Modern FPS games – I don’t get them??
Discussion
Am I the only one?
Let me explain a little. I’m a child of the 80’s, so grew up gaming on the NES and Amiga’s and eventually PC’s once they were able too. I’m not the world’s biggest gamer these days, but I like to play games when I get chance/opportunity to.
My all time favourite game is Doom (and Ultimate Doom, Doom II and Final Doom). I totally love this style of game.
The original Duke Nuk’em 3D carried on this game style rather well as did the original Quake. I admit Quake 2 was a bit boring though. And even the latter Series Sam games seemed to do rather well, if a little predictable and dumbed down in terms of game structure.
But what has happened to these games? I’ve still got Doom which I play on my iPhone and through a more modern interface on Windows which allows use of the mouse and slightly sharper graphics.
But I’m so not getting more modern versions of FPS’s............
I guess this started with Doom 3 where it felt like such a scripted game. There was no freedom of the originals and it was so boring by comparison. Ok the graphics where ok, although way too dark most of the time so it was boring, difficult to see and annoying.
But the real reason for this is, at the weekend I acquired an xBox360. Now I’ve not owned a console since the GameCube, although I’ve played on a few PS3’s and xBoxes in the past.
Last night I was playing Halo 3 and I’ve also played Medal of Honor and Call of Duty.
I’m just completely lost with them.....
Halo 3 just seemed to dump you straight in, no tutorial on the complex controls and what does what and why, and nothing more than a bit of pre game nonsense which really didn’t help me understand what the game was about.
And despite having played it now for a few hours I have no idea what I’m meant to be doing, or what any of the weapons or enemies are. As a game it just feels so scripted. All you do is follow some people and sometimes they stop until you go the only route you can and they follow you. And then you go back to following them again.
Then for what appears to be no reason you might get a few enemies which you shoot (or these team mates of yours shoot for you) and that’s that. I keep clearing check points and even attaining objectives, yet have no idea how or why. If you don’t follow where they lead you nothing else seems to happen. There seems to be no variation, no “secrets”, no nothing. Just basically follow the script.
Even shooting enemies seems pretty dull. As they are often really far away, which is difficult or impossible to shoot at accurately with a joypad (or for me at least
). There always seems to be too much scenery making it difficult to see them. And if you get up close you don’t actually have to do much but pull the fire trigger....
In Doom at least you had to move about and strafe as getting killed happened quick, and all the enemies were different too.
The graphics look great this I can’t deny, the controls as per all modern games seemed complex and over convoluted IMO. But does anyone else just not get or understand these games?
Let me explain a little. I’m a child of the 80’s, so grew up gaming on the NES and Amiga’s and eventually PC’s once they were able too. I’m not the world’s biggest gamer these days, but I like to play games when I get chance/opportunity to.
My all time favourite game is Doom (and Ultimate Doom, Doom II and Final Doom). I totally love this style of game.
The original Duke Nuk’em 3D carried on this game style rather well as did the original Quake. I admit Quake 2 was a bit boring though. And even the latter Series Sam games seemed to do rather well, if a little predictable and dumbed down in terms of game structure.
But what has happened to these games? I’ve still got Doom which I play on my iPhone and through a more modern interface on Windows which allows use of the mouse and slightly sharper graphics.
But I’m so not getting more modern versions of FPS’s............
I guess this started with Doom 3 where it felt like such a scripted game. There was no freedom of the originals and it was so boring by comparison. Ok the graphics where ok, although way too dark most of the time so it was boring, difficult to see and annoying.
But the real reason for this is, at the weekend I acquired an xBox360. Now I’ve not owned a console since the GameCube, although I’ve played on a few PS3’s and xBoxes in the past.
Last night I was playing Halo 3 and I’ve also played Medal of Honor and Call of Duty.
I’m just completely lost with them.....
Halo 3 just seemed to dump you straight in, no tutorial on the complex controls and what does what and why, and nothing more than a bit of pre game nonsense which really didn’t help me understand what the game was about.
And despite having played it now for a few hours I have no idea what I’m meant to be doing, or what any of the weapons or enemies are. As a game it just feels so scripted. All you do is follow some people and sometimes they stop until you go the only route you can and they follow you. And then you go back to following them again.
