-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
First person shooters: A wasted gen
- Thread starter GC|Simon
- Start date
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I'm thinking that will change on October 25th.GC|Simon said:
beelzebozo
Jealous Bastard
i wish first person shooters had better weapon economies. something like RESIDENT EVIL 4's, with weapons with real personality and the ability to upgrade them for tangible results. . . that'd do a lot toward making me actually want to play this garbage.
When Perfect Dark came out, Half-Life and Quake 3 had already been released. The PC was massively far ahead in design at that time.RedSwirl said:
I am not a PC elitist at all, in fact I consistently disagree the PC is the holy land many make out, but until Halo the gulf between shooters on PC and consoles was huge.
I certainly don't know about Perfect Dark being one of the best FPSs ever, but when I go back to play it and GoldenEye, I'm actually kind of surprised at how open their level design is compared to most current shooters. Shooters, by and large, have indeed become very linear compared to their ancestors, the only exceptions being shooter/RPG hybrids like Fallout and BioShock.
EDIT:
It may have been, but I'm not arguing that one was better than the other. Back then PC and console were kind of two different worlds, not entirely relevant to one another. Like I said in my previous post, a lot of the people who played and love the N64 shooters probably didn't have a computer that could run Half-Life or Quake 3. Of course that's less the case today.
Actually let me switch back to the PC side for a second and say that game was a bit better back when it was called System Shock 2.
EDIT:
StuBurns said:
It may have been, but I'm not arguing that one was better than the other. Back then PC and console were kind of two different worlds, not entirely relevant to one another. Like I said in my previous post, a lot of the people who played and love the N64 shooters probably didn't have a computer that could run Half-Life or Quake 3. Of course that's less the case today.
ochobit said:
Actually let me switch back to the PC side for a second and say that game was a bit better back when it was called System Shock 2.
StuBurns said:
I don't actually get what there is to disagree about PC being the holy land.
It is factually the best at everything. Hell, it's far better at playing all these terrible FPSers that GC|Simon is busy nostalgia splooging over than the consoles they originally released on. How much holier can something gaming-related be?
Neuromancer
Member
You can play the game the way you want to play it. Don't blame the game if you chose to use the visor to highlight everything for you, or stealth your way past every threat. Personally I think sneaking by guys is just as satisfying than shooting them which is a requirement for most shooters these days.DerZuhälter said:
Dude, if you don't have to move your hands between three handles because of obtuse controller design, it can never be the same. There is an inherent magic in Nintendo hardware, you have bought shame on yourself for suggesting a PC is any substitute, play Golden Eye Wii, play Crysis and look yourself in the mirror when you say Golden Eye isn't the better game, right in the eyes.Amir0x said:I don't actually get what there is to disagree about PC being the holy land.
It is factually the best at everything. Hell, it's far better at playing all these terrible FPSers that GC|Simon is busy nostalgia splooging over than the consoles they originally released on. How much holier can something gaming-related be?
I don't know. I seem to have bad luck with online cheaters, regardless of the game. I stopped playing Pokemon White online as well for similar reasons (playing in matches with infinite health where battles couldn't end, fighting opponents with all shiny legendaries with seemingly perfect stats), but from what I've been told it's not a game where cheaters are populous.Piano said:
I tend to quit quickly after running into cheaters, as well. Don't have the patience for that, and I don't have many friends who play the same games I do so all of the enjoyment I get out of multiplayer comes from the attitude and health of the community.
The Antitype
Banned
Wow, ok this is going to be a long post. I'll just start off by saying that the only major problem I have with Reach is map selection. The DLC helped that issue quite a bit IMO, and while the dull grays of the forge-maps are annoying, I find that many of them are actually quite fun. Not all of them though...
It was a joke.
I hate this argument. If you want quick kill-times, then there are tons of FPS games out there designed for fast, instant-gratification. Halo has always had a greater emphasis on the ebb and flow of combat, the rhythm of back-and-forth fire-fights. And Bungie flat out TOLD us, they wanted the fire-fights in Reach to be longer and 'messier'. They are. And they are satisfying to those of use who enjoy drama in our combat.
Demanding narrative continuity from a multiplayer game is asinine in my opinion. You say bloom adds luck, I say bloom adds CHOICE. I can CHOOSE to time my shots in perfect cadence with the bloom, ensuring that every shot counts. I can CHOOSE to use my weapon at the range it was intended for in the sandbox, which makes doing so easier. Or I can CHOOSE to take my weapon out of it's intended role in the sandbox, spam the trigger and risk losing because of a stray, lucky bullet. You show me two people in a short-range DMR battle spamming the trigger, I'll show you two idiots.
