←back to thread

Play Counter Strike 1.6, with full multiplayer, in the browser

(play-cs.com)
1345 points philosopher1234 | 3 comments | 02 Feb 23 16:00 UTC | HN request time: 0.752s | source
Show context
MuffinFlavored ◴[02 Feb 23 16:19 UTC] No.34628720[source]▶
Met what ended up being a great friend in real life somewhere in some random IRC room looking for a 5th member to join my friend's group

He had a special CRT monitor to get the best refresh rate to be as competitive as possible for the game

Feels like a lifetime ago

replies(5): >>34628819 #>>34629194 #>>34630350 #>>34630754 #>>34636855 #
Zurrrrr ◴[02 Feb 23 16:48 UTC] No.34629194[source]▶
"He had a special CRT monitor to get the best refresh rate to be as competitive as possible for the game"

People like that always trying to compensate for a lack of skill

replies(3): >>34629275 #>>34629278 #>>34629770 #
ackatz ◴[02 Feb 23 16:51 UTC] No.34629275[source]▶
Meanwhile all of the best players in the world are using 240hz monitors…
replies(2): >>34629655 #>>34630732 #
1. Zurrrrr ◴[02 Feb 23 17:10 UTC] No.34629655[source]▶
I didn't say refresh rate didn't matter. Buy buying a new CRT in the late 90s with a slightly better refresh rate isn't going to be much of an advantage.
replies(1): >>34630465 #
2. nrb ◴[02 Feb 23 17:57 UTC] No.34630465[source]▶
The difference was pretty drastic. My NEC FP2141SB in the early 2000s ran 1280x1024 @ 100hz, those Diamondtron/Tronitron tubes were next-level for their time even though they were super finicky.
replies(1): >>34630844 #
3. dbttdft ◴[02 Feb 23 18:20 UTC] No.34630844[source]▶
Yeah the range of CRT quality was huge and visible. Those were a type of product where price actually correlated to quality. With an LCD you could pay $1000 for a "gaming" model and still get something that has basic issues like high input lag or strong overshoot. With CRT it meant the screen is now flat, the image is now bigger than 17", and the focus is now sharper.