Can We All Agree That FPS's Aren't Going Anywhere?

Just because you'r enot seeing revolutionary titles doesn't mean you still can't enjoy what's already out: Two examples? STALKER and Dragon Age.

Dragon Age, at its bare bones, is a rehash of every RPG that came before it -- big evila rmy coming to destroy the world and you have to stop them. You fight, stuff happens and you win. Yay. But you can't just kick the game in the trash can because of it, I thoroughly enjoyed it. Heck, if you want to belittle EVERYTHING because it's not "original", then burn down your local Barnes &Nobles/Borders/Half-Price Books because fiction is just a rehash of older fiction. Way to argue. -.-

And on to STALKER: No game as made me save & exit out of fear -- not to mention, as previously said by a fellow STALKER fan, the non-scripted events (I'd disagree with this, it's half and half). It has freedom akin to Crysism though: you can approach a mission how you like. There's bandits wanting to kill a poor stalker in the Yanov Station because of outstanding debts, what do you do? You can pay them, ask for the interest to be lowered or just make the bandit leader eat a shotgun shell (very nutritious, I went this route). And that's not mentioning dozens of other events to make this series in my top ten list of game franchines.

So whine all you want about "no innovation", but keep on conveniently ignoring loads of titles. (Sure I'll get flamed for say that last line, but folks, you have to be more careful with what you say.)

I think you should reread my post. and I don't care if you don't care about my opinion. It's still going to be stated.

Some-Mist

[QUOTE="Some-Mist"]I think you should reread my post. and I don't care if you don't care about my opinion. It's still going to be stated.

Stevo_the_gamer

I only edited the end of that post. the entire time it stated "I wouldn't say it's an underwater hl2, but it's definitely crud." that part hasn't changed since you first saw it so you definitely misread it.

it would take a lot of ignorance for me to say bioshock's a blatant ripoff of hl2.

[QUOTE="DraugenCP"]

[QUOTE="Some-Mist"]seeing as you must have experience with those games, you should enlighten us on what new features they bring to the genre. maybe shed some light on the system wars forum here.Some-Mist

STALKER relies heavily on non-scripted events generated by the fantastic A Life engine, which makes for a unique gaming experience. It combinessemi-realistic ballistics, great AI (both in and outside of combat), unrivalled atmosphere and environments and a whole lot of other concepts. It's the direct opposite of scripted, cinematic shooters such as CoD, and anyone who says modern shooters are nothing more than CoD clones will be proven horribly wrong by STALKER, which is the mirror opposite of the CoD and Halo type of shooters in nearly every way. It also adds survival horror elements and RPG elements to what already is the greatest FPS this generation in itself.

Crysis is great because it is one of the only sandbox games to step away from the'explore world, go on mission' concept. Every level has a beginning and an end, but apart from a few mandatory objectives, the player has total freedom of action in how he handles each combat situation, aided by some powers such as invisibility, extra strength, armour, etc. It's even possible to go through an entire level (which is huge and can last up to 90 minutes) without being spotted even once. It's the best super soldier experience available and miles ahead of nearly everything out there.

That's it in a nutshell. If you want to get a better idea, read my user reviews for the respective games.

fair enough. I've really been meaning to check out the stalker series. you can almost argue that crysis does the same thing as MGS in terms of having many options/paths/freedom in how you choose to complete the mission. yes, I know MGS isn't open world, but the concept is very similar if you ask me.

Assuming that's true (I've never played MGS for more than 10 minutes), that's actually fine. The one thing I like about Crysis is that the stealth actually works - this is not the case in about 95% of the shooters in which the enemies have X-Ray vision and perfect aim. Not to mention the combat is extremely dynamic and satisfying. After having experienced this and Stalker, most other shooters will feel stripped and downgraded. It kind of ruined the CoD single player for me (not that it was phenomenal to begin with).