Now, I've already said that I don't think the bloom is perfectly implemented. The speed at which the bloom increases and the amount it increases per shot could both be adjusted, and should be. With the right tweaking, you would be able to keep it in there for balancing purposes AND do more to punish people that try to luck their way through fire-fights by spamming.
Getting rid of bloom entirely is a stupid idea, because it helped provide the most balanced weapon sandbox in Halo EVER.
I don't think this was one of the complaints you had in your first post. If it was, I missed it. I agree with you. The idea behind the Arena was clearly to get the people that REALLY cared about the fucking number beside their name away from the people that really didn't give a shit. It was an interesting idea in principle, didn't work in practice. They should bring back 1-50.
This is so fucking petty. Who cares how people earn the right to decorate their character model? I play customs with friends all the time. If you and your friends avoid playing customs cause you're dying to earn some credits, maybe you should re-evaluate why you play Halo. Is it for fun, or for the right to display your e-penis with fancy armor?
Armor customization is a nice bonus. That's all it is, it's an extra you earn along the way while you level up. It's there for everybody, regardless of whether they play multiplayer, fire-fight, or the campaign. Regardless of what kind of gamer, they can earn the armor they want. That's parity, and it's fine.
Douchebag randoms taking vehicles and power weapons for themselves was a problem long before the new vehicle health system.
And players were always (or SHOULD always have been) weary of jumping into the smoking husk of the vehicle that their teammate just died in.
I agree, I preferred the old vehicle health system, but I don't feel this change really SIGNIFICANTLY hurt the enjoyment or competitiveness of the game. It's a preference, not a game-breaker or a balance issue.
They were better off in the beta, but Elites are still better of in Halo: Reach than they are in Halo 2 and Halo 3, where they were basically just bigger targets. I'm glad Bungie tried to make Elites and Spartans feel unique and play differently, and I'm glad they limited the two going at it to the Invasion playlist (which I enjoy). I think the Elites could have been buffed a little more though, and their weapons should do more damage to vehicles.
So again, we have a small issue that could use some tweaking. Hardly renders the game a disaster.
This is the result of that same vocal minority WHINING. They whined that the Focus Rifle was too powerful at all ranges, and that it took no skill to use. Nerfed to appease the die-hard Halo tools.
They whined that the plasma launcher homed in too effectively and the shots traveled too fast. They said it took no skill to use. Nerfed to appease the die-hard Halo tools.
They whined that the needle-rifle took no skill cause it remained more accurate at a high-rate of fire and noobs could rely on a quick super-combine instead of going for the headshot. Nerfed to appease the die-hard Halo tools.
I would LOVE it if Bungie, in their final act before handing the series off to 343, returned these weapons to the state they were in the BETA, and left a giant banner on the wall for 343 saying 'Don't listen to the fucktards constantly whining about weapons taking 'no skill'.
Fine. I wouldn't have had a problem with them including the BR in some capacity, whether it was a weapon that had to be earned on the map (lower zoom than the DMR, appropriate bloom, more damage per second, etc) or limited just to customs. It's versatility killed it.
Nora Kisaragi said:
It was a joke.
Nora Kisaragi said:
I hate this argument. If you want quick kill-times, then there are tons of FPS games out there designed for fast, instant-gratification. Halo has always had a greater emphasis on the ebb and flow of combat, the rhythm of back-and-forth fire-fights. And Bungie flat out TOLD us, they wanted the fire-fights in Reach to be longer and 'messier'. They are. And they are satisfying to those of use who enjoy drama in our combat.
Nora Kisaragi said:
Demanding narrative continuity from a multiplayer game is asinine in my opinion. You say bloom adds luck, I say bloom adds CHOICE. I can CHOOSE to time my shots in perfect cadence with the bloom, ensuring that every shot counts. I can CHOOSE to use my weapon at the range it was intended for in the sandbox, which makes doing so easier. Or I can CHOOSE to take my weapon out of it's intended role in the sandbox, spam the trigger and risk losing because of a stray, lucky bullet. You show me two people in a short-range DMR battle spamming the trigger, I'll show you two idiots.
Now, I've already said that I don't think the bloom is perfectly implemented. The speed at which the bloom increases and the amount it increases per shot could both be adjusted, and should be. With the right tweaking, you would be able to keep it in there for balancing purposes AND do more to punish people that try to luck their way through fire-fights by spamming.
Getting rid of bloom entirely is a stupid idea, because it helped provide the most balanced weapon sandbox in Halo EVER.
