A tentative discussion on game innovation and the FPS genre.

[BabyHeadCrab]

Let's start with FEAR 2, it seems Monolith has perfectly exemplified the retrogression of the FPS genre into a slobbish, repetitive cliched rubbish I've come to expect with every single player FPS released since the post HL2-era. Where are the innovative AAA titles? They quite simply don't exist. People are doing interesting things with the third person perspective (Drake's Fortune, Gears of War, and even to some extent MGS4 - but the major publisher/developer uprisings have lead to little to no intriguing titles in one of my most beloved genres. (Epic, Id, and even Valve to some extent seem to have abandoned the concept of major AAA titles with full featured MP/SP components).

note: this can also be partially attributed to the rise of the digital distribution / web 2.0 era, but there's quite a lot of things to take a look at first. The way gamers are communicating is rapidly changing, let's slow down for a minute and discuss both what this means to the FPS genre and the video games industry in it's entirety.

Let's have a look at the best selling First Person Shooter game franchises in the last few years, you know the lineup before I even finish this sentence: Halo, Call of Duty, Rainbow Six, and the outliers such as Bioshock and Half-Life 2: Episodes 1&2. When is the last time you played a well narrated, beautifully executed, atmospheric and deep thinking first person shooter? Dues Ex perhaps? Half-Life? Bear in mind in not talking about free-roaming shooters which lack any kind of genuine narrative coherence like STALKER and Boiling Point or even glazed over turds like Far Cry 2 which masquerade over minor immersion advances like the lack of a screen-transitioning GUI or objective system (I must say though, that there are ways in which Far Cry 2 has been the most progressive shooter to come around in quite some time, which is somewhat sad).

So what in particular is holding developers back from even slightly risky projects? What is keeping developers from investing heavily in games with solid MP AND SP components (remember those days: SOFII, Jedi Knight series, the original Red Storm Rainbow Six titles, etc?) There's a lot of factors that could be contributing, namely the cost risk analysis in an economy that doesn't support risky development practices -- but primarily we're seeing what the movie industry saw not too many years ago -- very few studios remain independent from major conglomerates which spark projects purely based on assumed demographic interest and to please major investors. Case and point; the rise of Activision Blizzard, and their dropping of Schafer's latest project and now attempting to claim that they still somehow own publishing rights to the IP.

I've digressed severely here and you're probably not still reading -- but I dearly miss the days of well crafted, story driven FPS. You know, games like No One Lives Forever. While interesting franchises do exist, and games like Bioshock, Far Cry 2 and Half-Life 2 + episodes have been intriguing genre highlights, they do very little in the way of innovation, replay ability or balancing / integrating community involvement (modding), or co-op game play and significant narratives, things I feel the gaming community has reached out for and even constructed themselves out of dire situations developers have left us with. (UT3, FC2, Crysis) and so forth -- wonderful communities rising out of little to no developer support seems to be a trend amongst online gaming communities.

 

[Sheepo]

When is the last time you played a well narrated, beautifully executed, atmospheric and deep thinking first person shooter?

Half-Life 2: Episodes 1&2.

Although I do agree with you.

 

[mchammer75040]

I laugh in the face of you peons who enjoy F.E.A.R. 2. All I had to do is play the demo to realize Monolith has perfectly exemplified the retrogression of the FPS genre into a slobbish, repetitive cliched rubbish I've come to expect with every single player FPS released since the post HL2-era. Where are the innovative AAA titles?
They quite simply don't exist.

Uhh portal? Left 4 dead? Besides when did innovation reign supreme to begin with? In any other medium the amount of stuff out there that is either crap/derivative or just a very polished of well established ideas always outweigh any innovation.

. People are doing interesting things with the third person perspective (Drake's Fortune, Gears of War, and even to some extent MGS4 - but the major publisher/developer uprisings have lead to little to no intriguing titles in one of my most beloved genres. (Epic, Id, and even Valve to some extent seem to have abandoned the concept of major AAA titles with full featured MP/SP components).

