1. I know that we don´t know anything about Rage but the trailer suggested that it would have FPS elements and raceing elements in a post-apocaliptic atmosphere, maybe even RPG elements... but lets just wait and see.

2. Deus Ex and Systemshock are oldies but important to show that FPSs can do more than shooting. Bioshock is an exaple of people building on those concepts.

3. Mass Effect may not be a traditional FPS or a traditional RPG or strategy game, this is what I was saying all along, eventhough most FPS follow the same old concept there are games that mix it up and bring great new ways of playing into the game.

4. Lots of new "innovative" games suck because they do a half-assed revolution and can´t get the basics right, a great game doesn´t need to do new things to be great as long as it builds on what made the former games great. SMG: new controlles, Metroid: new controlles, SSBB: bigger and better, Killzone2: bigger and better, MGS4: bigger and better, Ratchet and Clank ToD: bigger and better, Halo 3: no revolution so its crap...

I thought other FPS on the Wii used the Wii's motion controls? Didn't Red Steel use them for instance? Also just because the control scheme is different does that make it revolutionary? I remember playing FPS on the Xbox in which the controls were changed significantly on a game (analog sticks were switched, etc) and I don't consider those games revolutionary in any way. Not in the same breath as Halo's 16 player system-link or Halo2's online or Bioshock's AI.

So the other games get a free pass for being "bigger and better" but Halo 3 is crap?

Oops I guess the discussion has gotten pretty far off topic so I won't bother saying anything more about Halo 1, 2, Bioshock, Metroid Prime 3, etc...  I guess we all have different opinions and as long as the games are fun that's all that really matters.

^^ Thats my point, this generation everybody is talking about revolutionary games but most of them are just bigger and better, yet for some games this is great (MGS4) but for others its not enough (Halo 3), Halo 3 will be bigget and better than 1 and 2, MGS4 will as well but they are both just old candy in a new wrapper, which is ok, why should you stop making games people like just because they aren´t new ? Lots of people here have double standards for games they love and don´t want to change and gemes they don´t like and whant to change. Next time I´ll put a big sarcasm sighn there like I intended :)

I'm not. Gonna download it.

Sorry for going of topic, my bad.

@Oraichu: Pretty ballsy to admit pirating in your first post, get ready for some "your killing the industry" talk, personally I don´t care what you do as long as you don´t hurt anybody. 

My apology, I suspected you were being sarcastic and I shouldn't have had even the least amount of doubt.

 Other games like Red Steel did use motion controls, but they just didn't get the awesome controls that you hear people rant and rave about.  Most people that came away from that game (after they got through saying it was just bad) said the controls were just alright.  with MP3, just about everyone that has played it has said perfection or something close to it.  Halo may have just switched the control sticks or whatever, but that was in fact a big step.  Just like with Mario 64 how it revolutioned 3D camera and controls, that was a huge step.

And as for the bigger and better thing, I completely agree that it's not anything huge.  Halo 3, MGS4, and SSBB will all be good I'm sure and will sell a lot, but they aren't anything that's really going to advance any genre in any special way.