Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(PC Gamer)   "Call of Duty has almost ruined a generation of FPS players." Boom. Headshot   (pcgamer.com) divider line 209
    More: Unlikely, Call of Duty, FPS, collective responsibility, Great Basin Desert, training wheels, knee-jerk reaction, Infinity Ward  
•       •       •

5162 clicks; posted to Geek » on 14 Mar 2013 at 3:42 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



209 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-03-14 02:06:02 AM  
I don't get why CoD is so popular.  The single player games are fun, but not worth $60.  The last 3 titles (BOPS 1 and 2, MW3) have serious lag issues.  MW2 got taken over by cheaters so I can't go back to that.

Seriously.  What's most important to you in a multiplayer FPS:  1) your skill; 2) strategy  3) tactics  4) teamwork.  If you answered 1-4 then CoD isn't for you because the number 1 factor is lag.  If you're on the wrong end of the lag curve (which I seem to always be) then your hosed no matter what.

/ Didn't get BOP2
// Forums are full of people biatching about lag, I got Borderlands 2 instead.
 
2013-03-14 02:24:50 AM  
I think that he's right, that the hybrid FPS-RPG is going to be where a lot of traction is found to produce some fun games.

Mind you, I don't think that Bioshock: Infinite is going to change that--all the Bioshock games are pretty much on rails, and the "exploring" portion of the show has been simply which area you'll explore first, and how many goodies you'll pick up along the way--nor has Borderlands really changed all that much, save increase the Skinner Box effect of having players looking for loot, constant streams of loot, and comparing new loot to old loot.
 
2013-03-14 02:40:01 AM  
FTA: sometimes we design something that's not accesible enough, they can't figure it out, we didn't give them enough information to figure out where to go... but more often than not, it's because Call of Duty compressed their skill gap so much that these guys never needed to get good at a shooter. They never needed to get good at their twitch skills with a mouse.

Players like Elliot [Cannon, Lead Designer] and I, back in the Quake and Unreal days, you know, we had to get good at aiming. These guys don't have to anymore. The skill gap is so compressed that like, "The game makes me feel that I'm awesome." These guys, when I actually watch them play, they're actually very poor FPS players. And I don't think it's because they're incapable of getting good, I think it's because they never had to get good. They get enough kills in Call of Duty to feel like they're awesome, but they never really had to develop their FPS skills beyond that.

A very apt statement.
Very little in current multiplayer FPS's have to do with skill, but more with prediction and memorization.
"I know this map like the back of my hand" and "I always put a bullet in that window every time I pass it" are statements I've heard over and over. 
Teamwork has fallen to the wayside and so has most ideas of patience.

hubiestubert: I think that he's right, that the hybrid FPS-RPG is going to be where a lot of traction is found to produce some fun games.

Mind you, I don't think that Bioshock: Infinite is going to change that--all the Bioshock games are pretty much on rails, and the "exploring" portion of the show has been simply which area you'll explore first, and how many goodies you'll pick up along the way--nor has Borderlands really changed all that much, save increase the Skinner Box effect of having players looking for loot, constant streams of loot, and comparing new loot to old loot.


I like Borderlands but the skinnerbox gets really really old. 
I feel that they did a pretty decent job with the level trees as it really changes the way you play the game, depending on what trees you use. 
I hope that there is more of that sliding into modern games, but not so much as it becomes a grind or a WOW kind of leveling system.
I honestly cant stand the "LEVEL UP" pop ups, but would rather have it be a randomized blind system of actions.
You get better at assault rifles by using them accurately. Spray and pray doesn't get you many points, but high accuracy increases your skill.

It's a hard thing to decide as every game has a feeling and no system is going to fit every game.
As no system is ever going to fit every gamer.
 
2013-03-14 02:50:53 AM  
I haven't tried any CoD games, though I've certainly seen enough of them advertised.  So I'm not exactly sure what the article is talking about.  I certainly played the crap out of the original Unreal Tournament though, back in the day.  Not playing online much, but downloading a few hundred 3rd party maps kept it very interesting.

I did play the original Deus Ex.. seemed like my old iMac from 2000 was barely able to handle it in some areas.  I tried a Deus Ex prequel the other week.. looks great.. but got stuck early on with a room with 3 enemies in it, and couldn't find a way to pick off one at a time.
 
2013-03-14 03:07:45 AM  
My son plays CoD a lot. I tried to get into the World at War one, but the whole "hide for a minute to regain health" thing was a bit much for me. That and the way it jumped between stories annoyed me.

But anyway, one thing I've noticed, and I don't know if it's him, the way the game plays, or if I just play FPS differently, but he always runs from place to place, turning and shooting without really looking. when I play games like that I always go slow and try to peak around corners, take careful aim, etc.. I just get the feeling that CoD encourages/rewards the way he plays. maybe, I don't know.
 
2013-03-14 03:08:34 AM  

Alphax: I tried a Deus Ex prequel the other week.. looks great.. but got stuck early on with a room with 3 enemies in it, and couldn't find a way to pick off one at a time.


The cover system threw me off. I need to give it another try.
 
2013-03-14 03:10:01 AM  

Nezorf: "I know this map like the back of my hand" and "I always put a bullet in that window every time I pass it" are statements I've heard over and over.


Games which require mastery and understanding of specialized information (usually based around individual concepts and mechanics) usually appeal to weaker players because you can get better by simply learning the game, not demonstrating comprehension and mastery.  You don't have to develop a certain mentality or create a mental investment within a game to become better.  You can simply get better by learning all of the specialized information.  This is one of the reasons that the DotA clones (with their dozens upon dozens of champions, items, abilities, and incredibly nuanced map design) are so popular, and I laugh my ass off when they're characterized as some kind of haven for hardcore multiplayer.

While map memorization may be important in games like Quake and Unreal Tournament, those games demand that you understand concepts.  And then in order to master those concepts, there's a high enough degree of depth (as built around various action and aiming mechanics) that you have to maintain some degree of commitment and practice to continue being good at those games.  Which, predictably, is why they don't appeal to the average moron.

But tying back to the original point of the article, you can also thank "e-Sports" for this nonsense.  I have no problem with people playing select, excellent games in an organized and tournament format.  But you now have communities (StarCraft II, DotA 2, League of Legends, Call of Duty) who think they're the cream of the farking Earth and that anything which deviates from their select, preconceived notion of their favorite game is "stupid".  And since you have people who are getting played to play these games and gaining minor celebrity status for their exploits, and gaining "expert" reputation for playing one video game ten hours a day, people will listen to them.  But the problem is, none of the games I listed are the class of anything.  StarCraft II is an average RTS.  Call of Duty (outside of some exceptions) is mostly putrid shiat.  DotA clones are by-and-large RTS for babies.  But who are you to tell Random Pro Gamer X that his game sucks?  He could totally kick your ass at that game.  So not only has there been a standardization of mechanics as they involve console first-person shooters and DotA clones, but these communities have largely embraced that standardization, and will defend it to the death.
 
2013-03-14 03:31:49 AM  

log_jammin: My son plays CoD a lot. I tried to get into the World at War one, but the whole "hide for a minute to regain health" thing was a bit much for me. That and the way it jumped between stories annoyed me.

But anyway, one thing I've noticed, and I don't know if it's him, the way the game plays, or if I just play FPS differently, but he always runs from place to place, turning and shooting without really looking. when I play games like that I always go slow and try to peak around corners, take careful aim, etc.. I just get the feeling that CoD encourages/rewards the way he plays. maybe, I don't know.


These are inherently tied together.
There is no consequence for taking a few bullets.
You get hit, screen goes red, and 4 seconds later you are peachy.
You get shot, and your squadmate can revive you back to 100%

It's playing on "Can I Play Daddy?" plus regenerative health.

Health kits are all over, you heal like mad, your shields replenish and you re-spawn instantly.
Even on hard difficulties its the same dynamics, you just have to be better or memorize the game better.

It has killed all aspects of teamwork, stealth, or actually taking your time.
 
2013-03-14 03:55:40 AM  
FTA: "Players like Elliot [Cannon, Lead Designer] and I, back in the Quake and Unreal days, you know, we had to get good at aiming. These guys don't have to anymore. "

Funny (for me) that he mentions that while lamenting the prevalence of COD. Quake 1 and the original unreal tournament are very much where I cut my teeth in first person shooters, and yet COD has been a guilty pleasure for some time now.
 
2013-03-14 03:55:54 AM  

Nezorf: log_jammin: My son plays CoD a lot. I tried to get into the World at War one, but the whole "hide for a minute to regain health" thing was a bit much for me. That and the way it jumped between stories annoyed me.

But anyway, one thing I've noticed, and I don't know if it's him, the way the game plays, or if I just play FPS differently, but he always runs from place to place, turning and shooting without really looking. when I play games like that I always go slow and try to peak around corners, take careful aim, etc.. I just get the feeling that CoD encourages/rewards the way he plays. maybe, I don't know.

These are inherently tied together.
There is no consequence for taking a few bullets.
You get hit, screen goes red, and 4 seconds later you are peachy.
You get shot, and your squadmate can revive you back to 100%

It's playing on "Can I Play Daddy?" plus regenerative health.

Health kits are all over, you heal like mad, your shields replenish and you re-spawn instantly.
Even on hard difficulties its the same dynamics, you just have to be better or memorize the game better.

It has killed all aspects of teamwork, stealth, or actually taking your time.


That's what the hardcore and veteran modes are for.
 
2013-03-14 04:03:36 AM  
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-03-14 04:03:48 AM  
There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....
 
2013-03-14 04:07:55 AM  

andynz81: Quake 1 and the original unreal tournament are very much where I cut my teeth in first person shooters, and yet COD has been a guilty pleasure for some time now.


Quake II turned me away from online gaming until a few months ago. The could have titled that online game as "bunny hoppers of death".
 
xcv
2013-03-14 04:12:13 AM  

farkingismybusiness: Nezorf: log_jammin: My son plays CoD a lot. I tried to get into the World at War one, but the whole "hide for a minute to regain health" thing was a bit much for me. That and the way it jumped between stories annoyed me.

But anyway, one thing I've noticed, and I don't know if it's him, the way the game plays, or if I just play FPS differently, but he always runs from place to place, turning and shooting without really looking. when I play games like that I always go slow and try to peak around corners, take careful aim, etc.. I just get the feeling that CoD encourages/rewards the way he plays. maybe, I don't know.

These are inherently tied together.
There is no consequence for taking a few bullets.
You get hit, screen goes red, and 4 seconds later you are peachy.
You get shot, and your squadmate can revive you back to 100%

It's playing on "Can I Play Daddy?" plus regenerative health.

Health kits are all over, you heal like mad, your shields replenish and you re-spawn instantly.
Even on hard difficulties its the same dynamics, you just have to be better or memorize the game better.

It has killed all aspects of teamwork, stealth, or actually taking your time.

That's what the hardcore and veteran modes are for.


And SWAT 4
 
2013-03-14 04:21:08 AM  
Feh. I find that Mass Effect fulfills all my possible FPS jones; all I really want to do is lay traps and snipe the deepest field possible, anyway, and that only between juicy story chapters. If it were at all possible to completely forget your arsenal and get though every situation with your stock pistol, I would do.
 
2013-03-14 04:25:48 AM  
I worked on Modern Warfare 1 and can honestly say that that was the best game ever with the best devs ever. Worked on several AAA titles later and they still don't matchup.
 
2013-03-14 04:26:28 AM  

log_jammin: My son plays CoD a lot. I tried to get into the World at War one, but the whole "hide for a minute to regain health" thing was a bit much for me. That and the way it jumped between stories annoyed me.

But anyway, one thing I've noticed, and I don't know if it's him, the way the game plays, or if I just play FPS differently, but he always runs from place to place, turning and shooting without really looking. when I play games like that I always go slow and try to peak around corners, take careful aim, etc.. I just get the feeling that CoD encourages/rewards the way he plays. maybe, I don't know.


That's pretty much why I gave up on CoD (MW3).  One time I was doing a group game, sniping targets... and one of my own teammates kept hunting me down and shooting me in the back of the head, because he wanted me to run around in the open like a farking retard.

I have Borderlands 2 now, and haven't looked back.
 
2013-03-14 04:27:08 AM  
I'm amazed so many FPS gamers still enjoy deathmatches. That's so early 90's. They don't want to think about objectives, and defending is "camping". They just want to mindlessly bunny-hop around a small map taking potshots at eachother.
 
2013-03-14 04:29:04 AM  

doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....


Ahhhh, Heretic. I loved that game.
 
2013-03-14 04:39:33 AM  

doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....


i like this idea. i would play that. awesome gore potential.
 
2013-03-14 04:39:49 AM  

J. Frank Parnell: I'm amazed so many FPS gamers still enjoy deathmatches. That's so early 90's. They don't want to think about objectives, and defending is "camping". They just want to mindlessly bunny-hop around a small map taking potshots at eachother.


The word tournament comes from the original, which was a large battle in Europe where all the knights would assemble each year during peacetime and stage a full contact knight battle with two charges followed by a melee. After the first charge, the lines would turn around and charge back. Hence the name Tournament.

Basically all young people want to do in any age is dispense with the strategy and lay about on all sides to show that they are the strongest.
 
2013-03-14 04:43:53 AM  

some_beer_drinker: doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....

i like this idea. i would play that. awesome gore potential.


You guys should look up the Mount and Blade series.  It's not the prettiest thing in the world, but few things can match the exhilaration of plunking that guy just right through his face mask with a cross bow and dropping him off a horse.
 
2013-03-14 04:47:31 AM  

some_beer_drinker: doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....

i like this idea. i would play that. awesome gore potential.


I haven't played it but I saw this video a while ago. It looks kind of fun but there seems to be no skill or strategy involved.
 
2013-03-14 04:49:31 AM  

doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....


I having a blast with this. It's multiplayer though.
Still it has objectives and you at least have to pay attention to what is going on.
 
2013-03-14 04:53:22 AM  
There was a game about 10-12 years back, called Rune.. was a FPS where you were a viking.. so, mostly melee weapons, some throwing of weapons.  I never bought the full version, but the demo had online deathmatch.. was fun for a bit.
 
2013-03-14 04:54:49 AM  

J. Frank Parnell: I'm amazed so many FPS gamers still enjoy deathmatches. That's so early 90's. They don't want to think about objectives, and defending is "camping". They just want to mindlessly bunny-hop around a small map taking potshots at eachother.


Any half-decent player will destroy you for "mindless bunny-hopping", just like any competent fighting game player will destroy you for mashing random buttons.  How you use your movement capabilities is what is important.  And that whole thing where they're "taking potshots at each other"?  That's called map control, and I wish more companies would expand upon the concepts laid out in Quake III Arena, because I don't think they've come close to exploring all the concepts for map control in the FPS.  (See: Descent II's Smart Mines and other items which can not only be used to actively control parts of the map, but are extremely flexible for offensive capabilities.)  So, no, it's not that players "don't want to think about objectives".  It's that they want to play game modes where the most satisfying concept in the first-person shooter (shooting and killing people) is the determinant and measure of player progress and skill.
 
2013-03-14 04:55:35 AM  

Alphax: There was a game about 10-12 years back, called Rune.. was a FPS where you were a viking.. so, mostly melee weapons, some throwing of weapons.  I never bought the full version, but the demo had online deathmatch.. was fun for a bit.


Witchhaven thread?

Actually, no.  Let's not go there.
 
2013-03-14 04:57:37 AM  

doglover: Basically all young people want to do in any age is dispense with the strategy and lay about on all sides to show that they are the strongest.


Interesting. Even though i've always appreciated strategy, i suppose i also felt the same back then.