Nora Kisaragi said:
I don't think this was one of the complaints you had in your first post. If it was, I missed it. I agree with you. The idea behind the Arena was clearly to get the people that REALLY cared about the fucking number beside their name away from the people that really didn't give a shit. It was an interesting idea in principle, didn't work in practice. They should bring back 1-50.
Nora Kisaragi said:
This is so fucking petty. Who cares how people earn the right to decorate their character model? I play customs with friends all the time. If you and your friends avoid playing customs cause you're dying to earn some credits, maybe you should re-evaluate why you play Halo. Is it for fun, or for the right to display your e-penis with fancy armor?
Armor customization is a nice bonus. That's all it is, it's an extra you earn along the way while you level up. It's there for everybody, regardless of whether they play multiplayer, fire-fight, or the campaign. Regardless of what kind of gamer, they can earn the armor they want. That's parity, and it's fine.
Nora Kisaragi said:
Douchebag randoms taking vehicles and power weapons for themselves was a problem long before the new vehicle health system.
And players were always (or SHOULD always have been) weary of jumping into the smoking husk of the vehicle that their teammate just died in.
I agree, I preferred the old vehicle health system, but I don't feel this change really SIGNIFICANTLY hurt the enjoyment or competitiveness of the game. It's a preference, not a game-breaker or a balance issue.
Nora Kisaragi said:
They were better off in the beta, but Elites are still better of in Halo: Reach than they are in Halo 2 and Halo 3, where they were basically just bigger targets. I'm glad Bungie tried to make Elites and Spartans feel unique and play differently, and I'm glad they limited the two going at it to the Invasion playlist (which I enjoy). I think the Elites could have been buffed a little more though, and their weapons should do more damage to vehicles.
So again, we have a small issue that could use some tweaking. Hardly renders the game a disaster.
Nora Kisaragi said:
This is the result of that same vocal minority WHINING. They whined that the Focus Rifle was too powerful at all ranges, and that it took no skill to use. Nerfed to appease the die-hard Halo tools.
They whined that the plasma launcher homed in too effectively and the shots traveled too fast. They said it took no skill to use. Nerfed to appease the die-hard Halo tools.
They whined that the needle-rifle took no skill cause it remained more accurate at a high-rate of fire and noobs could rely on a quick super-combine instead of going for the headshot. Nerfed to appease the die-hard Halo tools.
I would LOVE it if Bungie, in their final act before handing the series off to 343, returned these weapons to the state they were in the BETA, and left a giant banner on the wall for 343 saying 'Don't listen to the fucktards constantly whining about weapons taking 'no skill'.
Nora Kisaragi said:
Fine. I wouldn't have had a problem with them including the BR in some capacity, whether it was a weapon that had to be earned on the map (lower zoom than the DMR, appropriate bloom, more damage per second, etc) or limited just to customs. It's versatility killed it.
Always-honest
Banned
So you like fps games with a gimmick ( not a negative word). Play bioshock, metroid3 or the darkness.
StuBurns said:
I agree.PC shooters have always been and always will be better than console shooters.Even when Halo came there were better PC shooters.Clive Barker's Undying,Aliens vs Predator 2 and Return to Castle Wolfenstein all came out in 2001 and were much better games.As much as I liked playing Perfect Dark, it was far from the best available.
blazinglazers
Member
J-Rock said:
kodecraft said:
The success of the Wii with it's target audience (the elderly & the nostalgia crippled) has brought us an intriguing class of posters: individuals in the midst of existential crisis. Both the elderly and the nostalgia crippled struggle with versions of an "all my friends are dead" reality: the elderly have watched their loved ones die & the nostalgia crippled have watched their beloved games become irrelevant. In both cases it's as if the poster has just awoken from a great sleep, finding themselves alone in a world that has moved on without them. It makes sense that retirement-community-core gamers would think Perfect Dark or Golden Eye is the best first person shooter available in 2011. They haven't been exposed to anything else in over a decade. Hence the correlation between cry-for-help "blog" style posts and Nintendo nostalgia avatars.
These posters deserve our sympathy.
You know, i played goldeneye on a N64 a few months ago.
It is still the best FPS ever made.
Why? Because its slower. You have time to think and enjoy. Every enemy feels every bullet you land.
Nowdays every FPS has soldiers on meth. They take 1billion bullets, wont react to any of em and will keep shooting at you non stop.
Also, Goldeneye had a small take on bond gadgets and overall bond-ism that, even if timid, is lacking on modern games.