Then for what appears to be no reason you might get a few enemies which you shoot (or these team mates of yours shoot for you) and that’s that. I keep clearing check points and even attaining objectives, yet have no idea how or why. If you don’t follow where they lead you nothing else seems to happen. There seems to be no variation, no “secrets”, no nothing. Just basically follow the script.
Even shooting enemies seems pretty dull. As they are often really far away, which is difficult or impossible to shoot at accurately with a joypad (or for me at least
). There always seems to be too much scenery making it difficult to see them. And if you get up close you don’t actually have to do much but pull the fire trigger....In Doom at least you had to move about and strafe as getting killed happened quick, and all the enemies were different too.
The graphics look great this I can’t deny, the controls as per all modern games seemed complex and over convoluted IMO. But does anyone else just not get or understand these games?
Having just completed CoD: Black Ops I tend to agree with you.
Modern Warfare 1 / 2 and Black Ops are pretty much what is wrong with FPS these days. Fantastic graphics, amazing audio, brilliant story, crap gameplay. There is literally no AI involved in these games whatsoever. It's simply a case of a wave of never-ending enemy kamikaze AI, all following the exact same paths on every playthrough. There's no variation, they don't even attempt to avoid danger. For example, MW2, defending the diner, claymores clearly visible in the doorways, but does the AI see these and find an alternative route? No, they blow themselves up because that's the path they're scripted to take. When they've taken a couple of shots, do they retreat and take cover? Fall back? No, they remain where they are whilst you calmy wait for the dumb f
ks to pop their head out so you can finish them off.
With CoD it's sometimes pointless even fighting back because the enemy will just keep coming until you reach the next checkpoint. Your tactics simply become; run to checkpoint, kill whatever gets in your path, get killed by scripted sequence you didn't know was going to happen, restart, get past sequence you now know is coming, get to next checkpoint, etc, etc.
Modern Warfare 1 / 2 and Black Ops are pretty much what is wrong with FPS these days. Fantastic graphics, amazing audio, brilliant story, crap gameplay. There is literally no AI involved in these games whatsoever. It's simply a case of a wave of never-ending enemy kamikaze AI, all following the exact same paths on every playthrough. There's no variation, they don't even attempt to avoid danger. For example, MW2, defending the diner, claymores clearly visible in the doorways, but does the AI see these and find an alternative route? No, they blow themselves up because that's the path they're scripted to take. When they've taken a couple of shots, do they retreat and take cover? Fall back? No, they remain where they are whilst you calmy wait for the dumb f
ks to pop their head out so you can finish them off. With CoD it's sometimes pointless even fighting back because the enemy will just keep coming until you reach the next checkpoint. Your tactics simply become; run to checkpoint, kill whatever gets in your path, get killed by scripted sequence you didn't know was going to happen, restart, get past sequence you now know is coming, get to next checkpoint, etc, etc.
I loved the original Unreal, and UT for multiplayer after that.
The closest thing is Halo imho.
Though, having played Halo 2 helps a lot on the storyline and I can see it being confusing without that.
I loved doom, but I don't get the big difference (aside from graphics and AI of course) between doom/quake and Halo? Is it because halo actually has a storyline? Rather than "monsters are comming from another dimension, shoot them"?
Maybe reading up on the story/foes helps you a bit?
Oh and the controller: like I said, I played UT on a very high level (PC), now play X360 and it's just some getting used too...
The closest thing is Halo imho.
Though, having played Halo 2 helps a lot on the storyline and I can see it being confusing without that.
I loved doom, but I don't get the big difference (aside from graphics and AI of course) between doom/quake and Halo? Is it because halo actually has a storyline? Rather than "monsters are comming from another dimension, shoot them"?
Maybe reading up on the story/foes helps you a bit?
Oh and the controller: like I said, I played UT on a very high level (PC), now play X360 and it's just some getting used too...
All the things you've stated as problems seem to be evident in Doom too. You never got an introduction to the controls there, there was no real story and from memory it was all too easy to get lost and spend ages clicking on random walls hoping for something to open and give you that all-important key to allow you to progress.
Whereas you put Call of Duty in and it plonks you straight into a training level where it holds your hand through a series of tutorials, teaching you all of the major controls in the context of brushing up on your skills. Then the story plays out via various briefings and radio communications throughout each level, leaving you no more lost than you would be from watching any fast-paced TV drama.