Not even that old, but i'm already finding myself relying on strategy more to stay ahead of younger reflexes.
 
2013-03-14 04:59:45 AM  

IronOcelot: doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....

I having a blast with this. It's multiplayer though.
Still it has objectives and you at least have to pay attention to what is going on.


Right?
 
2013-03-14 05:00:11 AM  
speaking of strategy...I finally decided to build a computer after several years of not having one. So the first thing I buy is Empire Total War. I sunk hundreds of hours into shogun and medieval total war so I couldn't wait to get back into the series, but holy shiat...I'm having a hard time getting back into it. Either I got dumber(very possible) or they really upped the complication.
 
2013-03-14 05:01:48 AM  
At least we have Thief 4 to look forward to, right?

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2013/03/13/meet-the-n ew -garrett-from-thief.aspx

Haha just kidding. The PR guys themselves can't hide how awful they're making it.
There are key words to pay attention to in the video, like "modern audience", "console market",  "mainstream".

"We took a game many people enjoy, and we changed everything good about it so that no one will enjoy it."
 
2013-03-14 05:10:12 AM  

God-is-a-Taco: At least we have Thief 4 to look forward to, right?

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2013/03/13/meet-the-n ew -garrett-from-thief.aspx

Haha just kidding. The PR guys themselves can't hide how awful they're making it.
There are key words to pay attention to in the video, like "modern audience", "console market",  "mainstream".

"We took a game many people enjoy, and we changed everything good about it so that no one will enjoy it."


Why?  Why did you show me that?  The Thief series was my all-time favorite series in my long history of gaming (followed closely by Starsiege and the Tribes games up to Tribes 2).  They already got dangerously close to killing it with "Deadly Shadows" (why are there so many load screens, that prompt me to push a green A button to continue, when I'M ON A PC!?).  But now this?  Damn it so much...
 
2013-03-14 05:11:19 AM  
Reading through TFA I'm a bit confused as to what the point is. It seems to me that it's a foregone conclusion that if you assemble a group of people who exclusively play Call of Duty and have them try a game in the same genre but with different mechanics, they'll dislike what is different from CoD. It would make more sense to test it with a more varied audience.
 
2013-03-14 05:14:19 AM  

Gordon Bennett: Reading through TFA I'm a bit confused as to what the point is. It seems to me that it's a foregone conclusion that if you assemble a group of people who exclusively play Call of Duty and have them try a game in the same genre but with different mechanics, they'll dislike what is different from CoD. It would make more sense to test it with a more varied audience.


His point was to make a game that CoD players would like as well. i think he was amazed to learn that a lot of CoD players only want games that play exactly like CoD.
 
2013-03-14 05:15:11 AM  

Shadowknight: some_beer_drinker: doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....

i like this idea. i would play that. awesome gore potential.

You guys should look up the Mount and Blade series.  It's not the prettiest thing in the world, but few things can match the exhilaration of plunking that guy just right through his face mask with a cross bow and dropping him off a horse.


I've been meaning to try that one myself, or at least enough to try the Gangs of Glasgow: The Old Firm mod. (video at  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6FfFfL7zGo ).
 
2013-03-14 05:16:23 AM  
God-is-a-Taco:

FTFA: "Watch the video below to learn about the reinvention of Garrett and why the team hopes players see him as more than just some "goth."

GARRETT WAS NOT AND IS NOT "JUST SOME GOTH," YOU PINHEADS!  Just because he hung out in the dark while wearing dark clothes doesn't make him Goth.  IT MAKES HIM FARKING STEALTHY.

/gets way too worked up over this
//the series has pulled off more atmosphere than any game I can think of
///still waiting on a sandbox-style Thief game, where the buildings are all burglar-ready, if you're good enough.  I wouldn't even yell blasphemy to see it on a console
 
2013-03-14 05:17:41 AM  

God-is-a-Taco: At least we have Thief 4 to look forward to, right?

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2013/03/13/meet-the-n ew -garrett-from-thief.aspx

Haha just kidding.


I still believe!

Only major disappointment so far is that they didn't go with a female thief, as the ending to Deadly Shadows implied the torch had been passed to a young girl.
 
2013-03-14 05:25:58 AM  
God-is-a-Taco:

I just watched the video in  our clip.  They want to make him "not another goth," but they put him in skin-tight leather, give him styled black hair under a hood, a sickly complexion, and eyeliner.  So they made him "not just another goth," but instead into the Uber-goth.  Goth-Prime, if you will.
 
2013-03-14 05:34:22 AM  

doglover: IronOcelot: doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....

I having a blast with this. It's multiplayer though.
Still it has objectives and you at least have to pay attention to what is going on.

Right?


Oh crap!
Chivalry: Medieval Combat
 
2013-03-14 05:34:52 AM  

doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....


Ever play Mount & Blade?  Its a little rough around the edges but at its core is a magnificent combat engine that is as rewarding as it is unforgiving.
 
2013-03-14 05:36:29 AM  
FTFA: "Earlier this month I visited Killing Floor and Red Orchestra 2 creator Tripwire Interactive to play Rising Storm, the upcoming standalone expansion to RO2 (look for a preview on Monday)."

I'm having some difficulty wrapping my head around the term "standalone expansion." Didn't we used to call that a sequel back in the day?
 
2013-03-14 05:43:00 AM  

Shadowknight: God-is-a-Taco:

I just watched the video in  our clip.  They want to make him "not another goth," but they put him in skin-tight leather, give him styled black hair under a hood, a sickly complexion, and eyeliner.  So they made him "not just another goth," but instead into the Uber-goth.  Goth-Prime, if you will.


I think they're created a Golgotha for sure.

Mr Cantin has Assassin's creed cred yes, but its Assassin's Creed 1 and he's the guy behind its 'story' or complete lack there of.  Not AC2 or even AC3, just AC1.  I am prepared to weep as yet another classic series that I wished were remade comes out still-born, poisoned by hair gel and axe body spray.
 
2013-03-14 05:45:27 AM  

God-is-a-Taco: At least we have Thief 4 to look forward to, right?

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2013/03/13/meet-the-n ew -garrett-from-thief.aspx

Haha just kidding. The PR guys themselves can't hide how awful they're making it.
There are key words to pay attention to in the video, like "modern audience", "console market",  "mainstream".

"We took a game many people enjoy, and we changed everything good about it so that no one will enjoy it."


you mean thief 3.

/ original thief fanboi
// looks down on those whose first thief experience was 3
 
2013-03-14 05:57:55 AM  
As far as medieval fpslashing goes, mount & blade is super fun, but someone mentioned chivalry, which is... Alright. Others on the market are "pirates, knights, & vikings" and "war of roses" which are both a lot of fun in their own rights. There's a market of companies who also thought that sword & bow fighting would translate well to the fps scene. I don't think it has gotten great yet, but I'll admit to playing mount & blade more hours than is healthy.
 
2013-03-14 06:00:20 AM  
I would get annoyed with the "momentum" feature, too.  Not so much because it's "clunky" or "I'm used to CoD" but because when people have to run, they don't build momentum, they lose it.  People don't function like cars or trains. It's an arbitrary gimmick.
 
2013-03-14 06:02:27 AM  

thamike: they don't build momentum, they lose it.


They do both.

going from standing still to top speed takes times. and staying at top speed only lasts so long.
 
2013-03-14 06:02:44 AM  

Gordon Bennett: Reading through TFA I'm a bit confused as to what the point is. It seems to me that it's a foregone conclusion that if you assemble a group of people who exclusively play Call of Duty and have them try a game in the same genre but with different mechanics, they'll dislike what is different from CoD. It would make more sense to test it with a more varied audience.


I suspect it's because he actually is trying to "name names" and make a point, and that his game is probably mediocre.
 
2013-03-14 06:02:46 AM  
This will be the ultimate medieval FPS, if done right, which we hope they do: http://subutai.mn/clang.php
 
2013-03-14 06:02:58 AM  
I think the first Operation Flashpoint game was the most gripping and emotionally moving games I've ever played.
 
2013-03-14 06:03:49 AM  
I like how the comment thread for an article discussing how nobody will play a game which does not look, move, and function like Call of Duty has been completely derailed by discussion of stealth and medieval FPS games.
 
2013-03-14 06:05:28 AM  

Mike_LowELL: I like how the comment thread for an article discussing how nobody will play a game which does not look, move, and function like Call of Duty has been completely derailed by discussion of stealth and medieval FPS games.


I like that I'm reading this comment while waiting for Firaxis to announce new content for XCOM at pax east.
 
2013-03-14 06:05:32 AM  

log_jammin: thamike: they don't build momentum, they lose it.

They do both.

going from standing still to top speed takes times.


Not really.  Especially when the motivation is to not get killed.  Going from prone to a sprint?  Sure, but CoD takes care of that.

and staying at top speed only lasts so long.

CoD takes care of this just fine too.
 
2013-03-14 06:08:37 AM  
I should also mention that mount & blade was, at least, available as a full free demo until level 7. Idk if they still do that. But either way, it's a cheap digital download from amazon, and a purchase most medieval nerds won't regret.
 
2013-03-14 06:11:21 AM  

thamike: Not really. Especially when the motivation is to not get killed.


I'm not saying it takes a few minutes, but a person isn't at top speed in a 2 steps either.

without playing the game, I don't know if it works in that sense, but it does in real life.

thamike: CoD takes care of this


what eves console kiddie!!
 
2013-03-14 06:11:34 AM  

HotWingAgenda: log_jammin: My son plays CoD a lot. I tried to get into the World at War one, but the whole "hide for a minute to regain health" thing was a bit much for me. That and the way it jumped between stories annoyed me.

But anyway, one thing I've noticed, and I don't know if it's him, the way the game plays, or if I just play FPS differently, but he always runs from place to place, turning and shooting without really looking. when I play games like that I always go slow and try to peak around corners, take careful aim, etc.. I just get the feeling that CoD encourages/rewards the way he plays. maybe, I don't know.

That's pretty much why I gave up on CoD (MW3).  One time I was doing a group game, sniping targets... and one of my own teammates kept hunting me down and shooting me in the back of the head, because he wanted me to run around in the open like a farking retard.

I have Borderlands 2 now, and haven't looked back.


I used to play CoD and loved it, but everyone was always pissed at me because I was a good sniper. I would kill 3 or 4 players and relocate slightly so that when my victims respawned and came back expecting me to be in the same spot, I would get them again. Rinse and repeat. The hate mail/messages were hilarious.
 
2013-03-14 06:13:45 AM  
How could we have guessed mike lowell would be a COD player, and on top of that one who is convinced being 'good' at that POS makes him a strategic genius?
 
2013-03-14 06:14:34 AM  

casual disregard: FTFA: "Earlier this month I visited Killing Floor and Red Orchestra 2 creator Tripwire Interactive to play Rising Storm, the upcoming standalone expansion to RO2 (look for a preview on Monday)."

I'm having some difficulty wrapping my head around the term "standalone expansion." Didn't we used to call that a sequel back in the day?


It generally implies no major changes to the engine, and cheaper than a full game, as you would expect with an expansion, but not needing the original game to avoid locking out people that didn't get the previous one.

/of course that has been blurred a bit by doing the same, except add a couple of extra maps and call it a full price sequel instead
 
2013-03-14 06:15:10 AM  

Mike_LowELL: I like how the comment thread for an article discussing how nobody will play a game which does not look, move, and function like Call of Duty has been completely derailed by discussion of stealth and medieval FPS games.


But we're all old guys. I never liked Call of Duty. It was too much money(ie more than $0.00 USD) for "just another FPS"

We're not the kids in the article. We didn't cut our teeth on CoD, so we know better games are out there and getting good takes time.
 
2013-03-14 06:20:15 AM  

log_jammin: Alphax: I tried a Deus Ex prequel the other week.. looks great.. but got stuck early on with a room with 3 enemies in it, and couldn't find a way to pick off one at a time.

The cover system threw me off. I need to give it another try.


I highly recommend you purchase the Explosive Map Pack for it, if you haven't already.  It's only a few bucks, but it gives you one of the most useful items in the game: the Grenade Launcher, or as I call it, The Stupid Forced Boss Fight Easy Button.  When you're playing as a stealthy hacker and (as Penny Arcade puts it) the game "locks [you] in a room with a robo-bully and his fully automatic arm-cannon", you just take out the Grenade Launcher and spam explosions in his face until he's dead.  Takes maybe 10 seconds, tops.  Works on all four of the godawful "no you have to play this like an on-rails console FPS now" boss fights.
 
2013-03-14 06:28:42 AM  
The problem with the COD franchise is that the maps have gotten smaller. Back in the United Offensive days, maps were huge and sprawling and allowed for a high variation in successful strategy to win game modes (cause only tards judge a multiplayer experience by way of 'death match only'). capturing a point involved good use of scouting, approach routes and vehicle cooridination depending on the map (looking at you Foy).

Now, the maps are these cluster farked apartment rooms trying to squeeze 12 players into them where the longest you go before encountering an enemy is no more than 3 seconds. Often times less. At these kind of ranges, spastic reflexes, hipfire and full auto spray and pray will defeat ANY kind of team work. The only way to combat that is by complete map awareness. The unique situation you get when you've played the same game type on the same map 100 times. You instinctively know where people hide and where you are most likely to get shot from. So you react accordingly, pre-firing favored camping spots and bunny hopping around corners likely to hold an enemy presence.

I dont much like the way the game has evolved to that point but there you go. It says a lot about the environment where the game has upwards to 6 different sniper rifles but not a single map where the maximum line of sight exceeds 75 meters...

PS. Blops II doesnt have a lag problem, it has a floating hit box problem. The hit box around your character extends quite a bit beyond your model frame so YES, there will be times where you die from shots that by all accounts should have missed you because you werent in the room anymore or behind cover. This is what happens when titles designed for consoles gets ported to PC....poorly.
 
2013-03-14 06:50:18 AM  
There was a time when being an FPS didn't mean being caught in the mainstream where all titles were practically indistinguishable.
COD started on the "Wouldn't it be nice to play war like in the movies" theme, Battlefield was "Wouldn't it be nice to play with friends". You had mods like day of defeat and red orchestra which took an interesting run at the weapons and time period thing. Offerings like infiltration or Rogue spear would put your tactics to the test.

After shooters evolved onto the console, the drive became sales rather than gameplay.
COD and HALO became sales leaders and now everything tries to mimic them in the hope of similar success.

The mainstream is so far removed from the old games that tactics aren't understood or appreciated.  You've got voice communications but no one says anything that isn't either a four letter word or a question of their opponents sexual preferences.

I don't think we're talking "almost' anymore.
Mainstream console players are so far removed from the roots of FPS games that you'd only scare and confuse them if you offered something that wasn't a watered down clone.
The old way was mazes, challenges, and variety.  The new way is hand holding players through an action movie set.
 
2013-03-14 06:53:55 AM  

way south: You had mods like day of defeat and red orchestra which took an interesting run at the weapons and time period thing. Offerings like infiltration or Rogue spear would put your tactics to the test.


Oh back in the good old days where random strangers would actually work in teams and squads.
Voice communication was a rarity and a bit of a privilege so it was used well.

I also blame the leader boards and record keeping. People are so goddamn worried about their K/D ratio.
 
2013-03-14 06:57:15 AM  

log_jammin: speaking of strategy...I finally decided to build a computer after several years of not having one. So the first thing I buy is Empire Total War. I sunk hundreds of hours into shogun and medieval total war so I couldn't wait to get back into the series, but holy shiat...I'm having a hard time getting back into it. Either I got dumber(very possible) or they really upped the complication.