And also... WTF, these Call of Duty games have TERRIBLE single player. Its so linear its not even funny. Multiplayer is fun, i give you that. But single player? I guess nobody even plays this thing single player. Its so bad its incredible that developers still spend time making it.
It is still the best FPS ever made.
Why? Because its slower. You have time to think and enjoy. Every enemy feels every bullet you land.
Nowdays every FPS has soldiers on meth. They take 1billion bullets, wont react to any of em and will keep shooting at you non stop.
Also, Goldeneye had a small take on bond gadgets and overall bond-ism that, even if timid, is lacking on modern games.
And also... WTF, these Call of Duty games have TERRIBLE single player. Its so linear its not even funny. Multiplayer is fun, i give you that. But single player? I guess nobody even plays this thing single player. Its so bad its incredible that developers still spend time making it.
The Antitype
Banned
cacildo said:
Linear =/= Bad.
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare still has one of the most fun, intense, and well-paced campaigns of any shooter ever. All of the balls-out action is divided up but more suspenseful shit, whether its the AC-130 mission, the sniper mission, searching through houses in Europe in night-vision, etc.
None of the CoD games have matched up since in single-player.
I agree with the title of the thread though not with the OP. I wish back the good old days, when FPS where the domain of the master-race and console players were stuck with the fun games. Now consoles have the FPSs as well and they dominate the sales chart. So on one hand there are motion-controlled shovelware and on the other hand the big shooters. In between RPGs, Jump'n'Runs (or Platformers) and other fun genres got massacred.
Poimandres
Member
I find it strange that someone could love GE/PD, but have a strong dislike for Halo. They are different, but Halo is one of the only FPS series left that carries on the "party" style multiplayer with split screen and whatnot.
I always found GE/PD to be held back by the technology (controller, blury visuals, low frame rate) with great ideas shining through. I could never take them too seriously because I'd already played Quake LANs.
I always found GE/PD to be held back by the technology (controller, blury visuals, low frame rate) with great ideas shining through. I could never take them too seriously because I'd already played Quake LANs.
cacildo said:
It's too bad I can't think of any popular PC games that have slow pacing, non-linear mission design, emergent gameplay and enemies with intelligent AI.
Also, unrelated, but I think this post was a very good post and it makes me sad that nobody else thought so:
FuKuy said:
But, also STALKER and Amnesia and... like the first level of EYE. I wonder if Minecraft could even sneak into discussion. And Crysis I suppose. Far Cry 2 maybe. Just Cause 2? Left 4 Dead...
revolverjgw
Member
I still love Goldeneye and Perfect Dark's mission designs, and I can even deal with the frame rate, but it's just no fun to fight AI like that anymore. The enemies' behavior in GE is farcical.
FieryBalrog
Member
GoldenEye is the best FPS ever made because its slow. Gotcha.cacildo said:
Someone make a mod for Half Life 2 that makes the game run at 75% speed for this guy.
Nothing you can do really unless you give up playing FPS games.
It bug's me a bit, yes. When I see people cheating online and hacking it gets me annoyed. Like it does to everyone else, right?
You just have to deal with it. You were talking about cheating, but it's only a small chance of going into a lobby to find someone cheating. Sure, you see people hacking scores to get the top of the leaderboard. But so what, it isn't going to make them the best at the game, infact it's the complete opposite.
I can understand where you are coming from OP. But the only thing you can do is deal with it, or give up playing FPS's.
It bug's me a bit, yes. When I see people cheating online and hacking it gets me annoyed. Like it does to everyone else, right?
You just have to deal with it. You were talking about cheating, but it's only a small chance of going into a lobby to find someone cheating. Sure, you see people hacking scores to get the top of the leaderboard. But so what, it isn't going to make them the best at the game, infact it's the complete opposite.
I can understand where you are coming from OP. But the only thing you can do is deal with it, or give up playing FPS's.
dragonelite
Member
And with snes i got sick of platformers and rpg.
Gamecube era i got sick of the race games because of The fast and furious.
Always been a fps fan so can't get sick of it.
But i do want more platformers back and Action rpg they are really.
Or more franchises like zelda(should give darksiders a run when i have more time).
Gamecube era i got sick of the race games because of The fast and furious.
Always been a fps fan so can't get sick of it.
But i do want more platformers back and Action rpg they are really.
Or more franchises like zelda(should give darksiders a run when i have more time).
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Thread has been a good read. God I love shootin' stuff and talking about shootin' stuff (really). Best genre ever.
Canadian Psycho
Banned
Not even that: my old dad was diagnosed with the disease more than 10 years ago and he still managed a dozen perfect games in Wii Bowling, lol.Shiggy said: