By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Are FPS the beat'em ups of this generation

sethnintendo said:
UltimateUnknown said:

So comparing FPS to Beat em ups isn't really intuitive. One is multiplayer centric while the other is single player centric with maybe some co-op thrown in.


he's talking about online and you know it



Around the Network

im with pokoko and ultimateunknow on this one. Beat em ups were more popular in the arcade anyway, one cant possibly compare that to the FPS genre which never had a presence on arcades. How about we compare it to a genre that did dominate CONSOLES like...platformers. That was the king back then.

Bad transition?? Ok i can see that. But to say that 2d platformers transistioned better. Very few 2d platformers were being made in the 32 bit era and that genre took a nosedive in popularity in lieu of new shiny 3d worlds. Speaking of which i would consider 3d platformers as the same genre as 2d ones. Which is why i say 2d platformers didnt have a better transition



UltimateUnknown said:
I think you missed the point. FPS' aren't popular because of their linear single player experience. They are popular for almost exclusively their expansive multiplayer. The real reason FPS became the phenomenon they are today is because of the advancements made in technology to support online multiplayer, which wasn't that popular or well done in the previous generations.

So comparing FPS to Beat em ups isn't really intuitive. One is multiplayer centric while the other is single player centric with maybe some co-op thrown in. Different people of different times with different tastes.

That's only partially true.  The CoD phenomenon wouldn't be the same, obviously, but the FPS genre would still be very popular.  Look at the critical and sales success of Borderlands 2, for instance, which is single-player/co-op.  Look at BioShock and Left 4 Dead.  FPS games wouldn't have the CoD/Halo sales monsters, probably, but they'd still be an important segment of this generation.



Well.. the more Online Console gaming gets.. the more PC like console gaming is going to become.. Platformers were 8-16 bit.. along with shooters, and fighters on consoles..But now in days with the consoles getting closer to PC's in total capability.. It seems that most of what made consoles unique and fun in genres is dying out.. and becoming more and more PC like... that is why I think.. in the end.. The Dreamcast/PS2 era was the last era of true console gaming.. Portable systems are getting closer to what console gaming used to be.. and the people are dragging console gaming.. closer to PC gaming.. not realizing that they are doing it..



Nintendo Wii by generations...

1. Wii

2. Wii U

3. Wii O U

Predictions made by gamers concerning the current Nintendo line up of games.

Pikmen 3= Little Bump to nothing. (Got Little Bump)

Wind Waker HD= Won't sell anything (The explosion happened here and at one time 4 Wii U games was in the Amazon top 100)

Super Mario 3D World= Won't help at all looks cheap. (Currently the most sought after Wii U game and continuing the Wii U increase.)

pokoko said:
cyberninja45 said:
miz1q2w3e said:
I thought it was platformers back then.


Yeah platformers were very popular back then, but they were never quite as repetitive and transitioned  smoothly into the 3d era, beat em ups however did not.

Platformers are the very essence of repetitive.  Most of the time the levels were absolutely static, so you were really just trying to memorize how to progress.  I don't see how they can possibly be left out of this discussion.  It's the same exact thing.

The advancement of technology is what made the FPS popular, as previous generations couldn't do the genre real justice.  In that regard, I'm almost certain the FPS is here to stay.  On the other hand, tech improvements doomed the classic beat'em up, as they really were extremely limited.  Fun, yeah, I loved Double Dragon, but 3D environments meant an evolution away from the basic forumula.  I suppose games like Devil May Cry were the next step.

I have no idea why people feel the need to disparage the FPS genre.  The platforming saturation of the NES and SNES literally had me bored with gaming (until I found FF6).  The surge from the FPS genre went a long way in making me happy with this generation.  They take me back to the days of reflex gaming that I loved with the Atari, as opposed to the memory based gaming of the NES, where all you had to do was learn timing and you could beat some games with your eyes closed.