As for different enemies, Halo has an abundance of different enemies, all of which have their own strengths and weaknesses that you must learn in order to beat them, an example being the Hunters (giant things with great big guns and shields) where experience tells you that the orange fleshy parts are their weakspot and to aim there for any chance of success.
Whereas you put Call of Duty in and it plonks you straight into a training level where it holds your hand through a series of tutorials, teaching you all of the major controls in the context of brushing up on your skills. Then the story plays out via various briefings and radio communications throughout each level, leaving you no more lost than you would be from watching any fast-paced TV drama.
As for different enemies, Halo has an abundance of different enemies, all of which have their own strengths and weaknesses that you must learn in order to beat them, an example being the Hunters (giant things with great big guns and shields) where experience tells you that the orange fleshy parts are their weakspot and to aim there for any chance of success.
ZesPak said:
I loved the original Unreal, and UT for multiplayer after that.
The closest thing is Halo imho.
Unreal Toury was great for multiplayer, used to play at Uni on the Uni network The closest thing is Halo imho.
It's more the 1 player side of things though that I was meaning with this thread.
ZesPak said:
I loved doom, but I don't get the big difference (aside from graphics and AI of course) between doom/quake and Halo? Is it because halo actually has a storyline? Rather than "monsters are comming from another dimension, shoot them"?
When you say Halo, do you mean the original Halo or Halo 3?I've not really played the original Halo so can't comment.
As for the Doom/Quake thing. Well it was the freedom. Ok the story might have been weak, although with Doom the story seems as good as it does with Halo 3 and just as not a part of the game play too.
But it was how they played.
In Doom it was a level with an exit. The only goal was to get to it and shoot anything that moves. But it was so much more than than. The levels weren't scripted, if I wanted to go back to the beginning I could. There would be area's I might not find, or would need finding to access. There was often more than one route through an area. Finding weapons and ammo and health bonuses where all part of finding your way about.
Some levels would start you off next to the exit, but you'd need to figure out how to open it. So you'd have to explore, again not scripted as you were left to find out what to do, no written mission statements, no bullet list of objectives. Just free reign within the level.
I also liked the fact in Doom that all enemies had to come from somewhere and once dead they didn't just respawn if you returned to the same area. You could see you're trail of devastation.
ZesPak said:
Maybe reading up on the story/foes helps you a bit?
Sort of tried that late last night, will try again, but I found it a little bit boring and not really "playing". I sort of felt if I'm going to read, I might as well read a proper story book. If I want to play a game, I'd like to play a game... ZesPak said:
Oh and the controller: like I said, I played UT on a very high level (PC), now play X360 and it's just some getting used too...
I admit controls are a learning curve and one I'll have to adapt too.I do much prefer keyboard/mouse for this type of thing, but I'm sure I'll adapt in time.
Although it does seem to be a trend these days:
-old games = simple controls and good gameplay
-new games = complex controls and "so so" gameplay
Maybe I'm just grumpy though....
Really hoping it'll all just "click" and I'll really start enjoying these games.
I understand where you're coming from with a number of more recent titles that all seem to follow the same kind of path to the inevitable.
I think this is why I enjoyed the original Half Life and the sequels to it. Although it follows the same principles, it was more of an adventure game in a sense that you had to work out what to do to enable you to progress to the next stage. There was more thinking involved. Yes, the level of independence wasn't always there and a lot of it followed the same paths, but having certain challenges and options to take at each stage made it feel like you had more control over the progress you were making than say the likes of COD etc.
Again, the Fallout series isn't exactly classed as an FPS, but the level of freedom in your choices of playing style and routes make it far more enjoyable than most modern war FPS games of late.
Having said that, I don't pay as much attention to the Campaigns in Call of Duty/Battlefield as I do playing online, as every game online is completely different and regardless of my playing ability, online gaming makes COD etc more realistic in its own right.
I think this is why I enjoyed the original Half Life and the sequels to it. Although it follows the same principles, it was more of an adventure game in a sense that you had to work out what to do to enable you to progress to the next stage. There was more thinking involved. Yes, the level of independence wasn't always there and a lot of it followed the same paths, but having certain challenges and options to take at each stage made it feel like you had more control over the progress you were making than say the likes of COD etc.
Again, the Fallout series isn't exactly classed as an FPS, but the level of freedom in your choices of playing style and routes make it far more enjoyable than most modern war FPS games of late.
