When comparing Counter-Strike: Global Offensive vs Battlefield 1, the Slant community recommends Counter-Strike: Global Offensive for most people. In the question“What are the best online multiplayer games on PC?” Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is ranked 8th while Battlefield 1 is ranked 13th. The most important reason people chose Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is:
Each round of CS feels more like a game driven more by careful tactics than a frivolous fast-paced and lethal paintball arena of which too many modern First-Person Shooters are guilty of. Positioning, timing and thinking are key ingredients of a successful game and cooperation is crucial if you want to win.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Driven by tactics and cooperation
Each round of CS feels more like a game driven more by careful tactics than a frivolous fast-paced and lethal paintball arena of which too many modern First-Person Shooters are guilty of.
Positioning, timing and thinking are key ingredients of a successful game and cooperation is crucial if you want to win.
Pro Runs well on most hardware and even on older hardware
It's a very optimized game and runs smoothly on even outdated hardware.
Pro Carefully-executed changes to existing maps
The updates and improvements made to existing maps have been pretty clever and useful.
For example, cracked glass is more opaque, making it harder to go on a sniping rampage. Or the stairway which was added to the bottom of de_dust made the route more viable for the Terrorists, while keeping the original purpose of that area serving as a bottleneck.
Pro Will be familiar to CS 1.6 and CS: Source players
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive builds on the strengths of its predecessors, even though those predecessors have been constantly improving for over a decade now.
Nonetheless, Counter-Strike veterans will feel right at home in Global Offensive, albeit with some minor differences. The MP5 is now the MP7, The TMP has left its place to the MP9 and you can't attach a suppressor to the M4.
Pro Well composed audio that is every bit as informative as the graphics themselves
The high quality of distinctive audio in the game keeps the player well informed of happenings around them. By giving the player sound ques as to what else is happening in game, you can easily suss out what type of weapons are being used around you, where someone may be located, by the sound of their footsteps, as well as vehicles may be close.
Pro Solid single player campaign that shows off many different stories from WW1
The single player campaign tells quite a few good stories, that are neither tied to one place or time, which allows the game to take the player through many different locales. This way the scenarios in the game stay fresh, both through graphical settings as well as overall story.
Pro Stable gameplay
Unlike a few other games in the series, the games launch and subsequent playtime has been solid throughout. No server issues, no buggy play, everything works perfectly fine and the game is optimized quite admirably.
Cons
Con Has a large skill gap
Since it's a pretty old game, most players are veterans at this point and have been playing for a long time. This may make it hard for newer players to jump in and play.
Con Can have a bad community
As it is a large game, it should come as no surprise that the community just won't be up to par. You may be kicked for strange reasons (like bottom scoring or the all too common random hacking accusation) and many could give you a 7 day ban. It can be very frustrating as missions in the mission system require you to play certain things while crossing your fingers.
Con New maps and modes feel pretty mediocre
Even though old maps have been revisited and improved by a wide margin, new maps and modes released with CS:GO are pretty mediocre.
Half of the maps available are locked under Arms Race (which is a re-imagining of the original community-created GunGame) and Demolition (GunGame without insta-respawn and bomb defusal) modes.
These game modes feel pretty safe and unimaginative, especially for veterans who have played their predecessor.
Some of the new maps are pretty compact and designed to act as instant-action meat-grinders akin to modern FPS (like Call of Duty) instead of requiring any tactics to win.
Con Hard to see if you are hitting someone
One of the things that were changed in CS:GO is firing feedback.
When someone is shot in GO, they don't wince, there's only a small amount of blood and audio that conveys the information that you are actually hitting someone. But omitting wince animation from character models makes it harder to see if you are actually hitting another player, especially at distance.
Con Less time spent playing a game
This is a feature that makes kills and hits (no health regeneration) more impactful, but also a lot less time is spent playing the game, especially if you die early to a sniper peek. Newbies will be playing a lot less of the game than more experienced players.
Con Not historically accurate
World War I was full of trench warfare and you rarely went across no man's land (the space between your trench and the enemy trench). In Battlefield 1, there are barely any trenches, grenades are hard to get away from, and the bullet drop for snipers is too much.
Con Low recoil for what is supposed to be slow and old weapons (compared to modern day counterparts)
The recoil of the guns in game is quite fast for what are supposed to be pretty old and slow weapons. Most likely this off balance feel is caused by trying to make the game as accessible as possible. Sadly for those that would be interested in a more simulation like experience will be a bit disappointed.