? You are confusing me.. You say on one hand Gears is doing something interesting with the 3rd person mechanic (like..?) but then tell me Epic has abandoned the idea of offering both MP/SP in their games which is wrong considering how much stuff is crammed into gears. Sure the whole idea of taking cover is interesting, but how much of it has changed from the first? How is any of those games innovating in anyway to seperate themselves from the lack of innovation in FPS games?

note: this can also be partially attributed to the rise of the digital distribution / web 2.0 era, but there's quite a lot of things to take a look at first. The way gamers are communicating is rapidly changing, let's slow down for a minute and discuss both what this means to the FPS genre and the video games industry in it's entirety.

I'm not trying to be a dick, but what does this have to do with where the rest of your post is going?

Let's have a look at the best selling First Person Shooter game franchises in the last few years, you know the lineup before I even finish this sentence: Halo, Call of Duty, Rainbow Six, and the outliers such as Bioshock and Half-Life 2: Episodes 1&2. When is the last time you played a well narrated, beautifully executed, atmospheric and deep thinking first person shooter? Dues Ex perhaps? Half-Life? Bear in mind in not talking about free-roaming shooters which lack any kind of genuine narrative coherence like STALKER and Boiling Point or even glazed over turds like Far Cry 2 which masquerade over minor immersion advances like the lack of a screen-transitioning GUI or objective system (I must say though, that there are ways in which Far Cry 2 has been the most progressive shooter to come around in quite some time, which is somewhat sad).

So what in particular is holding developers back from even slightly risky projects? What is keeping developers from investing heavily in games with solid MP AND SP components (remember those days: SOFII, Jedi Knight series, the original Red Storm Rainbow Six titles, etc?) There's a lot of factors that could be contributing, namely the cost risk analysis in an economy that doesn't support risky development practices -- but primarily we're seeing what the movie industry saw not too many years ago -- very few studios remain independent from major conglomerates which spark projects purely based on assumed demographic interest and to please major investors.

How is it that making a SP/MP game is "risky"? It has nothing to do with innovation its just that the cost and the amount of polish that players expect has grown to ungodly proportions.

I've digressed severely here and you're probably not still reading -- but I dearly miss the days of well crafted, story driven FPS. You know, games like No One Lives Forever. While interesting franchises do exist, and games like Bioshock, Far Cry 2 and Half-Life 2 + episodes have been intriguing genre highlights, they do very little in the way of innovation, replay ability or balancing / integrating community involvement (modding), or co-op game play and significant narratives, things I feel the gaming community has reached out for and even constructed themselves out of dire situations developers have left us with. (UT3, FC2, Crysis) and so forth -- wonderful communities rising out of little to no developer support seems to be a trend amongst online gaming communities.

lolwut, No one lives forever was an exception at the time in a medium where most stories are shit to begin with, how on earth can you say we've gone backwards? Bioshock, hl..etc. are also exceptions now there is just a more growing need for decent storytelling. Hell please point to some titles that rival bioshock's or hl's stories from that era. Everything you've said could be applied to any medium, just like that spoony guy you posted awhile back who shat all over FFVIII....

Also as far as replay ability and modding, I don't see how epic or valve could ever be at fault there. Valve themselves have done more to bring innovation to the forefront of gaming than most would to begin with, with services like steamworks and plans to help sell games like zeno clash, which most publishers/devs would never touch.

 

[kupocake]

While interesting franchises do exist, and games like Bioshock, Far Cry 2 and Half-Life 2 + episodes have been intriguing genre highlights, they do very little in the way of innovation

Bioshock: Why reinvent a wheel nobody took the time to put on their car the first time round.

Far Cry 2: a "Genre Highlight"?

Our Survey says:

xx   xx
xx   xx
 xx xx 
  xxx
  xxx
 xx xx
xx   xx
xx   xx

Half-Life 2: Any game that came out with physics implementation before HL2 did so because of the HL2 E3 demo. And it wasn't nearly as entertainingly implemented either.

HL2 Episodes: Has basically become the 'old reliable' foil to everything else Valve is giving you at the same time in the way of innovation.

