Getting tired of fps genre..?

[mcj metroid]

I really got tired of this genre late into the original xbox life..

But They seem just as popular as they ever were.. It's no secret that it's the dominant genre at the moment and has been for the last few years.

 

In the early 90's plaforming was the biz.. But that was so broad. Look at how completely different sonic and mario were? But I do agree most were just silly immitators.. And I got tired of that until 3d made it worthwhile again..

 

When goldeneye came out It was fantastic there was nothing like it.

 

And I went through all the fps games since for a while like red faction, timeplitters, serious sam, halo, doom, quake, duke nukem.. But it's lost it's charm for me..

I know the wii is only getting started with it.. but for me no split-screen for conduit = no buy..

I have enjoyed a few lately like cod4.. But ONly play it at someone elses place for multiplayer.

 

I also must confess I was never a pc gamer either.

 

My Questions for this thread simply are:

Do you find yourself playing fps games as much as ever? What keeps you playing them?

HOW long do you think the genre's major popularity will last and what will come afterwards?

 

 

I also realise that this is a bit of a weird topic to have in the wii section as there are barely any fps games on the wii but there are STILL some I guess.

[Shino]

PC being one of my platforms of choice I still do play a lot of FPSs, and I can't say I'm bored of them, but I do am a lot more selective about what I play than other people, I'll play Half-life, TF2, L4D, Portal, COD, Battlefield but anything that looks like "another one" I won't care.

 

The problem isn't with the genre itself, its the saturation of the same styled games with bald space marines and angry people or WW2 games. I feel for example RPG are a lot more stale as a genre, FPS allow for more creativity.

[killer kirby]

Well the only game I only like that I might still play from time to time is Call Of Duty 4, nothing else interests me.

[dwarf]

I think FPSs are great, as long as they have their own style. I enjoy Resistance 2 because of its more arcade approach and KZ2 because it's a bit more tactical.

Wii is just waiting for the Conduit right now because while Call of Duty, Medal of Honour etc are good games, they don't really offer anything new, it's really only the controls and decent online mode that saves them.

 

I think it really is all about the maps, weapons and pace in the end though because each set has their own defining features and they are always being altered & improved.

[Pit-Jr]

short answer, yes. There have been some great ones put forth lately, but they do start to feel samey when played back to back.

 

I should wait a few months before playing another one

[Tellyn]

PC being one of my platforms of choice I still do play a lot of FPSs, and I can't say I'm bored of them, but I do am a lot more selective about what I play than other people, I'll play Half-life, TF2, L4D, Portal, COD, Battlefield but anything that looks like "another one" I won't care.

 

The problem isn't with the genre itself, its the saturation of the same styled games with bald space marines and angry people or WW2 games. I feel for example RPG are a lot more stale as a genre, FPS allow for more creativity.

 

I agree with this. I'm incredibly selective when it comes to FPS games. I usually find that I never feel motivated to finish the single player mode, so for me, multiplayer is where the game sinks or swims.

 

And yes, traipsing through screen upon screen upon screen of BROWN isn't my idea of a good FPS experience.

[Choze]

FPS are highly innovative or they would not be so popular now. Recently you also had Mirror's Edge which is a breakaway of the genre.

 

COD is very generic for example. Its pretty much the NFS of the genre. To others like Battlefield (multi only)which are very influential but not so popular.

 

The old developers are kind of lazy right now so its been good that others have picked up the slack. The European side has been great with games like Killzone 2, Battlefield, Crysis and Stalker. But lets see what id and the others come up with, right now they are in milk mode though.

 

Looking forward to see what games like MAG and Crysis do on consoles. PC fps are pretty much too quiet now.

Edited June 17, 2009 by Choze

[Chris the great]

in a word, no. i love the FPS, it's one of the more open genras. i suppose if you keep going for the same old guff, you'd get bored, but the quality titles tend to push the boat out a little. i mean, farcry 2 is an fps, but bears almost no simularity to say, call of duty 4, which is again very different to mirror's edge.

 

i think that the problem is viewing each genra as set. in reality, games like fallout 3 take elements from the pfs and combine it with the RPG, to the stage were it isnt set to a single genra.

[Ganepark32]

I'd say I fall into the 'Yes' and 'No' brackets. With FPS titles that fail to push the envelope beyond that which is already available elsewhere, I'd rather not know. While I did play through the latest Call of Duty, I just did enjoy the experience as much, in both single and multiplayer, as I did with Call of Duty. I think we're all tired of seeing the same shooters being release with slightly different locales and a few different guns.

 

But then I also love the genre. It's given me some of my favourite games, and these are the FPSs which have stepped away from the norm and tried something different. The likes of Portal, Bioshock, Left 4 Dead and even Mirrors Edge are not only some of the best games this generation but some of the best that the industry has ever created because of their originality. You could be forgiven for thinking the FPS genre was tired and out date before this generation of consoles but the likes of the titles I've just mentioned show that there is much more to give in the genre than some developers would have you believe. Yes it's a risk to provide a new and original idea in the FPS view/genre because who knows if it'll work. Portal was alright because it had Valve behind it and so a legion of Half Life 2 fans would make the cross over, like wise with Left 4 Dead, but the others had to start from scratch and we've seen them doing, in Bioshock's case, extremely well. The idea that a new idea will alienate fans is poppycock because these titles have showed people will still play them. I'd just like to see more originality in the genre, in a similar vain to what these titles brought, and things like Singularity look to be doing just that.

