Kantor, nearly 3 million sales is great for any game. Bioshock is just 1 example of why terislb's nostalgia for old FPS is ignoring all the great FPS games the last several years. There's also a game called Halflife 2 that some of you might have heard of.

CoD4's single player was excellent. Brothers in Arms aims at making gamers cry. As I mentioned above, Halflife 2 has a great single player. F.E.A.R.'s single player was good.

I just don't understand people that act like old games were so superior.

Whatever, time to try some single player since the servers are down.

That's not really fair. I think it's a bit shallow to classify BioShock as a shooter, anyway. Then again, some people think Uncharted and MGS4 are shooters

It focused on the campaign, no doubt, because that's all there was. It had a great story, and engaging gameplay. It got incredible reviews. But it had no multiplayer, and it paid the price. There's nothing to really compare it to, because all FPS games have multiplayer now...

Halo 3, CoD4 and Killzone 2 have varying degrees of campaign quality. CoD4 was pretty half-assed, actually. It was fun, but it was generic. Go here, shoot these Russians. Now go here, shoot these terrorists. Rinse, repeat. *Yawn*. The multiplayer redeemed it indeed, because that could just be the best FPS multiplayer I have played on a console. It's clearly where they put most of their focus. Perhaps 20% on SP, 80% on MP.

Halo 3 was very good, but nothing special, really.

Killzone 2 was something else. It wasn't satisfied with "go here, kill that" "why" "because I told you to". It actually explains the cause of your actions. It varies gameplay. I say it's the best campaign of the three.

The multiplayer doesn't quite live up to the other two, though. I would say quite a bit of the focus in KZ2 has been on single player. All three are deserving of that 9, for different reasons.

Assassin's Creed is not deserving of that nine. If they give a 9 to Assassin's Creed, they need to say these games are at least equal...

To reiterate my original point, a game does not need to be innovative to be good.

well if you have been paying attention you might have seen that me and kantor have been trying to discuss this ..with some success i might say ... whereas the purpose of your comment seems more to agitate

im not making those things up im merely stating the opinion of people who played games before the time of call of duty

as for your statement that you think what games are great please elaborate why .. no really if you actually put some effort into explaining your point instead of agitating and alienating you might find this all alot more rewarding for all of us

why do you think cod 4 is better than the old games you probably never played?

Can you honestly tell me that a gimmicky multiplayer mode wouldn't have added at least a million sales to BioShock?

And that's a good point. Older =/= better. I would say Killzone 2 and CoD4 are on par with some of the best shooters last gen.

No, it's just absurd to me that you think FPS games have no quality single player in the last decade.

Have you played them all?

What old FPS games should I have played to shwo me the light?  Doom sure didn't have a great story!  Quake?  Unreal Tournament?

The FPS genre was built on the same type of gameplay that is available today.  You sound like Wolfenstein has a better story than CoD.

I listed games that I feel have solid single player.  What details would you like me to add?  I thought CoD4's single player was very imersive, had a nice story, and did some things that are very unique.  I'm not going to spoil the story for those that might not have played it, including you.  F.E.A.R., despite me playing the inferior PS3 verison, scared the crap out of me and I've played other "scary" games before.  They did a great job of mixing up the scary segments with shootouts as well as providing an optional story through the telephones. If you don't know about Halflife 2, read the reviews.

I mean, there's not much for me to say if you are just going to disagree that FPS doesn't have good single player experiences now when plenty of them do to me.

Maybe, maybe not.  That's not the point.  To say a game "suffers" because it "only" sells 3 million just sounds silly to me.  There are tons of FPS games that review well that don't sell that much.

@windbane: Here's what he is saying (I think):

In the old days, before this newfangled internet, and...sorry, couldn't resist

In the old days, there used to be TWO kinds of FPS: Story and SP based games, like System Shock 2 and Deus Ex, and MP-focused games, like Unreal Tournament and Quake. Terislb was a fan of the former. In recent times, these two have been contracted into just FPS. They try to put effort into the single player, but they need to put effort into the multi, and they realise that it is more important nowadays, looking at a game like Halo 3.

I think this is a consequence of terislb sucking at FPS games, and being pissed when he loses online

Lol, jk.

well i suggest you read what me and kantor have been talking about in this thread and the "killzone 2 is way too overrated" thread.. we already discussed this quite succesfully without you..

well and since you just "admited" that you never played the old gems your whole argument is pretty one sided of course if you only played the current gen fps you will say they are the best you have ever played..

as for suggesttions try system shock 1-2 half life 1 + oppsing force ,quake 2 ,, deus ex, unreal 1.. duke nukem 3d..

its funny that you would mention unreal tournament its actually a great multiplayer game but since were talking singleplayer here

please at least try to make this a usefull argument.. .if you go on with oversimplifications that im going to say doom had a better story than cod 4
no of course not ..but if you take half life for example and take a look at how little fps have evolved since then

i hate joining games right when they end and i then loose by default :p