Generally, I just feel that you could have said this five, ten, fifteen years ago and you'd have been right. First Person Shooting is a very narrow genre. The invention of itself is the single biggest innovation that the genre will ever manage. The only difference between now and ten years ago is that people will savage mediocre games that try something new. Thief: The Dark Age would just be another Mirror's Edge today.

Something good did come of it all though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jbya4kxC6E
**** yes.

 

[morgs]

wow that's strange...I just saw that kermit video on youtube today D:

 

[TwwIX]

I Agree. Besides Mirrors Edge and Left4Dead, most of the recent shooters have been pretty crap.
You got Far Cry 2, which is nothing more than an overhyped and dumbed down version of Boiling Point.
A chore to ****ing play and tedious beyond my limits of tolerance.
FEAR 2, same shit again as in the previous games. Cheap scares and tons of gore. Unreal Tournament III=UT2K4 with updated visuals and countless of bots online. DOA.
Call of Duty: World at War. Really? Another WW2 game? Now with even more grenade spammage!
Along with a few other lackluster shooters that i won't even bother mentioning.

Besides Episode 3 and the updates for TF 2 and Left4Dead, there's nothing really to look forward to these days. I started playing older games again such as the NOLF and Operation Flashpoint series.
At least i still get some enjoyment out of them.

 

[Planetary]

I think mods is where the big FPS innovation is at. I'm definitely more excited for Black Mesa than anything else with a 2009 release. Plus many mods eventually end up being "serious" series, not just a fan project. Half of Valve's games are like that.
What I'd love best is a nice, modern first person stealth game, like Thief, but with all the fancy technology we have 10 years later. A high tech setting and cloaks and cool stuff like that. Nothing since Deus Ex has had much in that way (maybe Crysis, but no chance of playing for me, of course).
And true originality still shines once in a while, with Portal and the like.

You just need to look harder for it.

 

[Krynn72]

Funny that this gets brought up now. I was recently playing through old FPS games like ghost recon, the old rainbow 6s, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, etc.

Then I played modern ones like the newer ghost recons, rainbow sixes, fear 2 demo, etc, and I find myself incredibly unamused with them. Theres just something new games lack in terms of the "interesting factor". It may very well be the nostalgia aspect, but I really dont think that accounts for all of it. I think it may be because these games have all sorts of over-the-top shit happening, and gimmicky gameplay and linearity that, in the back of my mind, I notice. And because I notice it, everything seems superficial and flat. All these "new features" seem to just clutter up the experience, and seem to just provide an excuse to dumb down things and let them market "new features" and graphics to people who dont take the industry serious enough to care.

I'm trying to think of any game since after 2003 or so that I have gone back to play again after beating it once, and I can't think of any. I mean, theres half life 2, but even that, I only played it once more through (right before episode 2 came out, so that I could finish ep 1 and go right on to ep 2).

FPS games made now just dont seem as interesting as they used to be.

 

[MultiVaC]

(Drake's Fortune, Gears of War, and even to some extent MGS4 - but the major publisher/developer uprisings have lead to little to no intriguing titles in one of my most beloved genres. (Epic, Id, and even Valve to some extent seem to have abandoned the concept of major AAA titles with full featured MP/SP components).

Wait, what? Gears of War? The most childish, 12-year-old and frat boy targeted piece of mediocrity ever released? Gears of War is the epitome of "slobbish, repetitive, cliched rubbish". Yeah, the games are in a slump, but it's not just FPS games. The entire industry is being strangled by the pure, unmitigated greed of the major publishers.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Wait, what? Gears of War? The most childish, 12-year-old and frat boy targeted piece of mediocrity ever released? Gears of War is the epitome of "slobbish, repetitive, cliched rubbish". Yeah, the games are in a slump, but it's not just FPS games. The entire industry is being strangled by the pure, unmitigated greed of the major publishers.

Yet it's setting the standard and had more to bring to the table in terms of mixing up action sequences than any other AAA title since maybe Metal Gear Solid allowing you to hug walls. Don't get me wrong, Gears of War didn't "raise the bar" in terms of storytelling or lasting appeal, it just mixed up the way everyone saw shooting sequences and cover systems.