 

With the Wii, I wouldn't say the genre has had enough input to become tired yet. Red Steel, Medal of Honor and Call of Duty make up the jist of what's available and while Red Steel tried something new, it just became a bog standard shooter more than anything. There's clearly room for the genre to grow on the Wii, as titles like Metroid Prime 3 and MoH:H2 have shown exactly how good the controls can be, and the likes of The Conduit and Red Steel 2 should push the envelope that bit for the Wii.

[Retro_Link]

Personally I've never really been into the genre.

The only FPS's I've ever bought were Goldeneye and Perfect Dark!

 

A FPS would need to be something very different to grab my interest these days.

[Paj!]

I can't stand FPS games. I'm just shit at them. Can't control them for shit. Never know what the hell's going on etc. Just get killed instantly trying to back out a room.

[Deathjam]

Sooooooooo tired of them. May have been tired for years, which is funny because I don't think I have played that many. Just most of the great ones on the PC around the half life time period and beyond, the ones on the N64, and quite a few on the PS2. Thing is, they always had to have a hook, a sci-fi bent or could never be WW2 or similarly themed.

Nowadays I am super selective. I only play franchises I know I like or shooters from trusted developers, alwats wary to try something new, as really I don't have the patience for that. Even the beautiful ones like crysis are a little stale. Prefarably they need to have an RPG element to them like Fallout, Bioshock and Deus Ex otherwise my interest from the single player wanes very quickly and even now, I only own the first two of that list and Killzone 2 in a games collection that is probably nearing 20 games. I don't feel a need to get another unless it's a sequel to one of these.

On steam, I own the typical valve lot but thats about it, and if they were in physical cases, they would have gathered quite a lot of dust by now.

Edited June 17, 2009 by Deathjam

[darksnowman]

Not sure where I stand with the FPS genre. I loved Doom and Quake on the PC... and Duke Nukem 3D even more. Never liked the keyboard and mouse set up though- found it very cumbersome. Then came the N64 which for me (as well as many other Nintendo gamers) was a time when FPS games were the order of the day. The Turok games, GoldenEye, Duke Nukem, Quake, Perfect Dark and more... The controller fitted perfectly. Using the 3D stick to look around and the C buttons for movement made Duke Nukem all the better compared to how it felt on the PC!

 

Since then though, FPS games have been a non-event for me. Didn't like Timesplitters that much but Red Faction 2's destructible environments were fun. I found that I wasn't a huge fan of using the dual analogue set-up as well which obviously put a dampner on things, lol.

 

Then came the Wii and I was quick to buy Red Steel. Clearly a game with flaws but one that I had a great time playing nonetheless. I've played a few deathmatches which were decent enough actually- could have even been as great as the regular Dukematches I had back in the day if I was still able to get some friends together as frequently as back then.

 

I'm looking forward to Red Steel 2 and Moon on DS. I miss out on the neverending catalogue of Xbox 360 and PS3 FPS titles but I don't actually feel like I'm missing out that much. I'm happy enough with FPS games being few and far between on Nintendo machines as it means its easier to keep tabs on them.

 

 

 

To this day I still can't decide which is better out of GoldenEye and Duke Nukem 64!

[mcj metroid]

To this day I still can't decide which is better out of GoldenEye and Duke Nukem 64!

 

want me to help you out with that one?

[Grazza]

The only FPS I've ever enjoyed is Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath on the original Xbox. I tried Halo 2 as well, but found it terribly aggressive.

 

This is a large part of the problem. Much of their appeal is as macho, testosterone-fuelled experiences (or at least what people think is macho), but I've never been into that sort of stuff. This is also why they're always grey and brown. I dare say they are not strictly created in the spirit of traditional gaming, rather they are more for the "Loaded/FHM" audience (no offence intended to those who like them).

 

The other problem is that it's seeming incredibly old-fashioned to have a game set entirely in 1st-person perspective. I've never liked the lack of peripheral vision or not seeing your character in the context of their environment. I reckon Ocarina of Time had it right all those years ago - only going into 1st-person for when you particularly needed to aim. I realise FPSes are all about aiming. Perhaps that's the problem?

[dwarf]

Half Life 2 and the first 2 Primes I think set the example for where FPS should be more focused on. It isn't all about the shooting in those games, it's about the environments, story and other mechanics that keep it interesting.

I still want my online FPS fix (I'll always buy the next Resistance or KZ) but maybe there should be more like the above.

[Fused King]

They just need to sort of fuse all the major FPS's together, create a HUGE battlefield (like 500.000 people in one room, ya know, .....fighting a real war) get some sort of intriguing storyline in it and be done with the genre ONCE AND FOR ALL!!!