[QUOTE="Some-Mist"]

[QUOTE="DraugenCP"]

STALKER relies heavily on non-scripted events generated by the fantastic A Life engine, which makes for a unique gaming experience. It combinessemi-realistic ballistics, great AI (both in and outside of combat), unrivalled atmosphere and environments and a whole lot of other concepts. It's the direct opposite of scripted, cinematic shooters such as CoD, and anyone who says modern shooters are nothing more than CoD clones will be proven horribly wrong by STALKER, which is the mirror opposite of the CoD and Halo type of shooters in nearly every way. It also adds survival horror elements and RPG elements to what already is the greatest FPS this generation in itself.

Crysis is great because it is one of the only sandbox games to step away from the'explore world, go on mission' concept. Every level has a beginning and an end, but apart from a few mandatory objectives, the player has total freedom of action in how he handles each combat situation, aided by some powers such as invisibility, extra strength, armour, etc. It's even possible to go through an entire level (which is huge and can last up to 90 minutes) without being spotted even once. It's the best super soldier experience available and miles ahead of nearly everything out there.

That's it in a nutshell. If you want to get a better idea, read my user reviews for the respective games.

DraugenCP

fair enough. I've really been meaning to check out the stalker series. you can almost argue that crysis does the same thing as MGS in terms of having many options/paths/freedom in how you choose to complete the mission. yes, I know MGS isn't open world, but the concept is very similar if you ask me.

Assuming that's true (I've never played MGS for more than 10 minutes), that's actually fine. The one thing I like about Crysis is that the stealth actually works - this is not the case in about 95% of the shooters in which the enemies have X-Ray vision and perfect aim. Not to mention the combat is extremely dynamic and satisfying. After having experienced this and Stalker, most other shooters will feel stripped and downgraded. It kind of ruined the CoD single player for me (not that it was phenomenal to begin with).

It is true but then again MGS wouldn't be considered an FPS either, but a third person stealth/action/shooter or w/e

Are u delusional? Black Ops is adding wager matches which is probably the most inventive thing. EVER. Bioshock was crud, it was half life underwater.Call of Duty has dedicated, non laggy, servers with a caring, honest fan base. You all need to take a break from reach, and realize call of duty ias a new, fun experience everyday. And Left 4Dead sucks because it has no iron sights, I mean come on, Valve is a mess. Sure it was a team game, but Bad company did that first. And Bad Company is a copy of Call of Duty with less shooting and more "tactics" because the weak servers can't handle crap.

rickybigboy83

I have more.

Medal of Honor is a crap made by two develpers. Multi and Single are basically 2 different games. The beta is crud and its a mw2 in battlefields shell. Unrealistic.

MGS is a lame drama that Japanese developers think is interesting. THe gunplay is weak and the story is repetitve. I want a game not a movie. Snake is a lame old guy with a creepy butt.

Halo is a noobfest that takes 1000 bullets to kill. Besides nobody likes alien games. It has a lame red vs blue multi and single is a TERRIBLE story. Master Chief deserved to die because he is so dang annoying with his heroe crap.

Now go cry

[QUOTE="Mystic-G"]

Sadly, simplicity is what wins the shooter market. Something that requires thought will never sell as well as Halo or CoD.

FrozenLiquid

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think what happens in a shooting game is that you have a gun and you shoot someone with it.

I would think the FPS category revolves mainly around shooting. If you want to think like a general play a turn based RPG or something?

[QUOTE="Some-Mist"]seeing as you must have experience with those games, you should enlighten us on what new features they bring to the genre. maybe shed some light on the system wars forum here.DraugenCP

STALKER relies heavily on non-scripted events generated by the fantastic A Life engine, which makes for a unique gaming experience. It combinessemi-realistic ballistics, great AI (both in and outside of combat), unrivalled atmosphere and environments and a whole lot of other concepts. It's the direct opposite of scripted, cinematic shooters such as CoD, and anyone who says modern shooters are nothing more than CoD clones will be proven horribly wrong by STALKER, which is the mirror opposite of the CoD and Halo type of shooters in nearly every way. It also adds survival horror elements and RPG elements to what already is the greatest FPS this generation in itself.

