FPSs are starting to feel the same. The genre needs to evolve.

There were a lot of innovative first person games in the 90's, like Montezuma's Return which invented first person platformer 10 years before Mirror's Edge. You could also see your character model in first person, most games even today don't have this feature.

Also Jurassic Park: Trespasser, which is arguably the most innovative game ever made. Just google it.

1997 & 1998 seemed to be the years of innovation. Too bad these days generic derivative crap sells so much that nobody really tries to innovate anymore.

They've already tried to evolve it with Thief which emphasize stealth over combat. But nobody really cared about it, the game sell failed to meet the expectations 'cause gamers are only into shooting, shooting and shooting. So, why would the developers bother to try to evolve it again if they know shooting is the only thing that's appealing to gamers?

Guyper

I noticed this about five years ago.MrDziekuje

Mirror's Edge and Cryostasis show how flexible the FPS formula as with modification the formula managed to perfectly do platformer and survival horror.

FPSes are evolving, STALKER set up the path towards open ended FPSes, Half-Life episodes push cinematic content to new level while incrasing the interactivity. Crysis is putting the genre on new levels of combat flexibility

The problem is few devs try to follow the examples above and expand upon them,

Heck...the biggest FPS success of recent years financialy is CoD4 and WaW and those not only do not evolve the genre, they actualy devolve it to the state from 90s

AdrianWerner

Cinematic, interactive content is just another coat of paint. It adds nothing meaningful to the gameplay at all..DrinkDuff

Another thing is NPC buddy, Episode1 is the first game ever when such buddy actualy works like he's supposed to, both gameplay and most of all interaction-wise. Alyx in Ep1 and Ep2 is a true revolution in terms of NPC characters in videogames, the first character that actualy feels like a character, not a bot

hmmm no its not, mybe console shooters ok, but pc shooters are vastly different and not so generic on pc you have realistic games like ArmA less realistic games like CS:S than unrealistic games like Quake 4 and Unreal 3, than again games like CoD that are mix of both.. etc. lot more variety than on console, ok yes console have some of these games but they are nowhere near their pc counterparts_rpg_FAN

Kojima FPS please, FPS centered around a Kojima-like story = Godlike. Toriko42

There were a lot of innovative first person games in the 90's, like Montezuma's Return which invented first person platformer 10 years before Mirror's Edge. You could also see your character model in first person, most games even today don't have this feature.

Also Jurassic Park: Trespasser, which is arguably the most innovative game ever made. Just google it.

1997 & 1998 seemed to be the years of innovation. Too bad these days generic derivative crap sells so much that nobody really tries to innovate anymore.

HenriH-42

>

^

I'd also add 1999 and 2000 witch gave us complex hybrids like System Shock 2, Deus Ex and also UT (A.I. choices and mutators) and even NOLF (to a much much lesser degre).

I think shooters started to go down after 2000 due to the PS2/Xbox and then PS3/360.

[QUOTE="Leejjohno"][QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"] The same could be said for collecting health packs. Let's not forget that HL2 was an adventure-FPS vs. the war-based FPS that use regenerating health.Johnny-n-Roger

Well, this is the challenge that lies ahead for developers. I just don't think recharging health or shields are the answer.

No, but to some people, realism IS fun, but for me there should be middle ground, what's wrong with a realistic sci-fi game?

I think the genre's in a good place. :)inertk

Well, some people just prefer creative games.

[QUOTE="inertk"]I think the genre's in a good place. :)Leejjohno

Well, some people just prefer creative games.

Well, this is the challenge that lies ahead for developers. I just don't think recharging health or shields are the answer.

No, but to some people, realism IS fun, but for me there should be middle ground, what's wrong with a realistic sci-fi game?

People dont want the genre to change! All FPS are about is constant killing with weapons, If you wanna play something which resembles abit of variation then go and play the Metroid Prime franchise.Dibdibdobdobo

[QUOTE="Leejjohno"][QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"] What's wrong with recharging health? If you're looking for realism, play Rainbow Six: Rogue Spear or Operation: Flashpoint. One shot kills =/= more fun.Soulja_West

No, but to some people, realism IS fun, but for me there should be middle ground, what's wrong with a realistic sci-fi game?

That would be too casual for my taste. Games need to have compromise for them to make the player feel like he has something to lose, which is what games like gears don't have.

No, but to some people, realism IS fun, but for me there should be middle ground, what's wrong with a realistic sci-fi game?

That would be too casual for my taste. Games need to have compromise for them to make the player feel like he has something to lose, which is what games like gears don't have.

Killzone 2 is the first to implement a cover system in a FPS.SeanDiff

Killzone 2 is the first to implement a cover system in a FPS.SeanDiff

[QUOTE="SeanDiff"]Killzone 2 is the first to implement a cover system in a FPS.Johnny-n-Roger

[QUOTE="SeanDiff"]Killzone 2 is the first to implement a cover system in a FPS.Johnny-n-Roger

[QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"][QUOTE="SeanDiff"]Killzone 2 is the first to implement a cover system in a FPS.Dibdibdobdobo

Vegas 1 had it too, never forget

[QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"][QUOTE="SeanDiff"]Killzone 2 is the first to implement a cover system in a FPS.Dibdibdobdobo

[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"] Perfect Dark Zero? :|Lief_Ericson

Vegas 1 had it too, never forget

[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"] Perfect Dark Zero? :|mitu123

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"] Rainbow 6: Vegas 2 had one also.Dibdibdobdobo

[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="fluxorator"] Regenerating health is killing FPS. Get shot 300 times, hide behind a rock for 5 seconds and run back out. Honestly... What a joke.Cherokee_Jack

[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"][QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"] Perfect Dark Zero? :|mitu123

t's done to preserve pacing.lowe0

Not to mention it removes diversity from action.

