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

Forums - Gaming - Why all the FPS hate?

oniyide on 02 March 2011

@resident_hazard  o man, you dont give a damn!! i respect that. I agree with just about everything you said for the most part.



Around the Network
Resident_Hazard on 03 March 2011
Mummelmann said:
Resident_Hazard said:
richardhutnik said:

I would say part of it is popularity.  I would add a spin here, a concern I have about a genre becoming too dominant is that the videogame industry overly focuses on the dominant genre and sacrifices work in other genres, particularly both with those that people like and creation of new genres.  End result could be a serious downturn in the videogame industry.  Myself, I have 5 AT LEAST 360 FPS titles, and that is excluding stuff like Borderlands (part RPG) and L4D 2 (have it due to replayability), and also Mass Effect 2.  Do I need another one?


This assumes that first-person games are all the same kind of flavor.  Fallout, BioShock, FarCry 2, Borderlands, Bulletstorm, Oblivion, Left 4 Dead, Call of Duty, Halo, Killzone, and Portal are all very different flavors of gaming goodness.  Yes, on the "realistic military" front, there is a lot of "sameness," but first-person games are not necessarily shooters, and they certainly aren't all the same.  The thing is, a first-person perspective works great for a wide variety of gameplay ideas, and if you're* dismissing games based on that perspective, well... you* really aren't much of a gamer, then, right?

That's not very open-minded.  It's no different than the people who dismissed Zelda: Wind Waker based on it's graphics, despite the fact that it was the same old formulaic (and predictable) Zelda experience.  Or the way some people believe Metroid games are only good when side-scrolling, never realizing how much the gameplay experience matters--Super Metroid and Metroid Prime deliver the same detailed, exploration-based, atmospheric gameplay experience.  Something that Other M fails to do because the developers of that title tried selling it on "being side-scrolling" and having the worst cinematic story since first-gen Playstation 1 games.

*(I don't mean you specifically, more metaphorically.)


I'm not detracting from your points (nor am I agreeing for that matter) but I just wanted to ask why you clump Oblivion with FPS games, which are the targets of the OP's question? Oblivion is a WRPG and not a FPS.

I also mentioned Fallout and Borderlands.  Neither of which are strict FPS titles, but they all use some form of FPS mechanics.



Mummelmann on 03 March 2011
Resident_Hazard said:
Mummelmann said:
Resident_Hazard said:
richardhutnik said:

I would say part of it is popularity.  I would add a spin here, a concern I have about a genre becoming too dominant is that the videogame industry overly focuses on the dominant genre and sacrifices work in other genres, particularly both with those that people like and creation of new genres.  End result could be a serious downturn in the videogame industry.  Myself, I have 5 AT LEAST 360 FPS titles, and that is excluding stuff like Borderlands (part RPG) and L4D 2 (have it due to replayability), and also Mass Effect 2.  Do I need another one?


This assumes that first-person games are all the same kind of flavor.  Fallout, BioShock, FarCry 2, Borderlands, Bulletstorm, Oblivion, Left 4 Dead, Call of Duty, Halo, Killzone, and Portal are all very different flavors of gaming goodness.  Yes, on the "realistic military" front, there is a lot of "sameness," but first-person games are not necessarily shooters, and they certainly aren't all the same.  The thing is, a first-person perspective works great for a wide variety of gameplay ideas, and if you're* dismissing games based on that perspective, well... you* really aren't much of a gamer, then, right?

That's not very open-minded.  It's no different than the people who dismissed Zelda: Wind Waker based on it's graphics, despite the fact that it was the same old formulaic (and predictable) Zelda experience.  Or the way some people believe Metroid games are only good when side-scrolling, never realizing how much the gameplay experience matters--Super Metroid and Metroid Prime deliver the same detailed, exploration-based, atmospheric gameplay experience.  Something that Other M fails to do because the developers of that title tried selling it on "being side-scrolling" and having the worst cinematic story since first-gen Playstation 1 games.

*(I don't mean you specifically, more metaphorically.)


I'm not detracting from your points (nor am I agreeing for that matter) but I just wanted to ask why you clump Oblivion with FPS games, which are the targets of the OP's question? Oblivion is a WRPG and not a FPS.

I also mentioned Fallout and Borderlands.  Neither of which are strict FPS titles, but they all use some form of FPS mechanics.

Yes they do but they are both contemporary/sci-fi settings with shooter elements while Oblivion is a traditional first person RPG the likes of Ultima and other titles. They only share the perspective but the genre and setting difference is vast.



Resident_Hazard on 03 March 2011
Mummelmann said:
Resident_Hazard said:
Mummelmann said:


I'm not detracting from your points (nor am I agreeing for that matter) but I just wanted to ask why you clump Oblivion with FPS games, which are the targets of the OP's question? Oblivion is a WRPG and not a FPS.

I also mentioned Fallout and Borderlands.  Neither of which are strict FPS titles, but they all use some form of FPS mechanics.

Yes they do but they are both contemporary/sci-fi settings with shooter elements while Oblivion is a traditional first person RPG the likes of Ultima and other titles. They only share the perspective but the genre and setting difference is vast.

Fair enough.

Though I'll elaborate as much as I can, so you can (hopefully) see where I was coming from.

The thing I believe, is that people against first-person-shooters are largely against first-person-anything, in much the way that they're against the first two Metroid Prime games which are very much more action/adventure games than straight shooters.  Part 3 is a shooter with action/adventure elements (yes, I'm getting into semantics here).  