Crysis is great because it is one of the only sandbox games to step away from the'explore world, go on mission' concept. Every level has a beginning and an end, but apart from a few mandatory objectives, the player has total freedom of action in how he handles each combat situation, aided by some powers such as invisibility, extra strength, armour, etc. It's even possible to go through an entire level (which is huge and can last up to 90 minutes) without being spotted even once. It's the best super soldier experience available and miles ahead of nearly everything out there.

That's it in a nutshell. If you want to get a better idea, read my user reviews for the respective games.

they will sadly always be here. Because thats all western gamers want to play . I am getting so sick of these games. lot of them even run on the same damn engine .

dontshackzmii

I hope you are kidding, the reason why shooters are played more than any other genre has to do with a variety of factors, like having a generally strong multiplayer component and hype. If you think they are samey why dont you do yourself a favor and get Red Orchestra 2 when it comes out.

[QUOTE="DraugenCP"]

[QUOTE="Some-Mist"]seeing as you must have experience with those games, you should enlighten us on what new features they bring to the genre. maybe shed some light on the system wars forum here.savagetwinkie

STALKER relies heavily on non-scripted events generated by the fantastic A Life engine, which makes for a unique gaming experience. It combinessemi-realistic ballistics, great AI (both in and outside of combat), unrivalled atmosphere and environments and a whole lot of other concepts. It's the direct opposite of scripted, cinematic shooters such as CoD, and anyone who says modern shooters are nothing more than CoD clones will be proven horribly wrong by STALKER, which is the mirror opposite of the CoD and Halo type of shooters in nearly every way. It also adds survival horror elements and RPG elements to what already is the greatest FPS this generation in itself.

Crysis is great because it is one of the only sandbox games to step away from the'explore world, go on mission' concept. Every level has a beginning and an end, but apart from a few mandatory objectives, the player has total freedom of action in how he handles each combat situation, aided by some powers such as invisibility, extra strength, armour, etc. It's even possible to go through an entire level (which is huge and can last up to 90 minutes) without being spotted even once. It's the best super soldier experience available and miles ahead of nearly everything out there.

That's it in a nutshell. If you want to get a better idea, read my user reviews for the respective games.

As far as I see on the PC new shooters are really slowing down compared to 2007-2009.

does anybody have anymore comments on my posts?

[QUOTE="DraugenCP"]

STALKER relies heavily on non-scripted events generated by the fantastic A Life engine, which makes for a unique gaming experience. It combinessemi-realistic ballistics, great AI (both in and outside of combat), unrivalled atmosphere and environments and a whole lot of other concepts. It's the direct opposite of scripted, cinematic shooters such as CoD, and anyone who says modern shooters are nothing more than CoD clones will be proven horribly wrong by STALKER, which is the mirror opposite of the CoD and Halo type of shooters in nearly every way. It also adds survival horror elements and RPG elements to what already is the greatest FPS this generation in itself.

Crysis is great because it is one of the only sandbox games to step away from the'explore world, go on mission' concept. Every level has a beginning and an end, but apart from a few mandatory objectives, the player has total freedom of action in how he handles each combat situation, aided by some powers such as invisibility, extra strength, armour, etc. It's even possible to go through an entire level (which is huge and can last up to 90 minutes) without being spotted even once. It's the best super soldier experience available and miles ahead of nearly everything out there.

That's it in a nutshell. If you want to get a better idea, read my user reviews for the respective games.

i never left the starting zonesavagetwinkie

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] i never left the starting zonemillerlight89

[QUOTE="millerlight89"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] i never left the starting zonesavagetwinkie

If semi-realistic ballistics, leaning out of cover and bleeding out is uninspiredand clunky, I'd like to know what you want to see in a shooter like STALKER, plus an example.

It's not meant to be a shoo 'em up like TF2, so running and gunning is going to get you shot down faster than a furry at a Star Trek convention. So yeah....if you like Call of Duty, I don't blame oyu -- a lot of people do.

Generally they aren't going anywere. They most just copy cod.