I love the Total War series, and I also recently got into Empire.  I'd say it's the most complex in the series on the turn-based side.  Your empire sprawls so much and there can be so much going on that it gets very interesting, especially early on before you have established dominance.  It is definitely a ramp up from Medieval 1 and Shogun 1.  I care about the turn-based strategy side more than the real-time battles, so I'm really liking it.

That said, prepare to be annoyed by the victory conditions.  For some reason they set it so you have to play out till the designated year to win.  In my first game as the Dutch, I took my time and had the other victory conditions at around 1848, and had to play over 50 years to get the win.  I ended up conquering the world and hitting 'end turn' a bunch.

/Shogun 2 is even better.  I think it's the best in the series, by quite a way.
 
2013-03-14 06:59:32 AM  

Nezorf: These are inherently tied together.
There is no consequence for taking a few bullets.
You get hit, screen goes red, and 4 seconds later you are peachy.
You get shot, and your squadmate can revive you back to 100%

It's playing on "Can I Play Daddy?" plus regenerative health.


That's actually one of the reasons I like Mass Effect 3: you have a shield that regenerates after a few seconds but your health is divided into various sections. If you lose 3.5 sections of health, that half-section will "grow back" after a few seconds but the remaining 3 won't regenerate unless you use a medkit. I find this strikes a good balance: you can take a few hits to your shield without any real consequence, but you still need to manage cover and medkit inventory well.

I recall being annoyed with certain older games that didn't do regeneration and required that you pick up medkits to heal. It was a real pain when you were down to 6% health, faced with tons of enemies, and there weren't any medkits in sight. The shield+partially regenerating health helps keep the game fun (rather than swearing and reloading a previous save) but still presents a challenge, particularly on harder difficulty levels.
 
2013-03-14 07:12:15 AM  
I miss the Call of Duty games from World War 2. Granted, CoD basically killed that genre by having so many sequels. Then they killed the modern warfare genre by creating and spawning many similar games. I also miss the old Medal of Honor games.

FPS military shooters are too similar today and basically filled with annoying brats who think they so awesome because they have the 'dopest' achievements or play the game by running around and knifing people.
 
2013-03-14 07:13:13 AM  

heypete: Nezorf: These are inherently tied together.
There is no consequence for taking a few bullets.
You get hit, screen goes red, and 4 seconds later you are peachy.
You get shot, and your squadmate can revive you back to 100%

It's playing on "Can I Play Daddy?" plus regenerative health.

That's actually one of the reasons I like Mass Effect 3: you have a shield that regenerates after a few seconds but your health is divided into various sections. If you lose 3.5 sections of health, that half-section will "grow back" after a few seconds but the remaining 3 won't regenerate unless you use a medkit. I find this strikes a good balance: you can take a few hits to your shield without any real consequence, but you still need to manage cover and medkit inventory well.

I recall being annoyed with certain older games that didn't do regeneration and required that you pick up medkits to heal. It was a real pain when you were down to 6% health, faced with tons of enemies, and there weren't any medkits in sight. The shield+partially regenerating health helps keep the game fun (rather than swearing and reloading a previous save) but still presents a challenge, particularly on harder difficulty levels.


Back in the day I really enjoyed Day of Defeats bandage aspect.
You had health numbers, but if you got hit in a certain place (body or upper arm/leg) you started to bleed out. You had to find shelter and patch yourself up, but never gained that health back.
If they made you actually patch yourself up and never fully regain when your screen got all red, I would be far more into it.

Mass Effect did their health stuff pretty well.
The whole, take a break, eat a candy bar and have a smoke and your back up to 100% always feels so fake to me.
I just took 3 bullets to the chest and now I can stand up and take 3 more?

The whole 6% health, stuck in the corner, pinned down was some of my favorite parts of older games.
Makes you take it easy and not do dumb things as much.
Yeah you can abuse save/checkpoints but what is the fun in that?

It seems that they used to create games with the legendary difficulty in mind, but then dumb it down for the kids.
Now the legendary difficulties just seem cheap achievement quests.
Most games are nigh impossible to get through the first time on legendary, as it seems legendary is just a 100% completion kind of thing nowadays.
 
2013-03-14 07:14:59 AM  

Subtle_Canary: I dont much like the way the game has evolved to that point but there you go. It says a lot about the environment where the game has upwards to 6 different sniper rifles but not a single map where the maximum line of sight exceeds 75 meters...


This. Pretty much everything you said in your post. It's fine for a while, if you're really wasted, if you're a teenager, or if you need to vent by just running around blowing shiat up, but let's not conflate this with good and in-depth gameplay. These games should've been a small mod (call it...deathmatch, or something) on a much larger and objective oriented game, not their own beast.

I'll admit that the muscle memory and map memorization required to play these games at a high level is a sort of skill, but it's my opinion that...well, it's stupid. It has its place of course, but it is most certainly not at the forefront of the genre. We have the computing power to accomplish so much, and yet I think most phones could handle the complexity of the shovelware fps's they're throwing out. I blame consoles. <insert standard disclaimer about how this is my opinion and I'm aware I don't get to dictate how other people enjoy their gaming>

I wouldn't mind seeing things like randomized maps. That is, the maps themselves are generated, not rotated through a static list, so that you can never memorize a map, because you'll never see it more than once. And also that the battles take place in a much larger scheme of an on-going war. So if the battle is being fought in France, you get randomized hills, roads, bunkers and a random collection of a specific set of buildings to make up a small town. Could have a static map for Paris and other large notables, if the overall campaign dictates a fight for control of it taking place. Then if you're down in Africa you get different buildings and ground textures, and again it's all randomized for the actual terrain, with perhaps weights given to dictate the likelihood of fighting on flat land, hills, mountains, a coastal invasion, etc. You know what game they did that with? Mount and Blade.

That is an awesome game. Listening to Amon Amarth and building up my own kingdom from nothing, with just an axe a shield and a horse (and a small cadre of dedicated companions, and maybe a bunch of soldier cannon fodder, because I'm not going first up that ramp onto 500 pikes, fark you...I'll send your widows a few gold though, and make sure your sons grow up big and strong by building a new mill at your town...I'll need more soldiers eventually, after all).

They've been promising Mount and Blade 2 forever, but there's still absolutely NO information about it, except that it exists. With the introduction of multiplayer in the Warband expansion, and the subsequent changes that necessitates, I've become fearful for the fate of any future titles. I've heard War of the Roses is pretty enjoyable, but I just don't care about being a faceless soldier in a horde. I want to be the hero from humble beginnings who goes on to conquer the world and bend it to his will.

Not sure why the faceless soldier thing works when you have guns, but not when it's swords. At least for me. Anyways, I spent way too long making this post that's entirely too long. I am truly sorry for your lots.
 
2013-03-14 07:21:41 AM  
I've owned every CoD game since MW1 (with the exception of World at War).  I understand some of the hate the game receives, but at the same time, I don't think the proliferation of games like CoD, Halo, Gears of War, etc., have diminished the quality of other games that are released.  To me it's more or less just a matter of the mood you are in when you want to play.

Right now I'm cycling between Borderlands 2, Gran Turismo 5, BOps 2, and NBA 2k13.  Each game satisfies a certain taste for different times.  There have been so many unique games released in the last two years that defy the structure of a "run-and-gun" game like CoD.  The Uncharted series, Assassin's Creed, Heavy Rain, L.A. Noire, the two fantastic Batman games.  I just don't see why anyone really complains that CoD has ruined gaming.
 
2013-03-14 07:28:37 AM  

BurningMan03: L.A. Noire


That game had so much promise, but the gameplay got a bit repetitive and the sandbox felt a little empty.

Also, why the ever-loving fark did Rockstar not put a merchandising deal in place with Hot Wheels to sell a line of LA Noire cars?
 
2013-03-14 07:33:53 AM  

BurningMan03:  I just don't see why anyone really complains that CoD has ruined gaming.


I don't see it either, who is saying CoD has ruined gaming as a whole?

TFA and the posts here have been about the casualization of the *FPS genre*, not sure why you're talking about Gran Turismo 5.
 
2013-03-14 07:39:26 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: I wouldn't mind seeing things like randomized maps. That is, the maps themselves are generated, not rotated through a static list, so that you can never memorize a map, because you'll never see it more than once. And also that the battles take place in a much larger scheme of an on-going war. So if the battle is being fought in France, you get randomized hills, roads, bunkers and a random collection of a specific set of buildings to make up a small town. Could have a static map for Paris and other large notables, if the overall campaign dictates a fight for control of it taking place. Then if you're down in Africa you get different buildings and ground textures, and again it's all randomized for the actual terrain, with perhaps weights given to dictate the likelihood of fighting on flat land, hills, mountains, a coastal invasion, etc. You know what game they did that with? Mount and Blade.


I would play the hell out of that if it was bigger than COD maps.
Randomized urban area combat?
Randomized beachhead invasion?
Parachute and sweep of a Randomized building?
It would completely eliminate the boring old choke-points of most maps and destroy the knife/shotgun runners favorite 400m laps they typically do.

Although it would burn up the computers it was running on but I'm sure it could totally be built. All you would hear about though is how "unbalanced" every map is.
 
2013-03-14 07:40:15 AM  
Played MW3 and Bo and yet I always go back to UT99.
 
2013-03-14 07:40:22 AM  

thisiszombocom: looks down on those whose first thief experience was 3


As many things that were wrong about that game (why did you get rid of the rope arrows and replace them with freaking Spider-Man gloves?  That only worked on very few, select walls?), they did a couple things right.  They got the original voice actors back, which was appreciated, and the Shalebridge Cradle level was right up there with the creepiest moments in the original series.  And it was still better to run and hide than it was to fight, when they could have easily made it a Steampunk combat game.

Which is unfortunately what it looks they're doing with the newest game.  According to the video, making him more "action" oriented.  No.  Just... Just no.  Now, if you gave him some parkour moves like in Mirrors Edge to go along with his sneaking abilities, I think I might be able to roll with it.  Something to get away from guards and dodge arrows with.  But I have the feeling they're going to make him a combat expert.
 
2013-03-14 07:44:50 AM  
All games that use hitscan suck.

/mil-sim master race
//the worst of all master races
 
2013-03-14 07:45:20 AM  

BurningMan03: I've owned every CoD game since MW1 (with the exception of World at War).  I understand some of the hate the game receives, but at the same time, I don't think the proliferation of games like CoD, Halo, Gears of War, etc., have diminished the quality of other games that are released.  To me it's more or less just a matter of the mood you are in when you want to play.

Right now I'm cycling between Borderlands 2, Gran Turismo 5, BOps 2, and NBA 2k13.  Each game satisfies a certain taste for different times.  There have been so many unique games released in the last two years that defy the structure of a "run-and-gun" game like CoD.  The Uncharted series, Assassin's Creed, Heavy Rain, L.A. Noire, the two fantastic Batman games.  I just don't see why anyone really complains that CoD has ruined gaming.


Reading between the lines I would suggest the problem is COD sells lots of copies (especially at launch/full price), and that other FPSes want to sell lots of copies too, without just making another COD clone, so they experimented with generic COD players and couldn't find a way to do that. So the problem is you either have to make a relatively cheap game, or a COD clone, or you risk going out of business if you get unlucky or mess up - basically with so many potential players already ruled out, the risks for non COD-like games (and their developers) is much higher than making a COD-like game.
 
2013-03-14 07:49:03 AM  

balisane: Feh. I find that Mass Effect fulfills all my possible FPS jones; all I really want to do is lay traps and snipe the deepest field possible, anyway, and that only between juicy story chapters. If it were at all possible to completely forget your arsenal and get though every situation with your stock pistol, I would do.


Import your character through all the games. I beat ME3 (with my biotic from ME1), replayed ME3, and I'm level 55 a third of the way in the game. 

At such levels, your stock pistol, and the unholy power of your singularity+warp combo, is all you need.

/playing on Insanity
//Vancouver burns brightly
 
2013-03-14 07:54:37 AM  
Slightly off topic question.
Played Quake, doom, castle wolfenstein, ect on pc.

Trying to play Borderlands on Xbox, the controller just feels wrong.  I suppose it takes time but it feels less accurate then the keyboard.

Do I need to give it more time, or are PC gamers really the master race?
 
2013-03-14 07:58:09 AM  
Different games require different skill sets. You might argue that you don't like what a particular game emphasizes or what skill set they define as needed to "win" or get whatever game rewards there are, but that doesn't change the fact that part of a games inherent rules and logic has win conditions and ways to achieve them.

For me, I either adhere to that game's system rules (whether knuckling under to it or falling into it), learn to enjoy the game in other ways, or if the game simply isn't fun for me, move on. Criticizing a game for what it rewards seems a bit hyperbolic and pedantic - two words that I just used incorrectly on purpose the way a good poet will change the mundane exercise of a difficult bowel movement into a sublime work of art.

Being in game design, you don't want to design your game to turn people off, for sure, and you always have an audience target in mind, so what makes a good game is... does your target audience feel rewarded in what you made and like the final product enough to invest their dollars and encourage others to do so? This guy in the article complaining that there aren't enough people in his intended demographic that enjoy what he offers... it exhibits wishful thinking. Arguing that memorizing maps and game information to become a better player makes you less skilled as a player means you miss the point. Every game has their set of intended skill mechanics. If that's not your cup of tea, move on. If enough gamers piss and moan that the game they want to see and play isn't out there, start a farking petition with game companies and let them know what you want. You think they wouldn't listen? I mean really. They spend millions of dollars trying to figure this shiat out.
 
2013-03-14 08:00:08 AM  
They say that but we all know that Half-life 3 will outsell that years installment of COD if valve manges to release it on consoles as well as PC.

Developers need to stop putting in more RPG elements to shooters or any multiplayer game really. They were fun in COD:MW and it didn't take long to get everything. Now when I start up multiplayer and see how long it's going to take me to get all the stuff I usually don't feel like playing multiplayer anymore. I know that I don't have enough time to grind that out before some.12 year old with no responsibilities unlocks it all then uses it to ruin my night.
 
2013-03-14 08:00:26 AM  

the opposite of charity is justice: BurningMan03:  I just don't see why anyone really complains that CoD has ruined gaming.

I don't see it either, who is saying CoD has ruined gaming as a whole?

TFA and the posts here have been about the casualization of the *FPS genre*, not sure why you're talking about Gran Turismo 5.


I mention GT5 just to give some insight into my varied taste.  In the TFA he mentions how CoD has essentially made people impatient, which I agree with to a certain extent.  I've read other articles that speak to the same concept as this one and basically state that CoD has ruined games in general, not just FPS, because it does sell so many copies with each release, and it pushes game devs to match the success by simplifying the games they create and to follow that formula for a generation of gamers with short attention spans.  I have personally never owned a gaming PC, I've been console my whole life, so I'm not familiar with some of the other games that have been mentioned upthread, but I don't think FPS's are necessarily meant to be super in-depth like the other games I listed.  It fulfills a certain niche, so to speak.

I just fail to see how FPS's have really changed all that much compared to some of the first ones that any of us ever played.  How is Doom 2 all that different from CoD?  Or Goldeneye for the N64, which basically started the FPS craze?  Aside from the graphics, the point remains the same.  Run around, shoot, hide/find health pack to restore health, repeat.
 
2013-03-14 08:09:32 AM  

BurningMan03: I just fail to see how FPS's have really changed all that much compared to some of the first ones that any of us ever played.  How is Doom 2 all that different from CoD?


Because we'd advanced greatly since those days, and Halo/CoD was a huge step backward in game design.
 
2013-03-14 08:11:21 AM  
The only FPS I played that wasn't about map memorization or just being amped up on Mt Dew fast twitch was Operation Flashpoint.
 
2013-03-14 08:12:00 AM  

BurningMan03: Goldeneye for the N64, which basically started the FPS craze?


This sort of thing is why PC gamers think that console gamers are unworthy.

Goldeneye was neither revolutionary nor the beginning of anything. It was a lackluster game on a lackluster system. I should know I owned the MFer and my stupid friends were always bugging me to come over and play it. I had to keep explaining to them how shiatty the game was. Whatever less than  year later half-life came out and I just let them play it while I was on the computer.
 
2013-03-14 08:14:57 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: I wouldn't mind seeing things like randomized maps. That is, the maps themselves are generated, not rotated through a static list, so that you can never memorize a map, because you'll never see it more than once.


Thing is in most cases you'll wind up with something scattershot.  An extra tree being here or there doesn't change the situation much.  There's a fair bit of skill involved in making terrain interesting, and battlefields are anything but organic.  Anything combustible in a contested area will be inevitably charred, and combat engineers will set up various defenses to make getting from here to there as painful as possible.  But of course, the purpose of these games is anything but realism.  Oh, they should feel real, but there's nothing fun about walking three steps up an open field and then getting cut down by a pillbox, inhaling nerve gas or stepping on a land mine.

As for CoD, I understand it's intended to cater to a simple-minded market, but to some extent might the limitations of the game experience be precisely because the participants are simple-minded?  I never played it so I don't know, but it seems more frustration here is leveled at the multiplayer brats than anything else.  I remember the first Team Fortress being a conventional, if enjoyable, FPS until my then-college roommate (who is an effin' genius and went on to get an MD) took that game places.  He really didn't play that much, but when he did he'd innovate something nasty (and I was basically his Padawan).  There were plenty of brats then, but we didn't mind them because we ate them for lunch.  We only entered sessions where we'd be outnumbered 2:1 because otherwise we'd get bored.  Just one example among many dozens -- he set up a sentry gun near the bottom corner of a central moat.  It took him a couple of drowning deaths, but the resulting hilarity was well worth it.  The thing had line of sight to the opposing sniper's nest (and everyone played sniper, even back then) but was obscured by the water, so snipers kept getting annihilated by a gun they couldn't see.  He'd name himself the furthest thing from macho crap, like "a Totoro", so you'd get to see messages flashing on screen like, "AceSniperKillshot dies of a Totoro's mysterious tropical disease."  I think he did more to push the level of play in that game than anything in the game itself; I seriously doubt the developers predicted even half the stuff he thought of.
 
2013-03-14 08:15:05 AM  

BurningMan03: Or Goldeneye for the N64, which basically started the FPS craze?


Holy crap, what?  Don't get me wrong, it was a great game.  A DEFINING game in the genre.  But it hardly started the craze.  If any one game can get that laid at their feet, it would have to be Doom, and even that stood on the shoulders of the original Wolfenstein and the like.

BurningMan03: Aside from the graphics, the point remains the same.  Run around, shoot, hide/find health pack to restore health, repeat.


I think I'm seeing teh problem here.  You obviously have terrible tastes in games.  There are a ton of shooter games that require objectives to be captured/defended, structures to be built or destroyed, or captured and decoded, transmitted...  You just seem to play the brainless ones that never advanced beyond "See Movement, Shoot Until Movement Stops."

/the original Red Orchestra was amazing
//played the hell out of Unreal Tournament and UT2004 back in the day
///ok, ALL the shooter games back in the day
 
2013-03-14 08:15:45 AM  

hubiestubert: I think that he's right, that the hybrid FPS-RPG is going to be where a lot of traction is found to produce some fun games.

Mind you, I don't think that Bioshock: Infinite is going to change that--all the Bioshock games are pretty much on rails, and the "exploring" portion of the show has been simply which area you'll explore first, and how many goodies you'll pick up along the way--nor has Borderlands really changed all that much, save increase the Skinner Box effect of having players looking for loot, constant streams of loot, and comparing new loot to old loot.


meh, trends come and go, 5 years ago everybody was predicting that call of duty would create a huge shooter market of copy-cats

what actually happened is that call of duty ate up all of the shooter dollars, even the halo franchise lagged behind despite the 360 being the better selling HD console in the highest-demand markets

it was inevitable that call of duty would peak somewhere and then start to slowly slide in sales, while the day 1 sales continue to impress the tail-end sales aren't - meaning everybody who loves this type of games loves it so much they have to have it day 1, but a lot of people are growing tired of it

either way, we live in a media world dominated by the lack of attention for things, it's why every analyst thinks every device must be a convergence device, it's why financially fewer and fewer AAA games can be made in the future, it's why there's always so many failed copycats, but i think in the long run even the fps will suffer at the hands of adhd, and that more games like quake live will popularize
 
2013-03-14 08:16:43 AM  

Egoy3k: This sort of thing is why PC gamers think that console gamers are unworthy.

Goldeneye was neither revolutionary nor the beginning of anything. It was a lackluster game on a lackluster system. I should know I owned the MFer and my stupid friends were always bugging me to come over and play it. I had to keep explaining to them how shiatty the game was. Whatever less than  year later half-life came out and I just let them play it while I was on the computer.


I wouldn't say that.  I was the kind of guy that was designing Duke Nukem 3D levels back in the day, and I loved Goldeneye.  It wasn't revolutionary in any way, but it was well done and rather genre defining.
 
2013-03-14 08:17:04 AM  
I miss old Day of Defeat.

Wasn't it v1.3 that had the bleeding still? It was awesome.

I picked up the first Mass Effect a while ago because everybody recommended it to me, to get me into the story for 2 and 3, but I'm not quite sold on it yet. It feels like a railway shooter that's heavy on the dialogue right now.

/new gaming PC building this summer
//yay!
 
2013-03-14 08:21:05 AM  

Egoy3k: BurningMan03: Goldeneye for the N64, which basically started the FPS craze?

This sort of thing is why PC gamers think that console gamers are unworthy.

Goldeneye was neither revolutionary nor the beginning of anything. It was a lackluster game on a lackluster system. I should know I owned the MFer and my stupid friends were always bugging me to come over and play it. I had to keep explaining to them how shiatty the game was. Whatever less than  year later half-life came out and I just let them play it while I was on the computer.


But it was ridiculously popular and single handedly grew the FPS genre platform from us indignant master gaming racers to the masses, hence the word Craze.
 
2013-03-14 08:22:00 AM  

Shadowknight: Egoy3k: This sort of thing is why PC gamers think that console gamers are unworthy.

Goldeneye was neither revolutionary nor the beginning of anything. It was a lackluster game on a lackluster system. I should know I owned the MFer and my stupid friends were always bugging me to come over and play it. I had to keep explaining to them how shiatty the game was. Whatever less than  year later half-life came out and I just let them play it while I was on the computer.

I wouldn't say that.  I was the kind of guy that was designing Duke Nukem 3D levels back in the day, and I loved Goldeneye.  It wasn't revolutionary in any way, but it was well done and rather genre defining.


I found it unplayable due to the systems lack of a second analog stick, the floaty feeling and the jarring sound. Compared with what was available for the PC during that time period it was not really a great game.
 
2013-03-14 08:23:58 AM  

log_jammin: ticed, and I don't know if it's him, the way the game plays, or if I just play FPS differently, but he always runs from place to place, turning and shooting without really looking. when I play games like that I always go slow and try to peak around corners, take careful aim, etc.. I just get the feeling that CoD encourages/rewards the way he plays. maybe, I don't know.


That's my issue with online FPS games now.  The only strategy is to run around a map as fast as you can and kill as many before you are killed, spawn and start again. Run and Gun gets boring after...5 minutes.  If you try to use any other strategy everyone on the maps starts pissing their wheaties about the "camper".  "Camper? You've seen me at nearly every point on the map.  How is that camping?."

Playing a lan game with my boys was pretty fun but those days are done, oldest is off playing with uncle sams real toys and the younger two have moved on from FPS games. We'd spend two-three hours on a weekend, giving each other crap about getting to an achievment first and just general trash talking.

/oh, plus, i hate how every single map is "one level".  there's very little vertical elements, everything is clipped so you can't do any exploring to find other areas than the predefined paths.
 
2013-03-14 08:24:30 AM  
fark y'all. I just want to shoot zombies.
 
2013-03-14 08:30:11 AM  
Most military shooters are boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooring
 
2013-03-14 08:31:30 AM  
I have to agree with the guy. CoD multiplayet us annoying as hell and requires no aiming skill. Hell it's so broken that if you try, you die. I don't like to spray and pray. Just like I refused to nade spam in Q2. I loved all rails wod7 the best. Tarzan hook and a railgun. Now that took skill and twitch aim mastery, and it was a hell a lot of fun and I got very good at it. Unfortunately it was way late, around 2002-2003 and the servers were starting to drop like flies...
 
2013-03-14 08:36:06 AM  

Shadowknight: Egoy3k: This sort of thing is why PC gamers think that console gamers are unworthy.

Goldeneye was neither revolutionary nor the beginning of anything. It was a lackluster game on a lackluster system. I should know I owned the MFer and my stupid friends were always bugging me to come over and play it. I had to keep explaining to them how shiatty the game was. Whatever less than  year later half-life came out and I just let them play it while I was on the computer.

I wouldn't say that.  I was the kind of guy that was designing Duke Nukem 3D levels back in the day, and I loved Goldeneye.  It wasn't revolutionary in any way, but it was well done and rather genre defining.


That's what I was getting at.  Like I said, I've been a console guy my whole life, and Goldeneye was the first game that I can remember where my friends would have get-togethers just so we could all play the game.  It grew the genre in a way that Doom or Wolfenstein never could because of them being PC based.  If you go solely off of console FPS shooters, they haven't changed all that much.  I never played UT, Half-Life, or Counter-strike, although I had friends who were really, really good at CS.

With that being said, I'm glad to have you here to diagnose MY taste in video games.  I'll be sure to re-examine everything I've ever thought about the games I like.
 
2013-03-14 08:36:49 AM  

J. Frank Parnell: God-is-a-Taco: At least we have Thief 4 to look forward to, right?

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2013/03/13/meet-the-n ew -garrett-from-thief.aspx

Haha just kidding.

I still believe!

Only major disappointment so far is that they didn't go with a female thief, as the ending to Deadly Shadows implied the torch had been passed to a young girl.


It seems to be a complete reboot. From what I've read they've even removed the fantasy aspects too.
 
2013-03-14 08:38:33 AM  
CounterStrike and Team Fortress 2 are the king of multiplayer shooters.   This CoD crap is just that.  Crap.
 
2013-03-14 08:43:26 AM  

Nezorf: way south: You had mods like day of defeat and red orchestra which took an interesting run at the weapons and time period thing. Offerings like infiltration or Rogue spear would put your tactics to the test.

Oh back in the good old days where random strangers would actually work in teams and squads.
Voice communication was a rarity and a bit of a privilege so it was used well.


Unless, of course, you had baaallls of steeeeeelllll.
 
2013-03-14 08:44:36 AM  
I kept trying to use FPS skills gleaned from the days of Medal of Honor and Unreal Tournament on the PC and utilize it on the Xbox, and it didn't work. On the PC I was twitchy enough to walk into a room with 3 people and instantly prioritize which one to shoot first and then take out the other two and walk out alive. That's nearly impossible on the Xbox due to the controller, and I just get killed by an 8yr old with a throwing knife from 100yds away through the open window.

And while I do enjoy CoD on the Xbox, at the same time I recognize it as a pile of shiat. It wasn't until I significantly cheapened my game did I start getting "good."

Also not showing the ping is annoying as hell. I always used it as a feedback mechanism on the PC. If I got hammered continually and someone was in my approximation of ping I knew I wasn't playing well, or conversely if they had a 10 and I was at a 100 and I was losing I knew it wasn't necessarily me.
 
2013-03-14 08:46:45 AM  
meh. I just stick to the original Halo PC multiplayer.
 
2013-03-14 08:51:03 AM  

Egoy3k: I found it unplayable due to the systems lack of a second analog stick, the floaty feeling and the jarring sound. Compared with what was available for the PC during that time period it was not really a great game.


Well, I'll agree THERE.  I remember playing a lot of the "Future vs Fantasy" mod on Quake around the same time.  But Goldeneye, to me, was a decently constructed FPS boiled down to essentials.  It got a lot of people hooked and just widened the player base.  If a few of them went beyond that and started playing more in depth FPSs after, all the better.
 
2013-03-14 08:53:09 AM  
Every day I keep telling myself this is the last day I play Black Ops 2.  The lag is terrible, half the time is spent "migrating hosts", the hitmarkers are awful, the guns are inconsistent, the quickscoping is ridiculous, nobody plays objectives they just camp and boost their KD, everytime I join a Ground War game it's already in progress and some goober on their team is 76-2 with every single scorestreak up at the same time.  And yet I still keep popping in the disc and playing it... I don't know why.

Oh, and the single player campaign reeks.  Boring old guy in wheelchair who cusses unnecessarily too much telling stories to retarded looking young guy who cusses unnecessarily too much.  Yawn.

As a diversion the last week and a half I played the new Tomb Raider and was floored at how great the game was.  The differences in quality of the game didn't fully reveal themselves until I beat Tomb Raider and popped Black Ops 2 back in... ugh, wow.  Treyarch you're terrible.
 
2013-03-14 08:53:16 AM  

BurningMan03: That's what I was getting at.  Like I said, I've been a console guy my whole life, and Goldeneye was the first game that I can remember where my friends would have get-togethers just so we could all play the game.  It grew the genre in a way that Doom or Wolfenstein never could because of them being PC based.  If you go solely off of console FPS shooters, they haven't changed all that much.  I never played UT, Half-Life, or Counter-strike, although I had friends who were really, really good at CS.

With that being said, I'm glad to have you here to diagnose MY taste in video games.  I'll be sure to re-examine everything I've ever thought about the games I like.


You should.  Because you are missing out on a wealth of REALLY great games in favor of playing the blandest of games.
 
2013-03-14 08:53:48 AM  
Bah.  Every FPS franchise has it's quirks and style.  COD is more arcade style, Battlefield more team/objective oriented.....just play what you like and don't play what you don't like.
And get a PC you filthy simpering subhuman console scum.

/master pc race.

//Chivalry is alot of fun for a medieval FPS.

///stop liking what I don't like
 
2013-03-14 08:56:12 AM  
Most of the people that hate COD and other FPSs tried them on consoles. Consoles suck the life out of shooters, with their 'player assist' and plethora of kids running around. I play COD WAW and Bops on the PC, and only on a crouch server (Polite and friendly). The Crouch slows the game down, and the P&F servers are always admined so the kids are kept in line. Battlefield 2 is OK, but the wide range of guns and attachments, plus the long and tedious progression to get the later weapons make it a bi too much for me. Also, I hate huge maps- who wants to walk or ride for 3 minutes from your spawn, only to get sniped and have to start all over again?
 
2013-03-14 08:56:55 AM  
Arma III laughs at call of duty

media.pcgamer.com
 
2013-03-14 08:58:12 AM  

Testiclaw: I miss old Day of Defeat.

Wasn't it v1.3 that had the bleeding still? It was awesome.

I picked up the first Mass Effect a while ago because everybody recommended it to me, to get me into the story for 2 and 3, but I'm not quite sold on it yet. It feels like a railway shooter that's heavy on the dialogue right now.

/new gaming PC building this summer
//yay!


I think I started DoD on Beta 1.1. 
Great game and it was incredibly promising every release. 
My favorite was Beta 1.3b as it was around the longest. 
Wow, those were the days. 24 hour Battle For Europe tourneys.
As fun as it was I'm glad I set down the keyboard and moved on with my life.
Uninstalled every game off my computer and didn't play any for years because of DoD

Mass Effect picks up down the line. The first one is fun to play but doesn't hold up against time as the second one did.
Best part is unlimited ammo (in bursts)
 
2013-03-14 08:58:19 AM  

thisiszombocom: God-is-a-Taco: At least we have Thief 4 to look forward to, right?

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2013/03/13/meet-the-n ew -garrett-from-thief.aspx

Haha just kidding. The PR guys themselves can't hide how awful they're making it.
There are key words to pay attention to in the video, like "modern audience", "console market",  "mainstream".

"We took a game many people enjoy, and we changed everything good about it so that no one will enjoy it."

you mean thief 3.

/ original thief fanboi
// looks down on those whose first thief experience was 3


Rats.... always rats...
 
2013-03-14 09:00:55 AM  

Enemabag Jones: Slightly off topic question.
Played Quake, doom, castle wolfenstein, ect on pc.

Trying to play Borderlands on Xbox, the controller just feels wrong.  I suppose it takes time but it feels less accurate then the keyboard.

Do I need to give it more time, or are PC gamers really the master race?


It feels heavy and slow, right?  The problem is you're used to a mouse that can move several inches in any direction with almost zero friction.  The xbox thumbstick moves at most an inch, has a dead-spot in the center, and spring resistance.  You'll have to relearn how to shoot.  You'll get used to it, but it will never be as good as a mouse and keyboard, like god intended for FPSs.
 
2013-03-14 09:05:04 AM  

PanicMan: It feels heavy and slow, right?  The problem is you're used to a mouse that can move several inches in any direction with almost zero friction.  The xbox thumbstick moves at most an inch, has a dead-spot in the center, and spring resistance.  You'll have to relearn how to shoot.  You'll get used to it, but it will never be as good as a mouse and keyboard, like god intended for FPSs.


I'm really hoping that the next generation of consoles make a wireless keyboard and mouse a forgone conclusion, and that all console makers include support standard.  I know it won't happen, as two generations of fans have been conditioned to the gamepad being the one and only way, and they would get slaughtered wholesale by a decent kb/m combo.  It would alienate far too many folks, but man it would be fun in the meantime to watch the kids screaming about "HACKERS!" because I'm able to turn around in less than three full seconds.

/would also have to remove aim assisting, which would leave the poor befuddled controller folks wondering where all their bullets are going
 
2013-03-14 09:05:25 AM  
If there is no real difference in skill level in CoD why do some people have KD in the 2, 3 or 4 range and they are the ones that are always at the top of the score board?  They just that much luckier than everybody else?

And trying to make it seem like CoD is the only FPS where lag is a major factor is ridiculous.  I have played loads of FPS (Quake, Unreal, Tribes, Planetside, BF series,  etc.) and lag is always a major factor in each and everyone of them.
 
kab
2013-03-14 09:06:53 AM  
You have an entire generation of gamers who grew up thinking that controllers + aim assist are how FPS should be experienced.

What other reaction were you expecting, Mr. Developer guy?
 
2013-03-14 09:09:50 AM  

toetag: If you try to use any other strategy everyone on the maps starts pissing their wheaties about the "camper". "Camper? You've seen me at nearly every point on the map. How is that camping?."


Why do you care what brats think?  If you're unconventional they'll gun for you, but unless it's the sort of game where developers keep adding patches to nerf anything innovative, a little creativity can counter 1000 hours of mindless practice.
 
2013-03-14 09:10:27 AM  
What a bunch of whiny babies this group is. Holy hell. You want a hard strategy based cod game play hardcore sabotage. You want to run and gun play normal ctf. What the hell! Seriously almost every post here is whining about something. Waaah young people play this game and I don't like the way they play. Waaaah a particular game mode (that no one is forcing you to play) has rules I don't like. Waaaah There's no long sight lines so I can't snipe as long as I would like (which is also untrue on a lot of cod boards). there is no master formula. Play the game, game modes and boards you like. Don't like tdm on nuketown? Don't play it. There's millions of people playing these games at any given time. Sometimes you get matched up with idiots and get destroyed in an objective game by guys who work together. Sometimes you're on the good team and destroy other people. Want to mitigate that get a clan and play together. bottom line stop crying because a game like cod has game modes you don't like. I don't like corner hiding crouchers so I don't play tdm. I love the excitement of running with the flag so I play ctf and hardcore ctf. See how easy that is? sometimes I love knowing where the battle will be so I play demolition to ensure that I'll encounter most of the enemy team at one place trying to do one thing. Cod offers every variety you could want aside from maybe having huge boards. Even the biggest boards aren't huge compared to some other franchises. But overwhelmingly people don't want to run for ten minutes before seeing an enemy. Understand that people who want to play this way are in the extreme minority and thus aren't going to be catered to. Even with that caveat there are still at least tens of thousands of people looking to play that style and you can find them if you want to. want real hardcore play arma or dayz. this is like music snobs crying about pop music popularity when there are more choices and delivery methods for music than ever. Enjoy what you want. Banging on someone as stupid because they have different tastes is kind of ridiculous because that lens can just as easily be turned on you.
 
2013-03-14 09:13:19 AM  

Boxingoutsider: wall of itg text


...and if you don't like 'Merica get the fark out and stop ur whinin'
 
2013-03-14 09:19:01 AM  
I'm not a huge gamer, but I really don't like how when I'm stuck somewhere in say, Half Life 2, all I have to do is keep playing the same area over and over again until I find/memorize where all the enemies are. To finally get through a rough spot doesn't really offer me a huge sense of accomplishment, but instead I feel like I'm just glad that part's over with. To replay the same level at that point is almost always as easy as the last way you memorized the level.

I know you can change up your method at that point and do it all over, but I think I'd like to see more randomization of enemies every time you replay so that skill and overall strategy really are more important than just memorization. Then again, I'm not a game designer and I don't know if that kind of thing would really play out very well in the end.
 
2013-03-14 09:19:57 AM  
Itg? I'm a realist. I play what I like. Sometimes I play hardcore stuff that makes me work hard and be careful. Sometimes I run and gun. in general people who cry about stuff they aren't forced to take in are babies and need to just go back to what they like. In todays world with so many ways to entertain yourself there's bound to be something for everyone. I don't like soap operas but I understand how they appeal to people. I don't like Ives but I understand that people do like his music.
 
2013-03-14 09:21:27 AM  

theurge14: Every day I keep telling myself this is the last day I play Black Ops 2. The lag is terrible, half the time is spent "migrating hosts", the hitmarkers are awful, the guns are inconsistent, the quickscoping is ridiculous, nobody plays objectives they just camp and boost their KD, everytime I join a Ground War game it's already in progress and some goober on their team is 76-2 with every single scorestreak up at the same time. And yet I still keep popping in the disc and playing it... I don't know why.


Same here.  It's because it's designed to take advantage of the non-thinking, primeval, pleasure parts of your brain.  And after a long stressful day, I kind of need that.

I kind of want it, too.  It lets me shut out all the other crap.  I may only get a few minutes before I'm interruped with a real world obligation, so I can't play anything deep or complicated.  It's a bad habit.

And I'm currently playing Borderlands 2 and God of War Ascention with someone, but since they go to bed early I can't finish them up to start another story game.  So I'm kind of stuck with the cheap thrills of Black Ops 2.
 
2013-03-14 09:22:25 AM  

sxacho: I'm not a huge gamer, but I really don't like how when I'm stuck somewhere in say, Half Life 2...


Then again, maybe they've gotten better since then. I'm not exactly playing the newest games.
 
2013-03-14 09:53:48 AM  
And nothing of value was lost.

The developer's argument:
I built a game.
People think it sucks.
Therefore, the games that people don't think suck are responsible and suck.

Fark that guy.
 
2013-03-14 09:55:04 AM  
(God dammit, I can't not be verbose today)

dragonchild: Thing is in most cases you'll wind up with something scattershot.


That would be the point of randomized maps. Instead of knowing that the bottom right corner of the top window is where the unseen sniper's head is going to be because you've played the map a million times and know every line of sight and angle of fire possible, you have to think and adapt to the situation. It becomes strategic and tactical, rather than muscle memory and map memorization.

And I have to completely disagree with the rest of your opinion in your first paragraph. Interesting terrain is simply variety and the unknown. A creek-bed here, a building there, what's on the other side of that hill? That's not something you need a guy to sit down and conceive.

Regarding realism, there's actually a large and multi-faceted debate to be had over whether it's desirable or not which is outside the scope of this thread I think. I will say this, though - Realism is not solely walking blindly into a field of fire and being cut down, or nerve-gassed in the trenches. Granted, it does occur, but that's the struggle, to have that not happen. Which is actually much more easily accomplished when you can't throw a grenade from one side of the map to the other, when there are more than 3 choke-points, and when you can actually go around a potential kill-zone.

dragonchild: As for CoD, I understand it's intended to cater to a simple-minded market, but to some extent might the limitations of the game experience be precisely because the participants are simple-minded?  I never played it so I don't know, but it seems more frustration here is leveled at the multiplayer brats than anything else.


Not really. I mean it does cause its own problems, but the game is still narrow in scope and shallow in depth, regardless of who you're playing with. Same sort of thing happened in MMO's with WoW and its predecessors and potential rivals. You dumb down the game enough to coax the masses into trying it out, but then you're stuck if you ever want to offer them (or anybody else) something with any sort of depth or complexity. They don't want to go get owned in a game they have to actually put thought and effort into when they can just run around mindlessly and maybe break even, or get top kills/deaths without moving their crosshair more than a few inches, or just aim in the general direction of what they're trying to hit and get a boom headshot. And you -have- to make these sorts of games if you want to make the big bucks. Because unfortunately, these people didn't play video games before the welfare epics started flowing. If you were to remove WoW and CoD from the market they'd go back to whatever it was they were doing. Playing the foosball or whatever.

I disagree with TFA, I don't think any gamers have been ruined by CoD, I think it's only because of CoD that they're gamers. They're why being a gamer is no longer the same thing as being a nerd. Or is it geek? I've forgotten the definitions.

I remember the first Team Fortress being a conventional, if enjoyable, FPS until my then-college roommate (who is an effin' genius and went on to get an MD) took that game places.  He really didn't play that much, but when he did he'd innovate something nasty (and I was basically his Padawan).  There were plenty of brats then, but we didn't mind them because we ate them for lunch.  We only entered sessions where we'd be outnumbered 2:1 because otherwise we'd get bored.  Just one example among many dozens -- he set up a sentry gun near the bottom corner of a central moat.  It took him a couple of drowning deaths, but the resulting hilarity was well worth it.  The thing had line of sight to the opposing sniper's nest (and everyone played sniper, even back then) but was obscured by the water, so snipers kept getting annihilated by a gun they couldn't see.  He'd name himself the furthest thing from macho crap, like "a Totoro", so you'd get to see messages flashing on screen like, "AceSniperKillshot dies of a Totoro's mysterious tropical disease."  I think he did more to push the level of play in that game than anything in the game itself; I seriously doubt the developers predicted even half the stuff he thought of.

That's one of the points many are trying to make. There's very little room for innovation within these games.

In direct response to what you seem to be saying, I don't think anybody here is saying that we're unable to play these games effectively. At least I'm certainly not. What you just described still happens constantly, it's simply good placement of a stationary gun. Once you've found a good spot to put that stationary gun it will continue to be a good spot whenever that map comes up. So even the dumbest can stumble into winning tactics eventually, simply through trial and error, or monkey-see monkey-do. The problem, for me at least, is that even effective game play, coming in at #1 for kills/deaths, most points on the team, most objectives captured, whatever metric is being used when you mash tab, is a boring victory. I always knew exactly where the threats were, I never had to move my crosshairs away from the small handful of chokepoints that allow you to control a map, I knew exactly where to toss a grenade to wipe out the enemy spawn, I knew exactly where that sniper fired from that got my buddy, I know if I put a claymore here the retarded knifer will step right into it because he runs the same god damn lap every time.

This...this sounds like me bragging. That's certainly not my intention. There are dudes that are insanely good at these games, and would out twitch and out map-memorize me any day of the week. My point is that the battles are damn near scripted after the game's been out for a week. Variety is the spice of life, CoD does not has. Also? Small maps are teh suxx0rz.
 
2013-03-14 09:58:03 AM  
Complaining that fps players don't have to develop better "skills" in order to enjoy playing is like complaining that masturbation has too low a dificulty curve.
 
2013-03-14 10:01:15 AM  

Arthen: Complaining that fps players don't have to develop better "skills" in order to enjoy playing is like complaining that masturbation has too low a dificulty curve.


OMG!!  IT'S GONE HORRIBLY WRONG!!  MEDIC!!!
 
2013-03-14 10:02:58 AM  

sxacho: I know you can change up your method at that point and do it all over, but I think I'd like to see more randomization of enemies every time you replay so that skill and overall strategy really are more important than just memorization. Then again, I'm not a game designer and I don't know if that kind of thing would really play out very well in the end.


Aside from all the other shiat that developers have to put up with, the toughest problem to tackle is reconciling a game's potential for fun vs. how people will actually play it, which makes randomization risky.  On the contrary, the easiest way to make a game "safe" is to make it extremely linear, because you can exert complete control over how it's played.  Which sucks, at least for me.

The best games, in my opinion, can be "broken" because the developers didn't put in any overly restrictive limitations on how the game was played.  They just threw up a challenge and let everyone sort it out.  Grand Theft Auto: Vice City is a prime example of that.  I watched my friend (an old school RPGer) play through it and he really bought into the role of the protagonist being a slimy guy working his way up the crime ladder, so when it came time to do the stupid "race through town" minigame he got out of his car and tossed a few grenades under the other cars during the countdown, to hell with the consequences.  He wasn't trying to be cunning, wasn't using any guide and half expected to lose by default; he was just role-playing.  The other cars all blew up and, to our astonishment, the minigame continued.  So he hopped back in, completely unopposed, and (both of us laughing the whole time) started running errands en route to the most hilariously bad 1st place finish in the history of driving games.  In my opinion, this is how all games should be made.  Not necessarily sandbox so much as throwing up challenges and daring the gamers to figure them out.  It's boring when a level, mission or boss has one blatantly optimal path to completion.

The problem with these games, which gets back to FPS, is twofold:  One, they make the worst multiplayer games because their inherent flexibility makes them easy to "break".  Unless the developers are VERY good, invariably some asshole who takes gaming waaaaay too seriously will find some unstoppable combination.  To me, having grown out of my FPS phase, on-line multiplayer is a kiss of death for a game not because I'm antisocial so much as it completely changes the scope of the game -- it has to be painstakingly playtested to nerf any sort of creative combinations.  Second, and ironically, just because the game allows gamers to be creative doesn't mean gamers will actually be creative.  An extreme example was The Sims.  I heard that the vast majority used it as a sort of virtual suburbia simulator.  It's a pity, because the code in that game was robust and WIDE open.  I guess it was successful, but I had to teach others how enjoy that game.  This is a legitimate risk; if gamers don't figure out how your game is supposed to be enjoyed they'll think it's a bad game and congrats, creativity is rewarded with red ink.  Some studios are good at encouraging creativity but that's not the aim of FPS creators.
 
2013-03-14 10:05:06 AM  
I just cannot play twitchy instant respawn on small map FPSs.  When the heck are you supposed to drink your beer?  CS gives me minutes to take a few sips and watch the action.

/not a good CS player but it is still my go to after alllllll these years.
 
2013-03-14 10:08:52 AM  
If you want realism, play World War II Online.

Enjoy waiting to hitch a ride on a truck to be transported 5 min to the battlefield only to be staffed by a Stuka right before you arrive.
 
2013-03-14 10:10:33 AM  

MugzyBrown: If you want realism, play World War II Online.

Enjoy waiting to hitch a ride on a truck to be transported 5 min to the battlefield only to be staffed by a Stuka right before you arrive.


Or actually even worse, for the idiot truck driver to go off a ditch and hit something and kill all the soldiers aboard
 
2013-03-14 10:18:08 AM  

Eddie Ate Dynamite: What you just described still happens constantly, it's simply good placement of a stationary gun. Once you've found a good spot to put that stationary gun it will continue to be a good spot whenever that map comes up. So even the dumbest can stumble into winning tactics eventually, simply through trial and error, or monkey-see monkey-do.


Think that didn't happen?  Not only did others steal my roommate's ideas; on more than one occasion someone claimed to have invented it in his presence (even though the gun was positioned in the exact same spot, not even in the opposite corner or something).  Thing is, he was also always the first one to break down his own tactics.  A few days after he put a sentry gun in the water, he was taken out by. . . an underwater sentry gun.  After a few tries he'd found a way to defeat it, and over time several different ways, at which point the monkeys caught on and it became a non-viable tactic.  At that point he was already doing something else.  Again. . . he ate brats for lunch.

But whatever; I was curious about CoD because most complaints didn't seem to differentiate between gameplay and gamer.  Or at least, the shallowness of the game isn't immediately obvious from the complaints.  It's a non-issue for me because my game time is now so limited that any game with an extended learning curve is more unfeasible than anything.
 
2013-03-14 10:19:04 AM  
Also, is mentioning WoW in a video game discussion a version of Godwin'ing?

/That would mean WoW is Hitler
 
2013-03-14 10:54:33 AM  

Shadowknight: PanicMan: It feels heavy and slow, right?  The problem is you're used to a mouse that can move several inches in any direction with almost zero friction.  The xbox thumbstick moves at most an inch, has a dead-spot in the center, and spring resistance.  You'll have to relearn how to shoot.  You'll get used to it, but it will never be as good as a mouse and keyboard, like god intended for FPSs.

I'm really hoping that the next generation of consoles make a wireless keyboard and mouse a forgone conclusion, and that all console makers include support standard.  I know it won't happen, as two generations of fans have been conditioned to the gamepad being the one and only way, and they would get slaughtered wholesale by a decent kb/m combo.  It would alienate far too many folks, but man it would be fun in the meantime to watch the kids screaming about "HACKERS!" because I'm able to turn around in less than three full seconds.

/would also have to remove aim assisting, which would leave the poor befuddled controller folks wondering where all their bullets are going


Dust 514 (in open Beta on the PS3) has full mouse/keyboard support.  Pretty fun game from what I have played; only real down-sides so far: how slow it is to level up skills; you only get 3 char slots; real-money transactions (base game is free to play though).  But I am burnt out on FPS games for the time being and have started in on Ni No Kuni and holy fark what an addictive game that is....haven't had this much pure enjoyment from a game in a long time.
 
2013-03-14 11:00:07 AM  
PanicMan
It feels heavy and slow, right? The problem is you're used to a mouse that can move several inches in any direction with almost zero friction. The xbox thumbstick moves at most an inch, has a dead-spot in the center, and spring resistance. You'll have to relearn how to shoot. You'll get used to it, but it will never be as good as a mouse and keyboard, like god intended for FPSs.

Thanks for the advice.  Heavy and slow maybe, akward and not precise for sure.
 
2013-03-14 11:04:04 AM  
There sure is a lot of navel gazing 'it was better back in my day, all games now are too easy/suck/etc' in here.

My most fun moment in shooters was always running BF3 with a squad full of friends on teamspeak. Because I suck at shooters, and could play a strategic support role like medic or support gunner, and suppressive fire, etc. and it was a blast to shiat talk with my friends. We would often take best squad despite 2 of our 4 being terrible. The sum was greater than its parts, and strategy plus actual role use was great.

Cod doesn't offer that same sense of teamwork. It's a more individual shooter, and that's fine. I also like RPGs and crap. They evolve and change.

If you find the old school shooters with static health, no shields, etc, fun, you can recreate those. Personally I need liked the micro management. I play video games to get the 'brazen war hero saves the day' feel. Not be stomped down for hours.
 
2013-03-14 11:15:30 AM  
Though I did enjoy some BF:BC2 for a while, I haven't really found an online FPS worth playing since Half Life 2 Deathmatch. Guess after spending so much time with Quake and UT99 that I'm just stuck in the old-school frantic twitch shooters as online FPS games go.
 
2013-03-14 11:24:13 AM  

Wittenberg Dropout: I worked on Modern Warfare 1 and can honestly say that that was the best game ever with the best devs ever. Worked on several AAA titles later and they still don't matchup.


MW1 on the PC was a deep and interesting shooter. It wasn't as deep as some of the more traditional FPS games but it was definitely interesting.


Every single CoD since MW1 has been a Hollywood cash grab. They are terrible games and have created a sub culture of childish, whiney, mediocre players who wouldnt last 6 seconds in a game like natural selection or even counter strike.
 
2013-03-14 11:29:23 AM  
Only complaint with War of Roses is that I'm late to the game. Still trying to build my way up to the more awesome weapons and armor. Every server I've played on lately is just dude's in plate armor with two handed axes/swords.
 
2013-03-14 11:33:58 AM  

envirovore: Though I did enjoy some BF:BC2 for a while, I haven't really found an online FPS worth playing since Half Life 2 Deathmatch. Guess after spending so much time with Quake and UT99 that I'm just stuck in the old-school frantic twitch shooters as online FPS games go.


Try natural selection 2 on steam. I think you'll like it. It's FpS RTS.
 
2013-03-14 11:43:07 AM  
I live Assassin's Creed multiplayer because it's different and emphasizes skill, but nothing ruins the game faster than some CoD dink running around bouncing off rooftops without any regard for stealth or skill.
 
2013-03-14 11:45:42 AM  
The reason Goldeneye was so great was that you could beat your friends in the same room and then fart on them as part of your gentlemanly wager.
 
2013-03-14 11:55:47 AM  

ThreadSinger: balisane: Feh. I find that Mass Effect fulfills all my possible FPS jones; all I really want to do is lay traps and snipe the deepest field possible, anyway, and that only between juicy story chapters. If it were at all possible to completely forget your arsenal and get though every situation with your stock pistol, I would do.

Import your character through all the games. I beat ME3 (with my biotic from ME1), replayed ME3, and I'm level 55 a third of the way in the game. 

At such levels, your stock pistol, and the unholy power of your singularity+warp combo, is all you need.

/playing on Insanity
//Vancouver burns brightly


I don't have 1 (PS3 player), but do have a similar-level import from 2. If only I didn't love sniper rifles so much; the highest difficulty sucks a lot of the fun out of setting up those long-distance horror shots. T___T


I would absolutely love an FPS type with regular bow or crossbow options. Ask anyone about my maniacal giggling in Skyrim whenever one managed to pick off a guard with a flaming arrow from the shadows three rooms away.


/faint scream
//tiny sploosh
///*titter*
 
2013-03-14 11:55:48 AM  
COD really jumped the shark with 2. That was the first one to make spray and pray bunny hopping a viable strategy. Pulling that crap in the first COD or UO would get you killed and laughed at. The reason COD 2 was terrible multiplayer wise was because it was the first COD to cater to the console goons. Games designed for console use will ALWAYS suck from its pure PC origins. Look at Operation Flashpoint. The second they made the game for dual platforms, the concessions necessary to make it viable on consoles doomed it (Dragon Rising, Red River). The PC only versions, now called ARMA are freaking glorious. I have no doubt that they will make an ARMA game for the next wave of shiat boxes and when they do THAT series will go to pot.


I still miss the German Front mod for Call of Duty....
 
2013-03-14 11:56:13 AM  

doglover: Mike_LowELL: I like how the comment thread for an article discussing how nobody will play a game which does not look, move, and function like Call of Duty has been completely derailed by discussion of stealth and medieval FPS games.

But we're all old guys. I never liked Call of Duty. It was too much money(ie more than $0.00 USD) for "just another FPS"

We're not the kids in the article. We didn't cut our teeth on CoD, so we know better games are out there and getting good takes time.


My favorite multiplayer FPS was always the original Rainbow Six (and Eagle Watch).  Maximum of four players on a team and eight in a match.  If you got hit in the leg, your guy hobbled around until the round was over.  If you died, you had to wait patiently for the match to finish.  We learned very quickly not to die, cause it was damned boring waiting for the match to end.

/Ding Chavez FTW!
 
2013-03-14 12:00:31 PM  
They never needed to get good at their twitch skills with a mouse.

Really?  I feel like all COD is being good at twitch skills.
 
2013-03-14 12:00:35 PM  
All of mt favorite FPS have been ruined by stupid design choices, not so much anything else.

As a result, im just now moving to Planetside and away from BF BC3 and MW1.
 
2013-03-14 12:02:16 PM  

Snotnose: I don't get why CoD is so popular.  The single player games are fun, but not worth $60.  The last 3 titles (BOPS 1 and 2, MW3) have serious lag issues.  MW2 got taken over by cheaters so I can't go back to that.

Seriously.  What's most important to you in a multiplayer FPS:  1) your skill; 2) strategy  3) tactics  4) teamwork.  If you answered 1-4 then CoD isn't for you because the number 1 factor is lag.  If you're on the wrong end of the lag curve (which I seem to always be) then your hosed no matter what.

/ Didn't get BOP2
// Forums are full of people biatching about lag, I got Borderlands 2 instead.




CoD4 player here. Other people lag make it more difficult, not my lag. Dedicated server too. Plenty of them.

I will pwn you.
 
2013-03-14 12:04:19 PM  

Trocadero: The reason Goldeneye was so great was that you could beat your friends in the same room and then fart on them as part of your gentlemanly wager.


EXACTLY!  This gentleman knows what he is talking about.  The game wasn't GREAT per se, it was that YOU and three friends could split a pizza and play against each other IN THE SAME ROOM.  Then play Mario Kart then Perfect Dark then...

Yeah Half Life came out a year later and it was RIDICULOUSLY good, probably my favorite FPS game of all time (that and Q1) but I couldn't play against a group of friends in the same room unless we all had expensive computers and a network set up and the space for a bunch of PCs/monitors...

Like it or not Goldeneye made a FPS a FUN party game.  And like it or not Halo did the same thing for the X-box generation.  Yes there were WAY better FPS out there, none as fun to play in the same room against a group of friends on the same screen.
 
2013-03-14 12:05:01 PM  
Thread getting derailed:

"Consoles are crap for aiming, you heathens."

TRANSLATION:

"I really suck at using console controllers but I won't admit it."
 
2013-03-14 12:06:49 PM  

Mentat: I live Assassin's Creed multiplayer because it's different and emphasizes skill, but nothing ruins the game faster than some CoD dink running around bouncing off rooftops without any regard for stealth or skill.


One of the very few multiplayers I actually enjoy. Generally, I have no patience for the every-man-for-himself, surprise PvP crap, but AC puts the kibosh on it by design. ME multiplayer is surprisingly good for this, too; I don't have to hunt too hard to find a group of random strangers who return favors and work well together.
 
2013-03-14 12:07:53 PM  
SharkaPult:
Like it or not Goldeneye made a FPS a FUN party game.  And like it or not Halo did the same thing for the X-box generation.  Yes there were WAY better FPS out there, none as fun to play in the same room against a group of friends on the same screen.

Agreed.  Gears of War 3 on Horde mode is pretty fun with a living room full of friends and a fridge full of beer.
 
2013-03-14 12:08:46 PM  
My experience is so jacked up and unlike most folks'.  Well, based on these type threads anyway, maybe there's plenty out there with a similar history.

The last console I owned was a ColecoVision.  First PC was just a few years later, then upgraded to 3D video a few years after that.

So, all the "old school" FPS PC games I learned to play (and still do) was stick in left hand (which was  a leap for me, right-handed) and mouse in right.  I'm too fumble-fingered to go KB/mouse, and many newer PC FPS don't support stick.

I have practically ZERO experience with modern-era console controllers, and every time I've tried to play an FPS with one, I fail miserably.

So, I'm stuck playing UT99 (there's neat mods out there now-I really enjoy monster hunt).  As far as military-style games go, I played StrikeForce (the CounterStrike equivalent for UT99) quite a bit when it was new.  Dunno if any servers are still running it.  So, I'm content to play old-ass games like Kingpin, UT99, Tribes II, and SoF.

I suppose I'm stuck here forever, unless I upgrade my gear, and kind find more PC FPSs that support me Saitek.
 
kab
2013-03-14 12:16:32 PM  
theurge14:
"I really suck at using console controllers but I won't admit it."

Translation:   I can't kill anyone without aim assist.
 
2013-03-14 12:20:31 PM  
Shadowknight:  Mount and Blade series.

Will check it out, thanks
 
2013-03-14 12:26:12 PM  

dragonchild: Eddie Ate Dynamite: What you just described still happens constantly, it's simply good placement of a stationary gun. Once you've found a good spot to put that stationary gun it will continue to be a good spot whenever that map comes up. So even the dumbest can stumble into winning tactics eventually, simply through trial and error, or monkey-see monkey-do.

Think that didn't happen?  Not only did others steal my roommate's ideas; on more than one occasion someone claimed to have invented it in his presence (even though the gun was positioned in the exact same spot, not even in the opposite corner or something).  Thing is, he was also always the first one to break down his own tactics.  A few days after he put a sentry gun in the water, he was taken out by. . . an underwater sentry gun.  After a few tries he'd found a way to defeat it, and over time several different ways, at which point the monkeys caught on and it became a non-viable tactic.  At that point he was already doing something else.  Again. . . he ate brats for lunch.

But whatever; I was curious about CoD because most complaints didn't seem to differentiate between gameplay and gamer.  Or at least, the shallowness of the game isn't immediately obvious from the complaints.  It's a non-issue for me because my game time is now so limited that any game with an extended learning curve is more unfeasible than anything.


How many times did you blow your friend?
 
2013-03-14 12:31:21 PM  

enforcerpsu: Wittenberg Dropout: I worked on Modern Warfare 1 and can honestly say that that was the best game ever with the best devs ever. Worked on several AAA titles later and they still don't matchup.

MW1 on the PC was a deep and interesting shooter. It wasn't as deep as some of the more traditional FPS games but it was definitely interesting.


Every single CoD since MW1 has been a Hollywood cash grab. They are terrible games and have created a sub culture of childish, whiney, mediocre players who wouldnt last 6 seconds in a game like natural selection or even counter strike.


Every time I see someone use the "MW" shorthand, I get excited it might be about MechWarrior rather than some crappy console shooter.
 
2013-03-14 12:34:10 PM  

Shadowknight: BurningMan03: That's what I was getting at.  Like I said, I've been a console guy my whole life, and Goldeneye was the first game that I can remember where my friends would have get-togethers just so we could all play the game.  It grew the genre in a way that Doom or Wolfenstein never could because of them being PC based.  If you go solely off of console FPS shooters, they haven't changed all that much.  I never played UT, Half-Life, or Counter-strike, although I had friends who were really, really good at CS.

With that being said, I'm glad to have you here to diagnose MY taste in video games.  I'll be sure to re-examine everything I've ever thought about the games I like.

You should.  Because you are missing out on a wealth of REALLY great games in favor of playing the blandest of games.