 

So much has been tried and done, but the concept has remained the same which IMO has kept the genre very fixed.

 

Just get everything available of this genre in one game and don't make another one for about 3 years or so......

I do tend to think that there are way too many games on the market and, with me having little time on my hands, makes it hard to play them all.....

 

"Confessions of an idealistic f00l":zzz:

[dwarf]

Yeah that would be dumb, it's like trying to cram in every genre into one game just not with quite as wide a variety (but still quite a lot of variation in FPS to be honest) turning it into a Warioware farce.

 

*I like Warioware*

[DazzeL]

The single player FPS is incredibly stale imo. Bioshock, Fallout, Deus Ex are NOT FPS's in the same way that Oblivion is also not. They're RPG's through and through but just use a first person perspective - that's a completely different thing that's being confused here. I'm not sure about Prime, maybe sits somewhere in the middle although the lock on does lean towards the RPG genre. An FPS true shouldn't really have a look on - the main hook of the genre is the aiming.

 

So let's talk about the games that actually are FPS's. Half Life 1 and 2 deserve praise, for me they're the pinnacle of the single player FPS. I did enjoy CoD4 especially but the "set piece" story in your face style is getting a little tired. CoD is so damn scripted it's almost on rails! Even games that have tried to change this trend and go more "openworld" have failed to hook me in recent years. Crysis looked nice but I didn't think it was anything special and Far Cry 2 did a good job and felt different but I was still never addicted.

 

I think the genre has changed in recent years, in a fundamental way. The focus now is on multiplayer and targetting either a mass-market casual user base or the hardcore teams and clans scene. The best examples have always been able to attract both - CS, Battlefield 2, CoD 2 and CoD 4 and to an extent also TF2. For me, the sheer competitiveness of a good, team based online FPS playing in ladders and leagues is still awesome, even if I don't have the time to do it any more. The PC still does this amazingly well but the consoles have watered this down and leaned towards the larger casual user base. As a result there's a lot of "shit" in modern FPS's that has put me off of them. Things like crappy airstrikes and helicopters in CoD 4 and levelling up features that undermine a fair playing field. The real appeal, for actual hardcore gamers and not those 360 and ps3 players that have this label applied to them because they play Call of Duty and Halo, the experience of recent years is a real shame. The fact that we now need a third party mod just to play a competitive match of CoD4 and get rid of all this unfair crap put in to appeal to the mainstream is a step backwards.

 

This, for me, is where the Wii presents an opportunity. The onus is on gameplay and not on flashy features. This raw and fair player on player gameplay - that is being used in The Conduit, using an interface that relies entirely on player skill, is exactly what I want. In some ways then, a focus on solid core gameplay and less features sometimes provides a better gaming experience.

[dwarf]

Well extra abilities are a revolution I think and ake games way more interesting than just arenas and guns. They didn't add them for nothing and it's not like PS3 and Xbox don't have arcade shooters anyway. It's not a niche at all, it's just a step backwards. Wii hardware is fully capable of having these features as CoD has shown anyway.

[DazzeL]

Well extra abilities are a revolution I think and ake games way more interesting than just arenas and guns. They didn't add them for nothing and it's not like PS3 and Xbox don't have arcade shooters anyway. It's not a niche at all, it's just a step backwards. Wii hardware is fully capable of having these features as CoD has shown anyway.

 

Why does lack of features mean no popularity, a step backwards and make them "arcade shooters"?

 

Counterstrike Source is the most played online FPS in the world. More people play this than CoD4 which is available on 3 formats. It doesn't have extra abilities and it is just arenas, made to an incredibly high standard, and guns that feel awesome to use.

[dwarf]

Well no I didn't see they were bad but the extra stuff is added because it does make them better, so why remove it? KZ would be boring without the classes. It's not as heavily focused on them as in TF2 but they really make the game.

[darksnowman]

want me to help you out with that one?

 

Care to enlighten me?

 

Here's my dilemma:

 

GoldenEye

- Objective based missions

- Enemy AI

- Unlockable cheats

- Proximity mines

 

Duke Nukem

- More levels

- Secret levels/ secrets within levels

- Co-op

- Dukebots in Dukematches

- All levels available for Dukematches

- Explosive shotgun shells

 

 

Both games have a great atmosphere, great playability and are both multiplayer classics for me. We all know GoldenEye has its own place in gaming lore, but Duke is every bit as good... in different ways, if not slightly better.

[DazzeL]

No, you misunderstand me. I have nothing against classes. That's just a substitute for buying guns like in CS. My problem is with flashy extras that require no skill to use, ala helicopters in CoD4 or unlocks gained through levelling up (essentially grinding) that gives access to better guns than are available at the start.

[dwarf]

Oh I see what you mean. It's hardly going to differentiate a Wii title if it isn't designed like this though, I think most unlocks are quite achievable by everybody anyway. Haven't played Cod so not sure how long it takes to get the final 'upgrade'.