Well, I really liked my first post, so I didn't want to ruin it, but after spending more time with the game, I'll make a more serious follow up.

I think my previous anecdote is a good starting point. You seem to think I was upset because my teammate sucked. I'll be clearer. I was upset because my teammate was having more success sprinting and spraying than I was crouching and aiming. When the game you're playing has "Counter-Strike" in the title, this is a reason to delete the game.

When Valve announced CS: GO, they flew a slew of pro gamers out to their offices to thoroughly test the game, tell them what they think, and spread the word that it's coming. The No. 1 reason Valve gave for its development was to replace Source after its failure to provide a platform for competitive gaming. The philosophy was to build a graphically updated game that fell somewhere between 1.6 and Source rather than just remake 1.6.

Full Disclosure: I'm a 1.6/Condition Zero player. So I definitely am looking for something closer to that. Some people have told me that the run-n-gun mechanics I'm seeing are vestiges of Source, but WAY toned down from that. Honestly, after a good deal of play on launch day, I am starting to warm up to the game, but there is a long way to go.

There was at least one point I agreed with in your post: The MP5 was THE weapon you took when you couldn't afford anything better. Or when you needed to save (more on that later). Or when equipment mattered more than your primary. Or when you were guarding a tighter space, like Short A on dust2. Or when you wanted to skip M4/AK for AWP. Or when you wanted to save to plan ahead. It's the cheapest of the four standard weapons and available to both teams. This is why in the competitive scene, the MP5 is indeed the most commonly used weapon.

This doesn't mean that this is a bad game. But it is a clear indication that whoever made this game "just doesn't get it." There's a long list of other factors driving this point home. Such as the official absence of some very classic maps that were the pillars of the Counter-Strike experience. The lack of silencers. The missing spray paint tags. The lack of darker areas and flashlights/night vision to see in them. The requirement of buying ammo in Classic Competitive which was absolutely a HUGE part of the gameplay. All of these issues suggest the game was not given sufficient tender loving care, or respect, that it deserved.

It's very upsetting to see the new matchmaking playlists when so much that was integral to the game was missing. Taken together, it's the classic invitation to newcomers and slap in the face of old fans. I have come to appreciate them, though, and I think their ordering is rather brilliant, because Arms Race eases you into the gameplay, Demolition introduces the idea of objectives, Classic Casual shows you what CS is all about and Classic Competitive is the main event, which you should be ready for after playing through all previous modes. It's quite an ingenious build-up. But why didn't they also make a third or fourth game mode to build upon the classic "cs" and "de"?Dumbing it down can be awesome, but it is tremendously disappointing when a developer makes accessibility a priority while completely ignoring innovation. Balancing the accessibility/innovation dichotomy is one of the largest factors that makes Call of Duty the success it is.

And success is obviously at the heart of it here. Counter-Strike was two things: it was the biggest video game in history and it was the most praised competitive platform of all time. Unfortunately, the First Person Shooter genre has dramatically evolved in the about twelve years since CS first came out. Valve can't have both. In the state the game is in now, they would have been much better off having iron sights.

I'll leave you with a quote from the CSGO forums:

CS up to 1.6 was the most popular online multiplayer game of all time.
There are many reasons for this, and currently CSGO is lacking in a few areas which need improvement if it wants to take the crown.
I concede that a lot of my issues sound like trivialities, and they may not matter much to you, Vivi, but they matter a great deal to me and millions of fans who are now voicing their criticism of the game. Fans of the modders that created Counter-Strike and the community that facilitated it for so long, not fans of Valve and their repeated attempts to capitalize on it while consistently diluting its gameplay. This may be the third time they've done it under the guise of a new game, but it's the first time they cited rehabilitating the competitive community as the reason for doing it.

They have a lot of work to do.