The fact that I don't play PC based FPS games has nothing to do with my dislike of the format.  Nor do I harbor any bias against PC games.  It's a monetary factor.  I don't have the money to build my own gaming PC or purchase an Alienware setup.  I have a MacBook Pro and a 6 year old desktop which can't be upgraded other than adding 2 GB of RAM.

I'm well aware of the fact that a lot of the console games don't hold a candle to the PC counterpart.  I just happen to prefer consoles because that's what I grew up playing.  I started out with the NES and have upgraded to the newer systems as they come out.  Having a new HD plasma TV certainly helps me want to keep it that way.
 
2013-03-14 12:36:01 PM  

BHShaman: Shadowknight:  Mount and Blade series.

Will check it out, thanks


Got Mount and Blade for like 6 bucks on a Steam sale about a year ago. Time played was about 200 hours. 200 glorious hours for $6.

If you like the idea of charging across a plain on a heavy courser and watching your lance drop into the chest of the opposing general, instantly removing him from the battle, while all the other soldiers clash around you, then it's a good purchase.

If you don't like that, you're obviously some kind of weirdo, but you could also play as an archer or heavy foot soldier or some other variant.
 
2013-03-14 12:38:29 PM  

kab: theurge14:
"I really suck at using console controllers but I won't admit it."

Translation:   I can't kill anyone without aim assist.


Wrong.  I do both.  A mouse and keyboard is not an iron sight on a gun.  Get over yourself.
 
2013-03-14 01:03:39 PM  
SuperChuck:
Every time I see someone use the "MW" shorthand, I get excited it might be about MechWarrior rather than some crappy console shooter.

GC Council and ADL Represent!!
 
2013-03-14 01:20:31 PM  

BHShaman: Shadowknight:  Mount and Blade series.

Will check it out, thanks


The Warband Expansion is totally worth it. With Fire & Sword, not so much. Firearms fundamentally change the gameplay and not really in a good way.

Although if you ever wanted to lead a charge of Polish Reiters or direct the fire of Swedish Arquebusiers, then you might want to give it a shot. Just letting you know it doesn't grab you in the same way Warband did.
 
2013-03-14 01:36:23 PM  

manimal2878: How many times did you blow your friend?


Once, but I needed a ride reaaallly bad.
 / homophobic idiot is idiot
 
2013-03-14 01:53:57 PM  

Katolu: doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....

Ahhhh, Heretic. I loved that game.


TF2 has some fun medieval maps.
 
2013-03-14 02:30:38 PM  

SuperChuck: enforcerpsu: Wittenberg Dropout: I worked on Modern Warfare 1 and can honestly say that that was the best game ever with the best devs ever. Worked on several AAA titles later and they still don't matchup.

MW1 on the PC was a deep and interesting shooter. It wasn't as deep as some of the more traditional FPS games but it was definitely interesting.


Every single CoD since MW1 has been a Hollywood cash grab. They are terrible games and have created a sub culture of childish, whiney, mediocre players who wouldnt last 6 seconds in a game like natural selection or even counter strike.

Every time I see someone use the "MW" shorthand, I get excited it might be about MechWarrior rather than some crappy console shooter.


Join MechWarrior Online, help take back the abbreviation for giant robot awesomeness.
 
2013-03-14 02:32:03 PM  
 
2013-03-14 02:42:58 PM  

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: SuperChuck: enforcerpsu: Wittenberg Dropout: I worked on Modern Warfare 1 and can honestly say that that was the best game ever with the best devs ever. Worked on several AAA titles later and they still don't matchup.

MW1 on the PC was a deep and interesting shooter. It wasn't as deep as some of the more traditional FPS games but it was definitely interesting.


Every single CoD since MW1 has been a Hollywood cash grab. They are terrible games and have created a sub culture of childish, whiney, mediocre players who wouldnt last 6 seconds in a game like natural selection or even counter strike.

Every time I see someone use the "MW" shorthand, I get excited it might be about MechWarrior rather than some crappy console shooter.

Join MechWarrior Online, help take back the abbreviation for giant robot awesomeness.


Lemme know when they're out of beta. Though what I really want is a good single player game, not a online pay to win monstrosity
 
2013-03-14 02:43:50 PM  
BraveNewCheneyWorld: Arma III laughs at call of duty
 
[media.pcgamer.com image 627x319]


   This!  Finally someone mentions the best online multiplayer in existence. That there, ladies and gents, is a screenshot of actual gameplay and it's just been released as an alpha.  Not really happy that devs now use us as free alpha/beta testers, but with a game as complicated and true to real life physics I know the feedback isn't going to ruin the game like "omg teh m-60 is too overpowered, nerf it!!!"
 
2013-03-14 02:45:56 PM  
Been playing online since the Doom days, and IMHO the experience peaked with Day of Defeat.  I did OK in CS, but I loved DoD.

Can't say there's really an online game now that I *have* to play.  Been doing Borderlands 2 and MW3 for a few months now, but in B2 it gets old comparing guns, and with MW3 lag is the critical criteria.
 
2013-03-14 03:03:13 PM  
Is this the thread where all the people with slow reaction times blame lag for the reason for their deaths and low K/D?
 
2013-03-14 03:06:46 PM  
Regenerating health has been the downfall of the FPS. THAT is what has eliminated any need for skill
 
2013-03-14 03:11:05 PM  

TNel: Is this the thread where all the people with slow reaction times blame lag for the reason for their deaths and low K/D?


Hi, Vonderhaar.  You are correct, despite mountains of evidence of killcams not showing the same thing as in-game action, it's all the complaining noobs fault for being noobs.
 
2013-03-14 03:13:31 PM  

The Incredible Sexual Egg: Regenerating health has been the downfall of the FPS. THAT is what has eliminated any need for skill


Play Hardcore mode then.  Black Ops 2 has it's faults and to me the big 3 are: Quick Scope, Shotguns, and knife;  If they fixed those 3 things then it would be a really good game.  I play BO2 a lot but those things burn my ass all the time, ok wait let's add in spawn points.  I can't tell you how many times I've loaded in and died immediately because I spawned right in front of an enemy.
 
2013-03-14 03:14:40 PM  

TNel: The Incredible Sexual Egg: Regenerating health has been the downfall of the FPS. THAT is what has eliminated any need for skill

Play Hardcore mode then.  Black Ops 2 has it's faults and to me the big 3 are: Quick Scope, Shotguns, and knife;  If they fixed those 3 things then it would be a really good game.  I play BO2 a lot but those things burn my ass all the time, ok wait let's add in spawn points.  I can't tell you how many times I've loaded in and died immediately because I spawned right in front of an enemy.


Small maps are a major problem. Gunfight in a broom closet.
 
2013-03-14 03:17:21 PM  

theurge14: TNel: Is this the thread where all the people with slow reaction times blame lag for the reason for their deaths and low K/D?

Hi, Vonderhaar.  You are correct, despite mountains of evidence of killcams not showing the same thing as in-game action, it's all the complaining noobs fault for being noobs.


Who is this Vonderhaar?  I've played for 10 days and some change according to my combat record and there has been very few killcams that I would say are different than in game.  Lag has a part in it but most of the time the game will host migrate to level off the field.  If you have a crap connection or a bunch of people are streaming when you are playing then that's not the games fault.
 
2013-03-14 03:17:49 PM  

TNel: I can't tell you how many times I've loaded in and died immediately because I spawned right in front of an enemy.


Yes, because when I think of "challenge" or "skill", I think of this:
http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/167/085/avgn-starev il .gif
 
2013-03-14 03:18:45 PM  

Treygreen13: TNel: The Incredible Sexual Egg: Regenerating health has been the downfall of the FPS. THAT is what has eliminated any need for skill

Play Hardcore mode then.  Black Ops 2 has it's faults and to me the big 3 are: Quick Scope, Shotguns, and knife;  If they fixed those 3 things then it would be a really good game.  I play BO2 a lot but those things burn my ass all the time, ok wait let's add in spawn points.  I can't tell you how many times I've loaded in and died immediately because I spawned right in front of an enemy.

Small maps are a major problem. Gunfight in a broom closet.


Stop playing ground war then.  There are only a few maps that I would classify as too small, Nuketown (OMG I'm about to uninstall that map from my console) and Hijacked but other than that the rest are fine for 12 people or less.
 
2013-03-14 03:24:30 PM  

BurningMan03: Shadowknight: BurningMan03: That's what I was getting at.  Like I said, I've been a console guy my whole life, and Goldeneye was the first game that I can remember where my friends would have get-togethers just so we could all play the game.  It grew the genre in a way that Doom or Wolfenstein never could because of them being PC based.  If you go solely off of console FPS shooters, they haven't changed all that much.  I never played UT, Half-Life, or Counter-strike, although I had friends who were really, really good at CS.

With that being said, I'm glad to have you here to diagnose MY taste in video games.  I'll be sure to re-examine everything I've ever thought about the games I like.

You should.  Because you are missing out on a wealth of REALLY great games in favor of playing the blandest of games.

The fact that I don't play PC based FPS games has nothing to do with my dislike of the format.  Nor do I harbor any bias against PC games.  It's a monetary factor.  I don't have the money to build my own gaming PC or purchase an Alienware setup.  I have a MacBook Pro and a 6 year old desktop which can't be upgraded other than adding 2 GB of RAM.

I'm well aware of the fact that a lot of the console games don't hold a candle to the PC counterpart.  I just happen to prefer consoles because that's what I grew up playing.  I started out with the NES and have upgraded to the newer systems as they come out.  Having a new HD plasma TV certainly helps me want to keep it that way.


   You are aware all new gpu's have hdmi out jacks right?  Just spent $2000 to upgrade my 4yr old desktop and Arma lll looks damn sexy on my 42" lcd tv
 
2013-03-14 03:28:18 PM  

pyrotek85: It seems to be a complete reboot. From what I've read they've even removed the fantasy aspects too.


I'm actually fine with that, as long as it's respectfully done.
 
2013-03-14 03:28:19 PM  

TNel: Treygreen13: TNel: The Incredible Sexual Egg: Regenerating health has been the downfall of the FPS. THAT is what has eliminated any need for skill

Play Hardcore mode then.  Black Ops 2 has it's faults and to me the big 3 are: Quick Scope, Shotguns, and knife;  If they fixed those 3 things then it would be a really good game.  I play BO2 a lot but those things burn my ass all the time, ok wait let's add in spawn points.  I can't tell you how many times I've loaded in and died immediately because I spawned right in front of an enemy.

Small maps are a major problem. Gunfight in a broom closet.

Stop playing ground war then.  There are only a few maps that I would classify as too small, Nuketown (OMG I'm about to uninstall that map from my console) and Hijacked but other than that the rest are fine for 12 people or less.


I don't. I play Planetside 2 or Battlefield 3. Both of those have large maps. Large maps are good.
 
2013-03-14 03:29:41 PM  
I never got into "realistic" historic or modern shooters. I've played Day of Defeat and still play Counterstrike occasionally (that barely counts) but even back in the day BF1942 never grabbed me the way the unreal or half life series did. I used to be insanely good at UT, and even did CAL with CSS for a while, but nowadays most of my FPS time is spent playing TF2 (hatsssssss), and a few single player ones like Bioshock and hybrids like Borderlands, or mass effect. The only historical shooter I've played in recent memory is Dino D-day.

And even with TF2 I probably spend 10x as much time trading as I do playing, only game I've ever made money off of, I rarely buy games on steam anymore even, just trade for them through various tf2 item wheeling and dealing.

Think I might have to play some original UT when I get home, 20:1 nightmare mode bits @ 200% gamespeed and see if I've still got it.
 
2013-03-14 03:36:15 PM  

bifford: I think the first Operation Flashpoint game was the most gripping and emotionally moving games I've ever played.


Have you tried Spec ops: The Line? Absolutely amazing take on the "Heart of Darkness" tale. Be warned, there are some extremely visceral moments that will make anyone cringe.
 
2013-03-14 03:38:07 PM  

J. Frank Parnell: pyrotek85: It seems to be a complete reboot. From what I've read they've even removed the fantasy aspects too.

I'm actually fine with that, as long as it's respectfully done.


Yeah, I just fear it won't be. I feel like by removing the fantasy elements the Thief universe changes too much, and it might as well be a new franchise altogether IMO. It'll probably be a decent game on it's own, but like Deadly Shadows it'll likely pale in comparison to the originals.
 
2013-03-14 03:38:31 PM  

gaspode: How could we have guessed mike lowell would be a COD player, and on top of that one who is convinced being 'good' at that POS makes him a strategic genius?


How the hell did you come to that conclusion?  Did you even read anything I wrote?

Mike_LowELL: But the problem is, none of the games I listed are the class of anything. StarCraft II is an average RTS. Call of Duty (outside of some exceptions) is mostly putrid shiat.

 
2013-03-14 03:51:27 PM  

Shadowknight: some_beer_drinker: doglover: There needs to be more medieval FPS stuff. Recreate the Fall of Rome or something like that. Crossbows and swords and slings and daggers....

i like this idea. i would play that. awesome gore potential.

You guys should look up the Mount and Blade series.  It's not the prettiest thing in the world, but few things can match the exhilaration of plunking that guy just right through his face mask with a cross bow and dropping him off a horse.


Beat me to it.  Been playing that game on and off for years... 3rd person, but a fantastic game... charging through a line of infantry with a lance and heavy warhorse leading your cavalry is about as bad ass as I've ever felt in a video game.
 
2013-03-14 04:09:24 PM  
being a long time gamer i've seen a lot happen and i do know what he's talking about with the thing he calls "skill gap compression"

A great example is BF2 -BF3

2 was  slow paced, low kill count,  high intensity level game(every kill/death matters), and way harder to hit people.

3 is fast paced, but low intensity(you get killed/get a kill within a few seconds every time you spawn and you respawn in a matter of 5 seconds or less. If you did get killed it's not that big a deal whatever point you were guarding/capping can be reached by EVERYONE on the map in just a couple seconds, and you will be back there too in less than 10 seconds if you want to be. Seems like so much less is at stake that it could just be an arena map with no cap points to bother with.
High kill counts, but kills are easy to get just point in that direction and hold down M1. not only are there good odds that you can see and fire at someone no matter where you are within 1-2 seconds of spawning, but "aiming"  is practically done by the computer for me it seems(that was  head shot?).

i did play RO and RO2 a bit thought they came off just a little too hardcore in some ways.
I like that you need to deploy a machine gun to use it, but i don't like that you can absolutely not fire it at all until it's deployed.
Pretty sure if i rounded the trench corner and as faced with the choice of putting my arms out of socket for pulling the trigger or get killed for not, it's going to be an easy choice to make.


I still think BF2/2142 was the pinnacle  of multiplayer FPS games that has yet to be reached again.
 
2013-03-14 04:18:53 PM  

BurningMan03: That's what I was getting at.  Like I said, I've been a console guy my whole life, and Goldeneye was the first game that I can remember where my friends would have get-togethers just so we could all play the game.  It grew the genre in a way that Doom or Wolfenstein never could because of them being PC based.  If you go solely off of console FPS shooters, they haven't changed all that much.  I never played UT, Half-Life, or Counter-strike, although I had friends who were really, really good at CS.

With that being said, I'm glad to have you here to diagnose MY taste in video games.  I'll be sure to re-examine everything I've ever thought about the games I like.


Well, I can't blame you on that front.  Though I was a PC loyalist for years, the life of a family man has shrunk my budget as well as available play space to keep a large desktop system.  My computer room has been downgraded to a gaming laptop, and even my new laptop isn't what I'd call a gaming system.  It's more designed around photo editing (lots of memory and CPU, not so much in the GPU).  So most of my gaming, FPS included, is done on the PS3.  

I'm just saying that I can't get why just running around shooting at anything that moves being enjoyable.  I had to stop playing Rainbow 6 games (one of my favorite series out there) because what was suppose to be a tactical, cover based system turned into people just running around with a shotgun and blasting players and hostages alike.

As far as your "must reevaluate my preferences," get down off your cross.  It was a joke, so calm down.  Though you REALLY should expand your horizons.  A lot of the games the guy in the article worked on are still out there, and can be played on fairly inexpensive laptops.
 
2013-03-14 04:42:33 PM  

PvtStash: being a long time gamer i've seen a lot happen and i do know what he's talking about with the thing he calls "skill gap compression"

A great example is BF2 -BF3

2 was  slow paced, low kill count,  high intensity level game(every kill/death matters), and way harder to hit people.

3 is fast paced, but low intensity(you get killed/get a kill within a few seconds every time you spawn and you respawn in a matter of 5 seconds or less. If you did get killed it's not that big a deal whatever point you were guarding/capping can be reached by EVERYONE on the map in just a couple seconds, and you will be back there too in less than 10 seconds if you want to be. Seems like so much less is at stake that it could just be an arena map with no cap points to bother with.
High kill counts, but kills are easy to get just point in that direction and hold down M1. not only are there good odds that you can see and fire at someone no matter where you are within 1-2 seconds of spawning, but "aiming"  is practically done by the computer for me it seems(that was  head shot?).

i did play RO and RO2 a bit thought they came off just a little too hardcore in some ways.
I like that you need to deploy a machine gun to use it, but i don't like that you can absolutely not fire it at all until it's deployed.
Pretty sure if i rounded the trench corner and as faced with the choice of putting my arms out of socket for pulling the trigger or get killed for not, it's going to be an easy choice to make.


I still think BF2/2142 was the pinnacle  of multiplayer FPS games that has yet to be reached again.


  I disagree. It was Battlefield Vietnam.  Playing co-op and dropping napalm on 50 NVA regulars from a low level F-4 Phantom.... aaaaah, good times.
 
2013-03-14 04:42:40 PM  
Well this seems as good a place as any to ask, so forgive itf it ends up TL; and you DR.

I used to like FPSes, but quit them ages ago. Right when Quake came out. Partially at the time it was because they went full 3D keyboard and mouse instead of keyboard alone, which I found awkward but mainly because every shooter I saw was another dark, po-faced, increasingly realistic game. Over time it became worse, all I saw were games with real weapons, real locations, real soldiers.

Not for me at all. I like my shooters ridiculous and cartoonish and completely over the top with varied locations to explore, with bizarre and fantastic weapons and with colours as bright as a Sega arcade racer.

I like Duke Nukem 3D and Rise of the Triad and Shadow Warrior, games filled with absurdity and pop-culture references, ideally games with a sense of humour about them or at least a distorted, unreal atmosphere.

I thought that Postal 2 would work for me, as it had a lot of promise. I like the mundane missions, the odd weapons and the comical set pieces. I didn't even mind the loading times, but what killed it for me is that

A) the whole premise is that you play a maniacal killer who goes on a rampage while doing ordinary things, but the fact that you spend most of the game being attacked without provocation and thus defending yourself from killers instead of being the killer totally undermines that and

B) most of the time you can't even defend yourself without the polis creeping up on you and putting an immediate stop to the game by throwing you in jail.

It utterly ruined it for me to the point where even being able to pish on Gary Coleman until he vomits wasn't worth it.

So, Farkers, is there something out there that might work for me? I have a laptop that was a pretty good gaming machine seven years ago, a PS2, a PSP and a DS. Also an iphone but I'll be damned if I'm going to play an FPS without any hardware controls. I'd prefer to go with the PC as I think I'll more easily grow accustomed to keyboard and mouse than flailing around trying to aim with a wee thumbstick. But that's me.

In short, I want more of this:

www.duke4.net
 resolution-magazine.co.uk
media.giantbomb.com
YAY, FUN!


and less of this


i199.photobucket.com
pcmedia.ign.com
BOO, NOT FUN!
 
2013-03-14 04:46:19 PM  
Sear

Gordon Bennett: So, Farkers, is there something out there that might work for me?


Serious Sam 3 might work for you... bright colors, cartoony monsters...

A little darker but good one from a few years ago was Painkiller... sorta dark and gritty looking, but the weapons would fit right into Hexen....
 
2013-03-14 04:47:49 PM  
Though SS1 and SS2 were even brighter and more goofy...
 
2013-03-14 04:48:58 PM  

Gordon Bennett: Well this seems as good a place as any to ask, so forgive itf it ends up TL; and you DR.

I used to like FPSes, but quit them ages ago. Right when Quake came out. Partially at the time it was because they went full 3D keyboard and mouse instead of keyboard alone, which I found awkward but mainly because every shooter I saw was another dark, po-faced, increasingly realistic game. Over time it became worse, all I saw were games with real weapons, real locations, real soldiers.

Not for me at all. I like my shooters ridiculous and cartoonish and completely over the top with varied locations to explore, with bizarre and fantastic weapons and with colours as bright as a Sega arcade racer.

I like Duke Nukem 3D and Rise of the Triad and Shadow Warrior, games filled with absurdity and pop-culture references, ideally games with a sense of humour about them or at least a distorted, unreal atmosphere.

I thought that Postal 2 would work for me, as it had a lot of promise. I like the mundane missions, the odd weapons and the comical set pieces. I didn't even mind the loading times, but what killed it for me is that

A) the whole premise is that you play a maniacal killer who goes on a rampage while doing ordinary things, but the fact that you spend most of the game being attacked without provocation and thus defending yourself from killers instead of being the killer totally undermines that and

B) most of the time you can't even defend yourself without the polis creeping up on you and putting an immediate stop to the game by throwing you in jail.

It utterly ruined it for me to the point where even being able to pish on Gary Coleman until he vomits wasn't worth it.

So, Farkers, is there something out there that might work for me? I have a laptop that was a pretty good gaming machine seven years ago, a PS2, a PSP and a DS. Also an iphone but I'll be damned if I'm going to play an FPS without any hardware controls. I'd prefer to go with the PC as I think I'll more easily grow ...


Serious Sam maybe. Just be prepared to fight 300 of something at a time. It takes some getting used to. The new one is just meh. But it has the one-liners and madcap gameplay that you're describing.

On Console, Timesplitters had a lot of real fun stuff. You could maybe find an emulator or dust off an old console.
 
2013-03-14 04:50:44 PM  
Oh, also Team Fortress 2. Obviously it's multiplayer only but it's ridiculously madcap, gameplay is pretty easy to pick up, and oozes character.
 
2013-03-14 04:52:25 PM  

Gordon Bennett: Well this seems as good a place as any to ask, so forgive itf it ends up TL; and you DR.


Another +1 for Serious Sam, oh and maybe Borderlands since its definitely a self-aware game that throws humour and whacky encounters into the mix quite often.
 
2013-03-14 04:57:30 PM  

SuperChuck: , mediocre players who wouldnt last 6 seconds in a game like natural selection or even counter strike.

Every time I see someone use the "MW" shorthand, I get excited it might be about MechWarrior rather than some crappy console shooter.


Sadly I'm more proud of my .38 KDR in Mechwarrior Online than my average 1.2 KDR in Modern Warfare's and Black Ops'.
 
2013-03-14 04:58:23 PM  

BumpInTheNight: Gordon Bennett: Well this seems as good a place as any to ask, so forgive itf it ends up TL; and you DR.

Another +1 for Serious Sam, oh and maybe Borderlands since its definitely a self-aware game that throws humour and whacky encounters into the mix quite often.


Yes, I will definitely try out Serious Sam, that looks like what I'm looking for. I'll also take a look at the others recommended to see what I can run. Many thanks to all for the recommendations.
 
2013-03-14 05:28:44 PM  

PhDemented: Though SS1 and SS2 were even brighter and more goofy...


SS2 does NOT exist.

/I know, I know
//I had it, hated it
///SSFE and SSSE HD was more worth it.
 
2013-03-14 05:30:36 PM  

log_jammin: what eves console kiddie!!


I play AWSD on a laptop keyboard & mouse.
 
2013-03-14 05:39:46 PM  

RoLleRKoaSTeR: PhDemented: Though SS1 and SS2 were even brighter and more goofy...

SS2 does NOT exist.

/I know, I know
//I had it, hated it
///SSFE and SSSE HD was more worth it.


Been a while, can't remember which was which with all the different versions.  I remember playing one that was fun, but which one... <shrug>
 
2013-03-14 06:56:15 PM  
Somewhere upthread people mentioned momentum.  I just want to say that in Halo 4 it bugs the crap out of me.  You spawn, near and facing a teammate, start sprinting forward, he's sprinting toward you, you bump noggins, and you fly back 10 feet.  I should be better at avoiding them, but  they should be better at avoiding me!
 
2013-03-14 07:10:57 PM  

BumpInTheNight: Gordon Bennett: Well this seems as good a place as any to ask, so forgive itf it ends up TL; and you DR.

Another +1 for Serious Sam, oh and maybe Borderlands since its definitely a self-aware game that throws humour and whacky encounters into the mix quite often.


I'll throw in a suggestion for unreal tournament, the original or maybe 2004.  It's somewhat realistic(not cartoony), but you can play as aliens or robots and it has my favorite set of weapons in a FPS.
 
2013-03-14 07:39:53 PM  

J. Frank Parnell: God-is-a-Taco: At least we have Thief 4 to look forward to, right?

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2013/03/13/meet-the-n ew -garrett-from-thief.aspx

Haha just kidding.

I still believe!

Only major disappointment so far is that they didn't go with a female thief, as the ending to Deadly Shadows implied the torch had been passed to a young girl.


Never tried it, but someone made a very slick, huge mod for Thief II where you played as a female thief.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZadVCb8Dpc
 
2013-03-14 07:56:25 PM  
Also, that pic of Thief 4's Garrett as a run-of-the-mill serious business tough guy ninja with eyeliner instead of a haggard, cynical, possibly alcoholic medieval cutpurse with a cybernetic eye does depress the fark out of me.

/never did explain why Garrett is always out of cash, must be a gambler or alchy.
 
2013-03-14 08:42:19 PM  

theurge14: Every day I keep telling myself this is the last day I play Black Ops 2.  The lag is terrible, half the time is spent "migrating hosts", the hitmarkers are awful, the guns are inconsistent, the quickscoping is ridiculous, nobody plays objectives they just camp and boost their KD, everytime I join a Ground War game it's already in progress and some goober on their team is 76-2 with every single scorestreak up at the same time.   And yet I still keep popping in the disc and playing it... I don't know why.

Oh, and the single player campaign reeks.  Boring old guy in wheelchair who cusses unnecessarily too much telling stories to retarded looking young guy who cusses unnecessarily too much.  Yawn.

As a diversion the last week and a half I played the new Tomb Raider and was floored at how great the game was.  The differences in quality of the game didn't fully reveal themselves until I beat Tomb Raider and popped Black Ops 2 back in... ugh, wow.   Treyarch you're terrible.


These.

PanicMan: Same here. It's because it's designed to take advantage of the non-thinking, primeval, pleasure parts of your brain. And after a long stressful day, I kind of need that.

I kind of want it, too. It lets me shut out all the other crap. I may only get a few minutes before I'm interruped with a real world obligation, so I can't play anything deep or complicated. It's a bad habit.


And this.

I have a co-dependent relationship with COD MW3 and any COD game made by Treyarch. But due to schedules and shiat, it's the fastest way to get some gaming jollies before I have to do other stuff. A friend of mine keeps trying to get me into BF3, but he's a griefer, and I'm really not into camping on a hill a 1/4-mile away from the objectives and just sniping people.

Of course, I play on a PS3, so my opinions are pretty much meaningless anyway.
 
2013-03-14 10:26:39 PM  

Nanny Statesman: I care about the turn-based strategy side more than the real-time battles, so I'm really liking it.


Have you tried the Paradox Interactive games? If you find you're only playing the Total War series for the campaign map and are just automating all the battles, you were probably at the same point I was about four years ago. Try out Europa Universalis 3 (it has four expansion packs you can get as a bundle) which covers 1399-1821, or Victoria II (nineteenth century, roughly), or Crusader Kings 2 (1066-14th century).

They put the Total War games to shame in terms of depth and replayability. And, the newest game, Crusader Kings 2, almost matches Total War in graphics.
 
2013-03-14 10:51:25 PM  

Seth'n'Spectrum: Nanny Statesman: I care about the turn-based strategy side more than the real-time battles, so I'm really liking it.

Have you tried the Paradox Interactive games? If you find you're only playing the Total War series for the campaign map and are just automating all the battles, you were probably at the same point I was about four years ago. Try out Europa Universalis 3 (it has four expansion packs you can get as a bundle) which covers 1399-1821, or Victoria II (nineteenth century, roughly), or Crusader Kings 2 (1066-14th century).

They put the Total War games to shame in terms of depth and replayability. And, the newest game, Crusader Kings 2, almost matches Total War in graphics.


I love the Paradox games (especially EU and Hearts of Iron) but I just don't have time to play them anymore.
 
2013-03-14 11:08:51 PM  
i130.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-15 05:15:15 AM  
Call of Duty is like the speed chess version of an FPS. You aren't going to get people who enjoy it to slow down and calculate every move.
 
2013-03-15 07:23:40 AM  

HotWingAgenda: I have Borderlands 2 now, and haven't looked back.


Same. I just need to get a good conference call from a lvl52 warrior and a good bee from hellquist at lvl52 and then killing terramorphous solo won`t be so hard.

Then I can REALLY twink my next character. Orange all the way!
 
2013-03-15 02:03:55 PM  
A big reason the FPS games of today are so different is that the majority of players are controlling the action with a device that is far removed from something that could actually be used to play a FPS. The action, pacing, and design of the game have to take into consideration that the player is heavily handicapped by the controller.

It amazes me that no company has addressed the controller problem considering how popular FPS games are. It's been 20 years and no one has invented something that can outperform a simply keyboard and mouse.
 
2013-03-15 06:08:34 PM  

dragonchild: manimal2878: How many times did you blow your friend?

Once, but I needed a ride reaaallly bad.
 / homophobic idiot is idiot


Homophobic?  I don't care if you love your friend enough to blow him, it's just obvious that you do the way you are gushing over his skillz.
 
2013-03-15 07:32:24 PM  

PhDemented: SearGordon Bennett: So, Farkers, is there something out there that might work for me?

Serious Sam 3 might work for you... bright colors, cartoony monsters...

A little darker but good one from a few years ago was Painkiller... sorta dark and gritty looking, but the weapons would fit right into Hexen....


Wasn't that BulletStorm game along the lines of cartoonish and far from realistic?
 
2013-03-16 02:26:17 PM  

Seth'n'Spectrum: Nanny Statesman: I care about the turn-based strategy side more than the real-time battles, so I'm really liking it.

Have you tried the Paradox Interactive games? If you find you're only playing the Total War series for the campaign map and are just automating all the battles, you were probably at the same point I was about four years ago. Try out Europa Universalis 3 (it has four expansion packs you can get as a bundle) which covers 1399-1821, or Victoria II (nineteenth century, roughly), or Crusader Kings 2 (1066-14th century).

They put the Total War games to shame in terms of depth and replayability. And, the newest game, Crusader Kings 2, almost matches Total War in graphics.




I wish Hegemony could be fixed.
 
Displayed 209 of 209 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report