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"] Rainbow 6: Vegas 2 had one also.AdrianWerner

[QUOTE="lowe0"]t's done to preserve pacing.AdrianWerner

Not to mention it removes diversity from action.

[QUOTE="lowe0"]t's done to preserve pacing.AdrianWerner

Not to mention it removes diversity from action.

Usually while my health is restoring, I'm keeping an eye on my flanks and rear to assure that I'm actually "in cover". You're constantly involved in the action. What IS redundant is waiting until the combat is over and backtracking through previously expored areas of no importance to find a health station or health pack. There really is no other reasonable alternative to this.Johnny-n-Roger

Med kits are better solution. Just done in a way Max Payne or FEAR did it...ie not a stationary place, but a collectable health packs that can be used later on whenever you choose. It's the best solution for arcade shooters, no backtracking, but at the same time limited health.

I

Also..in plenty of games with health stations you can't really backtrack to the last one.

Regen is simply boring, it breaks the action, it makes the gameplay shallower, because of it you always fight in the same way. With constant health you always do get some variety, you act diffrently when in full health and diffrently when you're low on it

[QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"] Usually while my health is restoring, I'm keeping an eye on my flanks and rear to assure that I'm actually "in cover". You're constantly involved in the action. What IS redundant is waiting until the combat is over and backtracking through previously expored areas of no importance to find a health station or health pack. There really is no other reasonable alternative to this.AdrianWerner

Med kits are better solution. Just done in a way Max Payne or FEAR did it...ie not a stationary place, but a collectable health packs that can be used later on whenever you choose. It's the best solution for arcade shooters, no backtracking, but at the same time limited health.

I

Also..in plenty of games with health stations you can't really backtrack to the last one.

Regen is simply boring, it breaks the action, it makes the gameplay shallower, because of it you always fight in the same way. With constant health you always do get some variety, you act diffrently when in full health and diffrently when you're low on it

Why are you arguing with the Halo kids, they aren't going to understand the concept of challenging games?

I mentioned it as someone said Killzone 2 was 1st. Its like saying Halo was the 1st FPS to impliment dual-anaolog controls though it was either Golden Eye or Perfect Dark. Dibdibdobdobo

[QUOTE="Cherokee_Jack"][QUOTE="lowe0"] It's done to preserve pacing. Once you get far away enough from combat to heal, the rest of the trudge back to the last medikit you saw is pure tedium. Why make the player spend a couple minutes of non-fun?lowe0

Metroid and Mirrors Edge have really been the only innovative FPS games I've played.swade

[QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"] Usually while my health is restoring, I'm keeping an eye on my flanks and rear to assure that I'm actually "in cover". You're constantly involved in the action. What IS redundant is waiting until the combat is over and backtracking through previously expored areas of no importance to find a health station or health pack. There really is no other reasonable alternative to this.AdrianWerner

Med kits are better solution. Just done in a way Max Payne or FEAR did it...ie not a stationary place, but a collectable health packs that can be used later on whenever you choose. It's the best solution for arcade shooters, no backtracking, but at the same time limited health.

I

Also..in plenty of games with health stations you can't really backtrack to the last one.

Regen is simply boring, it breaks the action, it makes the gameplay shallower, because of it you always fight in the same way. With constant health you always do get some variety, you act diffrently when in full health and diffrently when you're low on it

[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"]t's done to preserve pacing.lowe0

Not to mention it removes diversity from action.

Medic packs normally dropped from enemies you killed or were put in locations where you had to walk. I have no idea where you are coming with this walking back non-sense. This btw is for the majority of PC FPS I am talking about.

So what, you hit a hot key and you're all better? How is that any less shallow then regen?Johnny-n-Roger

Regen simply completely destroys the pacing, you constantly run like a rat and wait and wait and wait for regen, then some action and then again waiting... action..waiting. It makes the games horribly schematic.

[QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"] So what, you hit a hot key and you're all better? How is that any less shallow then regen?AdrianWerner

Regen simply completely destroys the pacing, you constantly run like a rat and wait and wait and wait for regen, then some action and then again waiting... action..waiting. It makes the games horribly schematic.

On a side note, although Far Cry 2 was basically crap, it had a good balance between the two. You could heal yourself after taking cover but it takes time, but you can do it as much as you want. It's over the top though, I don't care who you are, there is no human out there who could pull a twisted rebar out of his own leg.

[QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"] So what, you hit a hot key and you're all better? How is that any less shallow then regen?AdrianWerner

Regen simply completely destroys the pacing, you constantly run like a rat and wait and wait and wait for regen, then some action and then again waiting... action..waiting. It makes the games horribly schematic.

[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"]

[QUOTE="Johnny-n-Roger"] So what, you hit a hot key and you're all better? How is that any less shallow then regen?mitu123

Regen simply completely destroys the pacing, you constantly run like a rat and wait and wait and wait for regen, then some action and then again waiting... action..waiting. It makes the games horribly schematic.

Far Cry2 also had good idea, because you had to heal yourself when dying and it would take time and if you were prevented from it..then bam, you were dead, it wasn't perfect, but it a huge improvement over the regular regen

I think for arcade fpses the ideal solution is if you have let's say 100 points of health total, then having regen for first 20 points and then the rest be replenished by collectible health packs