• Join Us |
  • |
  • Sign in with:

Latest News

Ritual's Condition Zero

by Maarten Goldstein, Dec 06, 2002 3:19pm PST

The CPL today announced their workshop schedule for the upcoming CPL Winter event, which shows some interesting information about Condition Zero. This single-player Counter-Strike will be shown at a workshop, but who is hosting this workshop? Ritual Entertainment, and not Gearbox Software. Through various sources we learned that Ritual (also working on Elite Force 2) took over development of the game back in August. It's not known if they started from scratch or are working with the content build by Gearbox. Randy Pitchford & Co will still be at the CPL, showing the PC port of Halo. Ritual is actually the third company to work on Condition Zero, as Rogue Entertainment briefly worked on it as well before Gearbox took over.

Update: Valve sends along confirmation that Ritual Entertainment is indeed the new developer for Condition Zero.
Counter-Strike: Condition Zero Development Moves to Ritual The primary development of Counter-Strike: Condition Zero (CS:CZ) has moved to Ritual Entertainment. Counter-Strike: Condition Zero introduces single player gaming to the world's #1 online action game. Representatives from Ritual and Valve will be presenting the latest on CS:CZ during a seminar at the The CPL's upcoming Counter-Strike Championships in Dallas, Texas.
In addition to the quote from Valve Software, we have gotten this from Gearbox's Randy Pitchford:
Gearbox Software suspended development of Counter-Strike: Condition Zero in July of 2002. Counter-Strike: Condition Zero introduces single player gaming to the world's #1 online action game. Valve Software has overseen development since July. Gearbox is aware of and endorses Ritual Entertainment's involvement. After developing several Half-Life games, Counter-Strike: Condition Zero, Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3 and James Bond 007: Nightfire, Gearbox Software is refocusing its efforts on future technology and more interesting and innovative game play. Gearbox Software will be discussing Halo: Combat Evolved for the PC and our vision for the future of interactive entertainment at The CPL's December 2002 event in Dallas, Texas.





Comments

51 Threads* | 147 Comments*





  • Like it or not, CS is a successful game. It has broadened the computer games market for the better. Anything that brings more people into computer games is a good thing. Gamers might bemoan the death of community and all that sort of stuff, but the truth is, until the whole "gamer" category as a distinct and separate group goes away, the video game industry will not advance. Video games have to go beyond the typical market of just males. To appeal to a wider audience, they have to pull in people on the basis of more than just system specs and violence. Mind you, CS doesn't do that in terms of violence, it does it in a roundabout way, but at least it is pulling people in.

    You don't know how many people I've talked to who have played and know about CS. I know plenty of chicks who have at least tried it, and some like it and lots of guys I wouldn't expect to be playing it. If CS can help to bring more people in to computer games, the less the industry will be viewed as for a specific target market and the more innovative gameplay you'll see. Hopefully, if they're brought into CS, then they might try other games, and those will be the really innovative ones that appeal to a wider, mainstream audience.

    As somebody mentioned, CS doesn't require lots of system specs to run as if that were bad thing. Again, that's the gamer's thinking but it doesn't work for appealing to a mainstream audience. You cannot expect that everybody has a top of the line system. CS is in the point that you don't need a lot of horsepower to run it and where the low end computers meet the requirements easily, but if they see other amazing games, then they may try them out and see that they need a better computer. As it is though, CS is a very good mechanism for ensuring that initial adoption in the first place.

    People may complain about the gameplay too as being stagnant and unchanging. I don't know that there's anything wrong with that. I have a friend who started playing CS and though he's tried other games such as Medal of Honor and BF1942, for some reason he just doesn't like them that much, beyond the initial "ooh" of pretty graphics. After that, he goes back to CS because he says none of the others have the same "feel" that CS does. Gameplay is therefore key. I don't know what it is, but it keeps people playing. Something that cannot be said for SOF2 despite all its amazing graphics and its gore engine, its not succeeding like CS is and that is fact. Besides which, what does SOF2 offer that CS doesn't? Better graphics? More realism? Playing games isn't about realism. It has absolutely nothing to do with it. I'm not sure what it does have to do with, but if it were real life, you'd all be dead when you died in the game. The Sims, believe it or not, is not about real life either, its about control. Better graphics may pull people in, but it won't keep them playing.