Brink looks like it could change some stuff

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="millerlight89"] O man. Ok I am done here. Hell I doubt you even played it still. That does not prove anything. However if you did play it and you did not even leave the starting zone I still think your claim is laughable. Usually the ones who think STALKER's combat sucks are the people who just can not get the hang of it. I mean it is pretty difficult and it is a step above a console shooter. Sheppard212

If semi-realistic ballistics, leaning out of cover and bleeding out is uninspiredand clunky, I'd like to know what you want to see in a shooter like STALKER, plus an example.

It's not meant to be a shoo 'em up like TF2, so running and gunning is going to get you shot down faster than a furry at a Star Trek convention. So yeah....if you like Call of Duty, I don't blame oyu -- a lot of people do.

It doesn't have semi realistic anything in that game, semi realistic balllistics would be bc2, bullets have a travel time and drop with gravity, guns just work horriby in it and enemies have no reaction to bullets, terrible ai, so combat is peak out of corner, empty clip into person, they aren't very aggressive, and pretty stupid so its not very exciting at all.savagetwinkie

Guns in STALKER have bullet drop, bullet flatness, recoil, the same accuracy they would have in real life, and in the later STALKER games these settings can even be adjusted and improved. Then again, you have only played the first few minutes of the game with the crappiest gun available, so you wouldn't know.

borderlands and portals are totally going somewhere

I can't agree completely, but I agree that the genre is stagnating. The last FPS I really enjoyed was Vietcong.

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"]It doesn't have semi realistic anything in that game, semi realistic balllistics would be bc2, bullets have a travel time and drop with gravity, guns just work horriby in it and enemies have no reaction to bullets, terrible ai, so combat is peak out of corner, empty clip into person, they aren't very aggressive, and pretty stupid so its not very exciting at all.DraugenCP

Guns in STALKER have bullet drop, bullet flatness, recoil, the same accuracy they would have in real life, and in the later STALKER games these settings can even be adjusted and improved. Then again, you have only played the first few minutes of the game with the crappiest gun available, so you wouldn't know.

[QUOTE="DraugenCP"]

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"]It doesn't have semi realistic anything in that game, semi realistic balllistics would be bc2, bullets have a travel time and drop with gravity, guns just work horriby in it and enemies have no reaction to bullets, terrible ai, so combat is peak out of corner, empty clip into person, they aren't very aggressive, and pretty stupid so its not very exciting at all.savagetwinkie

Guns in STALKER have bullet drop, bullet flatness, recoil, the same accuracy they would have in real life, and in the later STALKER games these settings can even be adjusted and improved. Then again, you have only played the first few minutes of the game with the crappiest gun available, so you wouldn't know.

There's a name for this phenomenon....

Ah yes, that. You obviously haven't played the game other than ten minutes. The enemies react the your guns, but have you tried a difficulty other than Rookie?

[QUOTE="DraugenCP"]

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"]It doesn't have semi realistic anything in that game, semi realistic balllistics would be bc2, bullets have a travel time and drop with gravity, guns just work horriby in it and enemies have no reaction to bullets, terrible ai, so combat is peak out of corner, empty clip into person, they aren't very aggressive, and pretty stupid so its not very exciting at all.savagetwinkie

Guns in STALKER have bullet drop, bullet flatness, recoil, the same accuracy they would have in real life, and in the later STALKER games these settings can even be adjusted and improved. Then again, you have only played the first few minutes of the game with the crappiest gun available, so you wouldn't know.

In the starting area, you generally only find some of the dodgy pistols, a sawed off shotgun and maybe a machine gun, only the last of which is relevant. The weapons carried by the NPCs in the starting area are generally the same poor 2-3 weapons. In fact, most people who say STALKER's gunplay is bad have not actually gotten past this part as it is unbalanced and tends to put people off. For what it's worth, here's a video I shot with X-Fire in the vehicle station at the start with a non-crappy gun.

http://www.xfire.com/video/36f1ff/

(Excuse the poor resolution.)

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="DraugenCP"]

Guns in STALKER have bullet drop, bullet flatness, recoil, the same accuracy they would have in real life, and in the later STALKER games these settings can even be adjusted and improved. Then again, you have only played the first few minutes of the game with the crappiest gun available, so you wouldn't know.

Sheppard212

There's a name for this phenomenon....

Ah yes, that. You obviously haven't played the game other than ten minutes. The enemies react the your guns, but have you tried a difficulty other than Rookie?

edit: and don't call me a troll because I don't see the game the same way you do. I played it and if you just want to ignore my points and opinions about the game I suggest you go do something else.

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="DraugenCP"]

Guns in STALKER have bullet drop, bullet flatness, recoil, the same accuracy they would have in real life, and in the later STALKER games these settings can even be adjusted and improved. Then again, you have only played the first few minutes of the game with the crappiest gun available, so you wouldn't know.

DraugenCP

In the starting area, you generally only find some of the dodgy pistols, a sawed off shotgun and maybe a machine gun, only the last of which is relevant. The weapons carried by the NPCs in the starting area are generally the same poor 2-3 weapons. In fact, most people who say STALKER's gunplay is bad have not actually gotten past this part as it is unbalanced and tends to put people off. For what it's worth, here's a video I shot with X-Fire in the vehicle station at the start with a non-crappy gun.

http://www.xfire.com/video/36f1ff/

(Excuse the poor resolution.)

[QUOTE="Sheppard212"]

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] no i had a lot of weapons, after letting 2 bases murder each other which took them like 2 hours, I looted their corpses and got other weapons, I didn't notice any of these things, playing the game it just felt like crap, its like bullets could shoot at a 45 degree angle out of the barrel, my BB gun has better accuracy then that. If stalker was realistic I don't think guns would even be used since a knife is more reliable.savagetwinkie

There's a name for this phenomenon....

Ah yes, that. You obviously haven't played the game other than ten minutes. The enemies react the your guns, but have you tried a difficulty other than Rookie?

edit: and don't call me a troll because I don't see the game the same way you do. I played it and if you just want to ignore my points and opinions about the game I suggest you go do something else.

I just tried it out, and an AK works just fine at a 20-30 yard range. The bullets hit straight were I put them at that distance, so the accuracy would probably remain in tact for much larger distances, although I didn't find the chance to test that yet. You just have to make sure you fire in spurts or even switch to 1-bullet mode like I occasionally do, as the recoil is quite big and emptying a magazine will generally make bullets spray around in a much larger radius.

But really, the accuracy of the AK-74irl is known to be quite horrendous when using an iron sight likeI did, so it shouldn't be used for long ranges in STALKER anyway.

I disagree about the AI. The thing about it is that the animation and ragdoll is generally quite crappy, and the AI itself can be quite buggy, so that all gives it an air of clumsiness. But if you see how they actually move through combat areas, adopt to fighting situations and maneuver around the player(I've had enemy AI actually move through several rooms in a building to catch me from behind), I can't really think of an FPS that does it this good, except maybe FEAR (although FEAR relies on much more conservative environments, giving the AI more time to shine).

[QUOTE="millerlight89"]Nope I can not agree on that. By the way Mirror's Edge is not a FPS. ichc1000x

It's in first-person, and you kill people with guns....sounds like an FPS to me.

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"]

[QUOTE="Sheppard212"]

There's a name for this phenomenon....

Ah yes, that. You obviously haven't played the game other than ten minutes. The enemies react the your guns, but have you tried a difficulty other than Rookie?

DraugenCP

edit: and don't call me a troll because I don't see the game the same way you do. I played it and if you just want to ignore my points and opinions about the game I suggest you go do something else.

I just tried it out, and an AK works just fine at a 20-30 yard range. The bullets hit straight were I put them at that distance, so the accuracy would probably remain in tact for much larger distances, although I didn't find the chance to test that yet. You just have to make sure you fire in spurts or even switch to 1-bullet mode like I occasionally do, as the recoil is quite big and emptying a magazine will generally make bullets spray around in a much larger radius.

But really, the accuracy of the AK-74irl is known to be quite horrendous when using an iron sight likeI did, so it shouldn't be used for long ranges in STALKER anyway.

I disagree about the AI. The thing about it is that the animation and ragdoll is generally quite crappy, and the AI itself can be quite buggy, so that all gives it an air of clumsiness. But if you see how they actually move through combat areas, adopt to fighting situations and maneuver around the player(I've had enemy AI actually move through several rooms in a building to catch me from behind), I can't really think of an FPS that does it this good, except maybe FEAR (although FEAR relies on much more conservative environments, giving the AI more time to shine).

edit: and when i had the ak it was mainly close range, what i ended up doing was trying to take one shot at a time.

i don't remember seeing them adapt to anything, i've never seen enemies more cumbersome, but unless they patched this, it was a day one purchase for me, and it pissed me off royally, i've never seen them do any more then stumble around and have far superior weapons to mine, even the same weapon seemed to be more accurate in their hands.

edit: and when i had the ak it was mainly close range, what i ended up doing was trying to take one shot at a time.

savagetwinkie

All I can say is that I experienced it differently. I've finished both the unpatched and the modded version of the game, and I still find the AI to be really impressive despite of a few goofy quirks.

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"]i don't remember seeing them adapt to anything, i've never seen enemies more cumbersome, but unless they patched this, it was a day one purchase for me, and it pissed me off royally, i've never seen them do any more then stumble around and have far superior weapons to mine, even the same weapon seemed to be more accurate in their hands.

edit: and when i had the ak it was mainly close range, what i ended up doing was trying to take one shot at a time.

All I can say is that I experienced it differently. I've finished both the unpatched and the modded version of the game, and I still find the AI to be really impressive despite of a few goofy quirks.

[QUOTE="ichc1000x"]

[QUOTE="Slashkice"]

Mirror's Edge wasn't a shooter.

But yeah, most games in the genre do little to innovate, but it's not like games have to do something completely new in order to be good.

davidkamayor

That's not what I'm trying to say. Most FPS's I play feel really derivative nowadays.

Well to be fair most of them are sequels.

The Darkness was awesome (I played it for the very first time a couple months ago), but it was way too short and easy.

[QUOTE="DraugenCP"]

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"]i don't remember seeing them adapt to anything, i've never seen enemies more cumbersome, but unless they patched this, it was a day one purchase for me, and it pissed me off royally, i've never seen them do any more then stumble around and have far superior weapons to mine, even the same weapon seemed to be more accurate in their hands.

edit: and when i had the ak it was mainly close range, what i ended up doing was trying to take one shot at a time.

savagetwinkie

All I can say is that I experienced it differently. I've finished both the unpatched and the modded version of the game, and I still find the AI to be really impressive despite of a few goofy quirks.

While storming the garage area with a dinky pistol isn't the greatest thing in the world, I wouldn't recommend giving it up. For me, it was the "Use cover and strategy" card that helped to cement a solid gaming experience. :)

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="DraugenCP"]

All I can say is that I experienced it differently. I've finished both the unpatched and the modded version of the game, and I still find the AI to be really impressive despite of a few goofy quirks.

While storming the garage area with a dinky pistol isn't the greatest thing in the world, I wouldn't recommend giving it up. For me, it was the "Use cover and strategy" card that helped to cement a solid gaming experience. :)

FPS is getting stale in general imo. I really appreciate a game like Far Cry/Crysis trying to introduce a quasi-open world aspect to the genre. These are the only two I'd say brought in any real innovation to the genre in a very long time. Half Life 2 was good with its physics, but imo that was a natural progression (although it did it the best and arguably still does). I want some real open world FPS games; that would be killer. Let's see how Rage turns out but in all honesty I don't get hyped for Id games anymore. They seem to be more about making engines.

MPFPS is ridiculously stale. The market is oversaturated with multiplayer shooters and it's really lame because the best MPFPS games are those that came about in the late 90s/early 2000s (or their later variations). I'm talking of course of the Unreal Tournaments, Quake IIIs, Team Fortresses and Counter-Strikes. These are still the best MPFPS games on the market which is kinda lame. First time I played the original CS I was soooo happy. I loved the game so much and thought how amazing FPS's would be ten/fiteen years down the line and it's very disappointed that CS still holds the crown of best core shooting gameplay dynamics.

There's way too much FPS this gen but what can you do? It's the most fun genre imho, though it is getting very stale.