But, this is something I theorize, though not blindly.  I mean, many Nintendo fans are crazy against the Metroid Prime games, despite the fact that they each offer the most purely "Metroid" style gameplay in the vein of the classic Super Metroid.  They get hung up on how the game looks rather than it's overall presentation.  Many have said that Other M is more "Metroid" than the Prime games, despite the fact that it lacks the kind of atmosphere, exploration, depth, mood, and style of the Prime games and Super Metroid (as well as Zero Mission and the original games).  There are some of these guys who have a hatred for the first-person perspective regardless of the gameplay style of the games.



Mummelmann on 03 March 2011
Resident_Hazard said:
Mummelmann said:
Resident_Hazard said:
Mummelmann said:


I'm not detracting from your points (nor am I agreeing for that matter) but I just wanted to ask why you clump Oblivion with FPS games, which are the targets of the OP's question? Oblivion is a WRPG and not a FPS.

I also mentioned Fallout and Borderlands.  Neither of which are strict FPS titles, but they all use some form of FPS mechanics.

Yes they do but they are both contemporary/sci-fi settings with shooter elements while Oblivion is a traditional first person RPG the likes of Ultima and other titles. They only share the perspective but the genre and setting difference is vast.

Fair enough.

Though I'll elaborate as much as I can, so you can (hopefully) see where I was coming from.

The thing I believe, is that people against first-person-shooters are largely against first-person-anything, in much the way that they're against the first two Metroid Prime games which are very much more action/adventure games than straight shooters.  Part 3 is a shooter with action/adventure elements (yes, I'm getting into semantics here).  

But, this is something I theorize, though not blindly.  I mean, many Nintendo fans are crazy against the Metroid Prime games, despite the fact that they each offer the most purely "Metroid" style gameplay in the vein of the classic Super Metroid.  They get hung up on how the game looks rather than it's overall presentation.  Many have said that Other M is more "Metroid" than the Prime games, despite the fact that it lacks the kind of atmosphere, exploration, depth, mood, and style of the Prime games and Super Metroid (as well as Zero Mission and the original games).  There are some of these guys who have a hatred for the first-person perspective regardless of the gameplay style of the games.


I have no problem agreeing with this post.

But, as you well know, it is important that we separate those who simply hate on FP style gameplay out of some form of tradition and personal qualm and those who simply dislike the general direction FPS games are headed or the fact that the market seems to be flooded by them (many of them very poorly executed).

I belong to the second group, there are still FPS games that I like but they are becoming less and less frequent. The same can be said for almost all other genres, I guess. I don't like where the industry is headed, period.



Around the Network
Resident_Hazard on 03 March 2011
Mummelmann said:
Resident_Hazard said:
Mummelmann said:
Yes they do but they are both contemporary/sci-fi settings with shooter elements while Oblivion is a traditional first person RPG the likes of Ultima and other titles. They only share the perspective but the genre and setting difference is vast.

 

Fair enough.

Though I'll elaborate as much as I can, so you can (hopefully) see where I was coming from.

The thing I believe, is that people against first-person-shooters are largely against first-person-anything, in much the way that they're against the first two Metroid Prime games which are very much more action/adventure games than straight shooters.  Part 3 is a shooter with action/adventure elements (yes, I'm getting into semantics here).  

But, this is something I theorize, though not blindly.  I mean, many Nintendo fans are crazy against the Metroid Prime games, despite the fact that they each offer the most purely "Metroid" style gameplay in the vein of the classic Super Metroid.  They get hung up on how the game looks rather than it's overall presentation.  Many have said that Other M is more "Metroid" than the Prime games, despite the fact that it lacks the kind of atmosphere, exploration, depth, mood, and style of the Prime games and Super Metroid (as well as Zero Mission and the original games).  There are some of these guys who have a hatred for the first-person perspective regardless of the gameplay style of the games.


I have no problem agreeing with this post.

But, as you well know, it is important that we separate those who simply hate on FP style gameplay out of some form of tradition and personal qualm and those who simply dislike the general direction FPS games are headed or the fact that the market seems to be flooded by them (many of them very poorly executed).

I belong to the second group, there are still FPS games that I like but they are becoming less and less frequent. The same can be said for almost all other genres, I guess. I don't like where the industry is headed, period.

There was a time when I didn't care for FPS titles, but it had more to do with some bizarre crippling motion sickness I was getting from the style for a while.  Lately, I play tons and tons of FPS and other first-person games.  I get where you're coming from in that the market seems flooded with too many that are too identical, but this always happens in the industry, and the industry always moves on and grows.  Back in the early and mid-80's, it was swamped with shmups, often copying Space Invaders, or maybe Galaga.  Late 80's, everyone was cloning Mario platformers and making their own, often crappy, platformers.  This is actually the second time first-person games have been so prevelant in the market--during the mid-90's, the original Playstation and PC (at the time) were completely crowded with FPS games, then often referred to as "Doom Clones."  The industry survived and new genres took hold and came and went.  Survival horror took off for a while, and a large part of the last generation was overtaken by GTA-clones and other Sandbox games.  

It's a trend, and when something new takes hold, a new trend will rise.  What beaten-horse-corpse trend just collapsed last month?  Music games featured a prominant death with Guitar Hero, pretty much putting an end to that trend running amok.  

I'm not worried about FPS games.  Frankly, I just bought Bulletstorm, and I think it's just fantastic.  It's such a completely fresh shooter, and for reference, I've never been a fan of the real-life military shooters like Call of Duty and Medal of Honor.  I've been playing more varied shooters over the years, so the style/genre hasn't really been burned out for me.  

My biggest worry about gaming is that Apple is cheapening this medium by flooding the market with cheaply made, cheaply priced downloadable crap games.  People new to gaming are at risk for thinking this kind of crap is the norm, and will not see the value in a full-blown $60 release, no matter how deep and engrossing it may be.   Just the way many new people, through the Wii, felt that games are supposed to be waggley nonsense with no depth and ugly graphics.