Not really platformers use the levels to differentiate itself from other platformers, in other words the real enemy in games like mario brothers and donkey kong are the levels not the goombas and so on. Its kind of hard to explain but let me put it like this, if you take the enemies of out Super mario you would still have a decent platformer because of the levels, if you take the enemies out of a  beat em up (or most fps) there isn't much of  a game left to play, that's where the repetitiveness of ploughing through enemies really show



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



Around the Network
cyberninja45 said:
Not really platformers use the levels to differentiate itself from other platformers, in other words the real enemy in games like mario brothers and donkey kong are the levels not the goombas and so on. Its kind of hard to explain but let me put it like this, if you take the enemies of out Super mario you would still have a decent platformer because of the levels, if you take the enemies out of a  beat em up (or most fps) there isn't much of  a game left to play, that's where the repetitiveness of ploughing through enemies really show

Exactly what I'm talking about, the repetitive action of doing the same jumps over and over.  If you fail, the jump is the same.  You're just doing the exact same challenge over.  The platformers that take you back to a check point or the start of a level, especially, I loathe.  I don't want to do the exact same action again, I'm usually only good for a couple of deaths in a platformer before I give up.  They're usually just variations of jumping and waiting.  I much prefer dynamic enemies over static jumps.



UltimateUnknown said:
I think you missed the point. FPS' aren't popular because of their linear single player experience. They are popular for almost exclusively their expansive multiplayer. The real reason FPS became the phenomenon they are today is because of the advancements made in technology to support online multiplayer, which wasn't that popular or well done in the previous generations.

So comparing FPS to Beat em ups isn't really intuitive. One is multiplayer centric while the other is single player centric with maybe some co-op thrown in. Different people of different times with different tastes.

You know I always thought the precursor to fighting games (like street fighter) were beat em ups like double dragon, they took the core parts of it and made it into its own genre. Now fighters are still around but there popularity also kind of faded,except for a few titles, and those few titles that are still around are mostly those that were established years ago, as it is especially hard for a new fighter to have mainstream popularity these days.

 Most of the people that played fighters back then I think are the only ones supporting it now,  I think this occurred due to fighters only catering to their audience and making it impossible if you were new to the genre to get into it, as you would get destroyed by veteran players (those darn stinking veteran players) so this in turn caused this genre to dwindle alot in its popularity.

Could this also happen to online multiplayer in FPS?



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



pokoko said:
cyberninja45 said:
Not really platformers use the levels to differentiate itself from other platformers, in other words the real enemy in games like mario brothers and donkey kong are the levels not the goombas and so on. Its kind of hard to explain but let me put it like this, if you take the enemies of out Super mario you would still have a decent platformer because of the levels, if you take the enemies out of a  beat em up (or most fps) there isn't much of  a game left to play, that's where the repetitiveness of ploughing through enemies really show

Exactly what I'm talking about, the repetitive action of doing the same jumps over and over.  If you fail, the jump is the same.  You're just doing the exact same challenge over.  The platformers that take you back to a check point or the start of a level, especially, I loathe.  I don't want to do the exact same action again, I'm usually only good for a couple of deaths in a platformer before I give up.  They're usually just variations of jumping and waiting.  I much prefer dynamic enemies over static jumps.


I see your point I guess it comes down to personal preference then. But that doesn't make them (fps) any less repetitive.



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



A thread about beat'em ups and this hasn't been mentioned yet?

Beat'em ups were mainly co-op focused games. Back then they were the most popular genre in the arcades, and platformers were in consoles. When the arcades died and consoles focused in 3D single player experiences they dissapeared.

FPSs have been around for a long time, their popularity may decrease if other genres became more popular but I don't think they'll dissapear like beat'em ups.



Gamegears said:
Well.. the more Online Console gaming gets.. the more PC like console gaming is going to become.. Platformers were 8-16 bit.. along with shooters, and fighters on consoles..But now in days with the consoles getting closer to PC's in total capability.. It seems that most of what made consoles unique and fun in genres is dying out.. and becoming more and more PC like... that is why I think.. in the end.. The Dreamcast/PS2 era was the last era of true console gaming.. Portable systems are getting closer to what console gaming used to be.. and the people are dragging console gaming.. closer to PC gaming.. not realizing that they are doing it..


i disagree. Fighting games are a LOT more popular now than they were back in the DC/PS2/GC/xbox era. I wonder why that is???? Hmmm probably something to do with consoles now being able to support these games online which is what that genre demands, competition, probably the closest to arcade like we can get now. 2d platformers were dying because of the advent of 3d, nobody really did want to make games that were not flashy. Can you name some 2d platformers for DC? PS2? GC? no really can you? i cant think of any. And what do you know we have seen a sudden surgence of 2d platformers this gen. I wonder why? Probably because the advent of online services on consoles, devs can put those games on their for cheap without having to worry about sending them out to die against the AAA titles