Another great example of this sort of innovation in an otherwise mediocre game is the exploration of vertical space in Mirror's Edge.

I can't address everyone's qualms with my OP, but I will say that a lot of the examples I used weren't to illustrate the fact that I think games like FC2 are major innovators, just that they've taken more steps than the average popular AAA release to stir things up a bit in terms of interface and pacing (for better or for worse) and was also pointing out that the average major game release these days fails to be the "entire package" that we used to see only ten years ago.

 

[mchammer75040]

Yet it's setting the standard and had more to bring to the table in terms of mixing up action sequences than any other AAA title since maybe Metal Gear Solid allowing you to hug walls. Don't get me wrong, Gears of War didn't "raise the bar" in terms of storytelling or lasting appeal, it just mixed up the way everyone saw shooting sequences and cover systems.

Another great example of this sort of innovation in an otherwise mediocre game is the exploration of vertical space in Mirror's Edge.

I can't address everyone's qualms with my OP, but I will say that a lot of the examples I used weren't to illustrate the fact that I think games like FC2 are major innovators, just that they've taken more steps than the average popular AAA release to stir things up a bit in terms of interface and pacing (for better or for worse) and was also pointing out that the average major game release these days fails to be the "entire package" that we used to see only ten years ago.

Well personally I think that is why people created this whole episodic content bullshit. Its a way of selling you more shit that should have been delivered in the game in the first place under the banner of DLC, like as if its being progressive ( for example the latest TR). How is "episodic" different than expansion pack? It isnt.

 

[MJ12]

What is No One Lives Forever about?

 

[Jintor]

Spies.

It's that whole 'superspy' genre thing.

 

[Doppelgofer]

its about a string vest that gets a fever

 

[Sheepo]

I youtubed it.

Sense of humor: YES
Interesting style: YES
About Spies: YES!
Intriguing story/plot: YES
Gameplay: ....

 

[Asknoone]

Yes, the genre is enduring a washing machine effect - it is spinning endlessly and derivatively through the same old, same old, and unfortunately, people are lapping it up. Games like FEAR 2 and Call of Duty 4 exemplify what is so very wrong with the state of things; it is pure regression. Make no mistake, there is nothing significantly good about these games, bar illustrating that, really, you're a moron willing to indulge in the brainless. We are seldom rising above the Michael Bay types of the market. The quality, the innovation, the intelligence - it just isn't there. Valve have honed these to a point, but even their most recent, Episode 2, does little to raise the bar in the context of Half-life games. Among the pack it has perfected a kind of game design very few developers seem capable of comprehending, but when we've seen this in Half-life 2, and when we've experienced the slew of quality seeping out of the likes of Portal and Team Fortress 2 and L4D, we're just that little bit underwhelmed.

The problem is nestled within this Neanderthal thinking most developers seem caged by. The videogame thinking. Never transcending the barriers of, shoot the bad guys, or, how can we make this gun bigger and better. There's this refusal -- or inability -- to explore the countless, far more innovative, thought-provoking avenues we've seen only touched upon here and there. And you know, there's also the non-linear problem. We have incoherent, unpolished, fractured turds like STALKER and Far Cry 2 that seem to think opening up is the key forward. On the contrary. It's not.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

We are seldom rising above the Michael Bay types of the market.

First Person Shooters. Some people just like to blow shit up.

 

[Warbie]

*cracks knuckles*

I am so all over this thread when I get back from work. I will just add that advancements in story telling mean absolutely **** all if we end up with the same tired gunplay seen countless times before. These are fps. The guns are the stars and bloodletting all the narrative I need (although a decent story is always nice).

There was a time when I would need a flame suit for the sentence coming up, but by now my skin has evolved and can handle the fires of hate. The best, bar none, example of involved and deep combat still exists in a series that starts with an H and ends in an O. In comparison every other fps released in the last few years is Combat Devolved.

 

[Jintor]

(For my money the best FPS gameplay in the last few years is L4D. But I suppose that's really a mix of FPS gameplay and horror elements, as well as methods of enforcing teamwork.)

 

[Asknoone]

I think mods is where the big FPS innovation is at. I'm definitely more excited for Black Mesa

A remake is innovation? Really?

 

[Sparta]

How's the marriage to Halo going after all these years Warbie?

Going good? I know you guys started out pretty strong in 2001. You got along pretty well when you first met and the more time you two spent together the more you fell in love with each other. You'd never met anyone like her before and you found it impossible to get her out of your mind once you started meeting other women. Suddenly it clicked. She was the one for you. So you popped the question, she said nothing because she's a video game, you took it as a yes.

You two would go parties with friends and you'd introduce her to people she didn't know, somewhat awkwardly at first, but soon enough everyone would be comfortable and having fun. Some of your friends would even come up to you afterwards and say how much they enjoyed her company, and that you're a lucky guy.

Life was great.

At least for a few years, right?

A rough patch came along for you guys in 2004. You two, of course, denied you were having any marital problems. Despite the lack of satisfaction between the two of you, you both held it together, all while longing for the love that flourished years ago which had long since passed by then. Your friends were no longer interested in socialising with you and her as much as they used to be, having grown long since bored of your all-too-familiar antics.

2007 came around and it was apparent you were only really in the marriage for the sex, which is still the same after 6 years and has gotten incredibly stale and boring by now. Sure you've tried to change it up by adding a few different positions, but its nothing that really satisfies either of you anymore. You hadn't seen your friends for a while so you figured you'd drop in and surprise some of them. Some were eager to see you and your missus return. Most however, didn't care one way or another. It was really only the younger couples who cared to see you again. Those who had spent their first dinner socials with you and your wife.

Now-a-days to those outside the marriage, it looks like you two have seperated. Apparently for good. The only remnants of your time together are a few couples here and there that seemed to admire you two and your relationship in the past and are beginning to behave in a similar fashion. Emulation is Admiration after all, no one denies that. The friends you had 8 years ago no longer talk to her, but you can't help but think you two as a couple made some impression on them. It could be true. It could be false. You spend your days trying to meet new women, but no one compares to your old flame. Your friends tell you how much better they are for you then her, but you refuse to listen. They can't compare, you tell them. You've got to move on, they tell you. You can't let it go.

Even now and then you like to return to those old, perfect memories of 8 years past and tell yourself "It'll be like this again someday. Someday." as you cry yourself to sleep in the pitch dark, where you are likely to be eaten by a grue.



And that is by far the nerdiest thing i've ever written in my entire life. All in good jest by the way Warbie. No offense meant.

In all seriousness though, Halo was great, but if you take away the Elite's and the incredibly unbalanced difficulty of it you're left with some good, but not great, games. Funnily enough, Halo 3 did exactly that, but everyone turned a blind eye at the incredibly forgettable single-player campaign and heaped praise on the multiplayer.

As for the FPS genre, there really hasn't been any innovation since.... yeah Halo. And that was only two things (which were very good additions). Regenerating health and limited weapons. The closest anyone's come to innovation since then has been.... what..... Crysis? That's not saying much. I think someone really needs to do something about the A.I. in shooters. As everytime there has been a major jump in behaviour with A.I. most people have taken notice. Half-life did it, then Halo did it and then the closest the genre has come to creating better A.I. since then has been..... i have no idea because i honestly haven't noticed the slightest difference. All i know is that those two games are the only games that i've honestly noticed the A.I. being good in. The first F.E.A.R game gets a special mention because that had ace A.I., but it pretty much did exactly what the A.I. from the original Half-life did on a slightly bigger scale and faster too.

 

[Bob_Marley]

You're not really talking about innovation. Having a strong storyline is no longer innovative as such. And you seem to be equating a well written stories to innovation. Which they are not. Interesting to have and something I'm glad to see in games but its not innovative.

TF2, for example, is innovative. It uses a unique (to FPS) art style, well thoughtout gameplay mechanics and balance. Now that is innovation. Or C&C Renegade, with its resouce management and base defence mechanics.

Innovation in gameplay is still possible but lets be honest the FPS genre will always, at its core, be about blowing away the bad guys. But devs can still find new and interesting ways to do this.

 

[Asknoone]

As for the FPS genre, there really hasn't been any innovation since.... yeah Halo. And that was only two things (which were very good additions). Regenerating health and limited weapons.

These elements merely add to a pre-existing layer. I'm not saying this is a bad thing -- on the contrary. But you know, they're just an extension of the combat we already had. It's innovation to an extent, but it's not true innovation. Halo, as good as it is, can be stripped away quite easily once you pull back its combat (something that can become tiresome after, say, three levels). And the innovative features go with it. There's nothing beyond that combat. It is just pulling the trigger and shooting.

 

[Sparta]

True, but there really hasn't been any game that has had such a widespread impact as Halo since Halo. Think about it. Most FPS games now-a-days have regenerating health and now most of them only allow you to carrying between 2 to 4 weapons at a time. Some have tried to make games more open, none have really succeeded because all they really have done in the end is expand the corridor and that's all the FPS has ever been.

But essentially all games and all entertainment is linear in the end isn't? Some games just have better corridors than others.

We can talk about this until time ends, but i've found the best cure for boredom when it comes to First Person Shooters is to stop playing them. The last FPS i played before F.E.A.R 2 was Call of Duty 4 and i enjoyed it quite a bit. Apparently its quite an average but you've could've fooled me.

(And yes i have played Mirror's Edge, although I don't really consider it an FPS. More of a first-person racing game)

 

[Barnz]

I think mods is where the big FPS innovation is at. I'm definitely more excited for Black Mesa than anything else with a 2009 release. Plus many mods eventually end up being "serious" series, not just a fan project. Half of Valve's games are like that.

Go away.

What is No One Lives Forever about?

Go away.

The best, bar none, example of involved and deep combat still exists in a series that starts with an H and ends in an O. In comparison every other fps released in the last few years is Combat Devolved.

Go away.

In all seriousness though, Halo was great, but if you take away the Elite's and the incredibly unbalanced difficulty of it you're left with some good, but not great, games. Funnily enough, Halo 3 did exactly that, but everyone turned a blind eye at the incredibly forgettable single-player campaign and heaped praise on the multiplayer.

Go away.

 

[Xevrex]

As everytime there has been a major jump in behaviour with A.I. most people have taken notice. Half-life did it, then Halo did it and then the closest the genre has come to creating better A.I. since then has been..... i have no idea because i honestly haven't noticed the slightest difference.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl and Clear Sky both have the best enemy AI I've ever seen in an FPS before. Just thought I'd throw my hat in.

 

[StardogChampion]

Yes, the genre is enduring a washing machine effect - it is spinning endlessly and derivatively through the same old, same old, and unfortunately, people are lapping it up. Games like FEAR 2 and Call of Duty 4 exemplify what is so very wrong with the state of things; it is pure regression. Make no mistake, there is nothing significantly good about these games, bar illustrating that, really, you're a moron willing to indulge in the brainless. We are seldom rising above the Michael Bay types of the market. The quality, the innovation, the intelligence - it just isn't there. Valve have honed these to a point, but even their most recent, Episode 2, does little to raise the bar in the context of Half-life games.

Agreed.

 

[Deleted member 56031]

Although yes I agree with what people are saying in this topic, I can see why people keep making these games, they sell and they sell well.

I agree that alot of them are not original anymore and it is quite sad to think that the most innovative fps in some time was the first halo. However I do like FPS as a genre and while I agree the points I like shooting things in my games Thats why I play games like call of duty or fear etc.

Are they the greatest games? No way. I haven't played an FPS in quite some time that would get above an 8/10 from myself but (and as terrible as it sounds) in today's gaming scene if you don't play FPS what do you really play?

 

[jverne]

what about games in general?

sim games are extinct,
adventure games mostly died out,
strategy games are almost all the same and few,
RPGs got completely washed out,
FPS...

we truly are in the dark ages of gaming. from the era 1992-2003 a lot of games were interesting, now i find very few worth of even watching the trailer.

