seen each other in months reunited in Verdansk. With the refreshed sequel, players hoped to experience a sense of nostalgia and significantly improved BR experience with the release of Warzone 2.

However, the popularity of the original Warzone was due not only to the pandemic but also to fast gameplay, slide cancels, lightweight weapons, one-shot snipers, and a tight map. What did the sequel do? Remove slide cancels, make guns slower, remove one-shot snipers, and add large barren areas to the new Al Mazrah map. The game felt completely different and, as a result, worse. Despite the initial surge in player numbers at launch, the situation quickly began to deteriorate. It seemed like the game’s popularity would only be sustained for so long, unless Infinity Ward listened to the community and did not bring back elements from the first Warzone. After many disappointing updates, the community had had enough of the state of the game – it seemed like no one was listening to them. By January 2023, the number of Steam players in both Warzone 2 and Modern Warfare 2 had dropped by almost half, and this number continued to decline. In March, the number of Steam players reached its lowest point in history. To compound this disappointing statistic, this lowest point coincided with the release of the limited beta version of Counter-Strike 2, and fans began to make comparisons.

Valve’s approach to CS:GO 2

At the gameplay level, Valve clearly understood what players want and need from CS2. Counter-Strike has a tried and tested format that only needs refinement and doesn’t require a ton of new features or excessive complications. That’s why the smoke update received such overwhelmingly positive feedback – even though it wasn’t as flashy and impressive as some attempts at new innovations in Warzone 2. One-way and inconsistent smokes were a nightmare for the existence of a Counter-Strike player, so instead of reinventing the wheel, Valve decided to fix it.

Counter-Strike is a tactical, hardcore shooter, so Valve realized that this side of the game needed to stand on its own. Focusing CS2 on improving smokes, fixing the tickrate problem, and improving lighting and graphics is where it won the community over. Many of Warzone’s problems were just as glaringly obvious as one-way smokes and TTK problems in CS: GO, and answers to many of the problems we see in Warzone 2 have already been solved in the original game.

One of the most obvious problems was that you couldn’t stand up while sprinting, which was a key feature of gameplay in the original Warzone. Adding this to the game took Infinity Ward until February – over three months of essentially standing still if you wanted to lie down. Adding this to the game was met with an immediate positive reaction from the community, but there was (and still is) so much to fix or add. The very fast time to kill (TTK) was one of the biggest problems for players because it was harder to get out of situations when someone jumped on you with slower movement. Many defined this as reducing the skill gap, as unskilled players could luckily find themselves in a favorable position, killing another player before they could even react. This was due to the developer’s decision to reduce the player’s basic health by 50 at the game’s launch. But Infinity Ward refused to return to this.

For many, including me, the TTK in the original Warzone was almost perfect – except for the overpowered meta guns, which were eventually patched. So why change that? It would be like releasing CS2 and making a headshot with an AWP no longer a one-shot kill, completely changing the game’s style. The difference is that Valve knows its users and wouldn’t change such an integral part of the game. Valve not only made all the right moves in gameplay, but also allows players to transfer their CS:GO skins to CS2. In contrast, Warzone 2 wiped the slate clean, and while it may have been done for technical reasons, fans were unhappy seeing skins appearing in the store that looked strikingly similar to those found in the original Warzone. In fact, it was a savvy business move, considering the record number of CS:GO cases being opened. It would be absurd to suggest that Valve is a noble, non-capitalist developer whose goal is to create the best game without financial gain – of course, to make money. But at least Valve makes money by serving the Counter-Strike community, which is what it wants.

This is the most frustrating thing about the Warzone 2 debacle. Players weren’t asking for the moon – most just wanted a refined and improved Warzone experience. There were very obvious and seemingly fixable problems that any avid Warzone player could identify, but instead, a ton of new features was prioritized. Comparing how Infinity Ward and Valve approached their sequels, there is a clear, distinct difference. Warzone 2 turned one of the most popular Call of Duty games of all time and one of the best battle royales into a disappointing example of why listening to the community is the most important thing a studio can do. Meanwhile, Counter-Strike 2 took that lesson and ran with it.

Source: The Loadout.