 

[KagePrototype]

I laugh in the face of you peons who enjoy F.E.A.R. 2.

I take issue with this statement, and suggest that you suck ass through a straw.

At the end of the day, FPS games cost a ****-ton of money to make. This means that as the demand for spectacle goes up, the number of risks go down. If you want new gaming experiences, there's a huge indie community making all sorts of cheap, wonderfully unique games for you to buy. My suggestion to all of you is to stop pining for one particular genre's lack of innovation, widen your spectrum of interest and enjoy whatever stands out to you.

Or stop complaining on an internet forum and fix the problem yourself. Any self-absorbed asshole can complain about something if it's not meeting their hoity-toity standards, but very few of them have the talent or motivation to really do anything about it.

 

[MJ12]

Or stop complaining on an internet forum and fix the problem yourself. Any self-absorbed asshole can complain about something if it's not meeting their hoity-toity standards, but very few of them have the talent or motivation to really do anything about it.

Sure, but it's not his job to do that . It's like if all the ice cream stores started making crappier icecream, yet you still love icecream and you are like "****in A man, this ICE CREAM SUCKSSS, what happened to the way they used to make icecream?!"

And then some guy comes in and is like "Dude, YOU MAKE THE ICECREAM THEN"

HE is the customer, THEY make games for HIM. If he does not like the quality, the customer gets pissed, does not buy.

What kind of world do you live in where the customer is supposed to solve the problem of the market from which he is buying from lol??

 

[Asknoone]

I take issue with this statement, and suggest that you suck ass through a straw.

At the end of the day, FPS games cost a ****-ton of money to make. This means that as the demand for spectacle goes up, the number of risks go down. If you want new gaming experiences, there's a huge indie community making all sorts of cheap, wonderfully unique games for you to buy. My suggestion to all of you is to stop pining for one particular genre's lack of innovation, widen your spectrum of interest and enjoy whatever stands out to you.

Or stop complaining on an internet forum and fix the problem yourself. Any self-absorbed asshole can complain about something if it's not meeting their hoity-toity standards, but very few of them have the talent or motivation to really do anything about it.

Since when were they exempt from criticism? If something does not meet my standards and falls very much below them I am perfectly justified in criticising it. Simply having higher standards, and expecting more and better, does not make someone a 'self-absorbed asshole'. Why should someone apologise for wanting a higher standard of quality in what they purchase and play?

 

[Deleted member 56031]

Sure, but it's not his job to do that . It's like if all the ice cream stores started making crappier icecream, yet you still love icecream and you are like "****in A man, this ICE CREAM SUCKSSS, what happened to the way they used to make icecream?!"

And then some guy comes in and is like "Dude, YOU MAKE THE ICECREAM THEN"

HE is the customer, THEY make games for HIM. If he does not like the quality, the customer gets pissed, does not buy.

What kind of world do you live in where the customer is supposed to solve the problem of the market from which he is buying from lol??

I've got to use that example from now on

 

[Remus]

Yes, the genre is enduring a washing machine effect - it is spinning endlessly and derivatively through the same old, same old, and unfortunately, people are lapping it up. Games like FEAR 2 and Call of Duty 4 exemplify what is so very wrong with the state of things; it is pure regression. Make no mistake, there is nothing significantly good about these games, bar illustrating that, really, you're a moron willing to indulge in the brainless.

I see, so according to you, people are morons if they like games you don't like. Brilliant! :dozey:

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Portal is one massive outlier since the '00 era. If you can even classify it as an FPS.

 

[Asknoone]

Yeah, you know, that's a really excellent point. We are almost at a stage where FP is as dominant as FPS.

I see, so according to you, people are morons if they like games you don't like. Brilliant! :dozey:

I wouldn't put it quite like that. I can list countless games I don't like, but I wouldn't so arrogant as to claim that each and every person who does like them is a moron.

 

[Eejit]

Portal is one massive outlier since the '00 era. If you can even classify it as an FPS.

Of course it's a FPS. You shoot portals at things. In first person.

 

[KagePrototype]

Sure, but it's not his job to do that . It's like if all the ice cream stores started making crappier icecream, yet you still love icecream and you are like "****in A man, this ICE CREAM SUCKSSS, what happened to the way they used to make icecream?!"

And then some guy comes in and is like "Dude, YOU MAKE THE ICECREAM THEN"

HE is the customer, THEY make games for HIM. If he does not like the quality, the customer gets pissed, does not buy.

What kind of world do you live in where the customer is supposed to solve the problem of the market from which he is buying from lol??

Not really, since with ice cream you expect it to be the same every time. What I said was meant to be aimed at people who simply aren't content with the same and constantly demand something new without really putting anything forward.

"Why the **** are you serving chocolate, I'm BORED OF CHOCOLATE. Make something NEW that I find INTERESTING."

"Well, doing that would be risking a lot of money...what do you find interesting?"

" I DUNNO, JUST MAKE IT INTERESTING."

"What about chocolate and mint?"

"THAT'S NOT INNOVATE ENOUGH, YOU'RE JUST ADDING ONTO A PRE-EXISTING LAYER"

At this point the server will just ignore the one asshole yelling in his face and serve everyone else, who are only interested in eating some yummy chocolate ice-cream.

Since when were they exempt from criticism? If something does not meet my standards and falls very much below them I am perfectly justified in criticising it. Simply having higher standards, and expecting more and better, does not make someone a 'self-absorbed asshole'. Why should someone apologise for wanting a higher standard of quality in what they purchase and play?

I'm not saying they're excempt from criticism, and I didn't mean to aim that barb at everyone who expects a little bit more. I aimed it more at the arseholes who ignore the reality of the situation, expecting everything to cater to them because it's what they want just because WHY DOES THE ARMOR LOOK DIFFERENT, CATER TO MEEE.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

I take issue with this statement, and suggest that you suck ass through a straw.

At the end of the day, FPS games cost a ****-ton of money to make. This means that as the demand for spectacle goes up, the number of risks go down. If you want new gaming experiences, there's a huge indie community making all sorts of cheap, wonderfully unique games for you to buy. My suggestion to all of you is to stop pining for one particular genre's lack of innovation, widen your spectrum of interest and enjoy whatever stands out to you.

Or stop complaining on an internet forum and fix the problem yourself. Any self-absorbed asshole can complain about something if it's not meeting their hoity-toity standards, but very few of them have the talent or motivation to really do anything about it.

I was being tongue n' cheek, sir, but I appreciate the heated response. I don't actually think anyone who enjoys FEAR is a peon. If you'd read any post I've made on this forum since 2003, you'd know that I was just being silly.

I do, however, think a developer like Monolith is capable of something much, much better than a game like FEAR 2. And what's this about games costing a lot of money being the excuse to push the same tired concept out twice? Monolith has incredible publisher support and a team that's taken risks, and succeeded in taking risks -- your point is nil. As for enjoying the Indie market, if you'd read the entirety of my OP, you'd see that this space is addressing AAA, fully funded projects which receive media and public attention from the get-go (don't think that it's impossible for these types of projects to bring innovation the table). What exactly are you arguing? That companies have the excuse of a high risk market to not aim for innovation? They honestly don't need a knight in shining armor.

Any self-absorbed bastard can make a comment without fully reading the original post. Why is a moderator flaming like a child who's had his candy taken away?

 

[stemot]

I laugh in the face of you peons who enjoy F.E.A.R. 2.

That's funny, I laugh in the face of people that can't simply enjoy a decent shooter and expect every game that is released to try new and exciting things.

These games would not be made if people didn't enjoy them, and putting yourself on some sort of higher pedestal than these people because your so up yourself you can't enjoy a good blaster and expect the future of gaming to be tailored to your opinions.

Sure, there is room for games to try new things, but sometimes all you want is to have fun, whether that means playing a game that is tried and tested in it's formula or something more innovative, as long as it's fun I really couldn't give a toss.