Having said that, I don't pay as much attention to the Campaigns in Call of Duty/Battlefield as I do playing online, as every game online is completely different and regardless of my playing ability, online gaming makes COD etc more realistic in its own right.
Steve Evil said:
All the things you've stated as problems seem to be evident in Doom too. You never got an introduction to the controls there
True, but they where also much more simple. Or at least involved less buttons. But this is only a minor complaint, it was more the gameplay than just learning the controls.Steve Evil said:
, there was no real story
Well there was the text at the beginning of each episode, but I agree. The only thing I'd say that was different, and with things like Duke Nuk'em 3D. I'm not sure they needed much of a story. It was evident what you needed to do and it was about playing not role playing.Steve Evil said:
and from memory it was all too easy to get lost and spend ages clicking on random walls hoping for something to open and give you that all-important key to allow you to progress.
Maybe, never really found that myself. But as said above, it was more about freedom and exploration.
I just feel as though with all the modern FPS's I've played, there is no freedom. You just go exactly where the story and computer tell you to go. You have no choice or say in the matter and there is no alternative.
And for example, even after playing Halo 3 for a bit, I've progressed through the game, but I have no idea how or why. But I had no choice, I could do nothing else but go where it allowed me too.
Steve Evil said:
Whereas you put Call of Duty in and it plonks you straight into a training level where it holds your hand through a series of tutorials, teaching you all of the major controls in the context of brushing up on your skills.
I agree that does help and is nice, I suppose I don't really have anything against this, only for me it's a shame that you need to have such a thing in order to play. Bring back single button joysticks!!!!! 
Steve Evil said:
Then the story plays out via various briefings and radio communications throughout each level, leaving you no more lost than you would be from watching any fast-paced TV drama.
That's it, I sometimes play with no volume or low volume due to other reasons. And if I'm brutally honest, I don't want to play or feel like part of a TV drama. Again it's back to that whole scripted feel.CypherP said:
I understand where you're coming from with a number of more recent titles that all seem to follow the same kind of path to the inevitable.
I think this is why I enjoyed the original Half Life and the sequels to it. Although it follows the same principles, it was more of an adventure game in a sense that you had to work out what to do to enable you to progress to the next stage. There was more thinking involved. Yes, the level of independence wasn't always there and a lot of it followed the same paths, but having certain challenges and options to take at each stage made it feel like you had more control over the progress you were making than say the likes of COD etc.
That's it exactly.I think this is why I enjoyed the original Half Life and the sequels to it. Although it follows the same principles, it was more of an adventure game in a sense that you had to work out what to do to enable you to progress to the next stage. There was more thinking involved. Yes, the level of independence wasn't always there and a lot of it followed the same paths, but having certain challenges and options to take at each stage made it feel like you had more control over the progress you were making than say the likes of COD etc.
I think the only way I can sum it up:
3D graphics, 2D gameplay
CypherP said:
Again, the Fallout series isn't exactly classed as an FPS, but the level of freedom in your choices of playing style and routes make it far more enjoyable than most modern war FPS games of late.
Maybe I'll have to try it. I got so bored with Halo last night that I resorted to shooting my own people, but that interest only lasted a few mins too....still play halo now and then, and you do get the fkwits who find it easier to team kill than to shoot the other team, some just get confused of must be colour blind, but play on the pc where the fkwits can get autobanned 
still play UT, was war gaming with a friend and had a few games, had to let him win a lot as he is not very good and storms off if he gets wtfwpned too much
kwits who find it easier to team kill than to shoot the other team, some just get confused of must be colour blind, but play on the pc where the fkwits can get autobanned still play UT, was war gaming with a friend and had a few games, had to let him win a lot as he is not very good and storms off if he gets wtfwpned too much
Steve Evil said:
If freedom is what you're after, have a look into Far Cry 2, several miles worth of territory to make your way round, a story, driving and many ways of going about each objective.
Although I agree that there is a lot of freedom in this game, the mission scripting and going back and forth to the same locations does get very dull. IMHO, I had this game for a week and traded it in as I was getting bored of having so much open space and yet by following the story, only covering the same locations.Weapons were fun though!
300bhp/ton said:
Maybe I'll have to try it. I got so bored with Halo last night that I resorted to shooting my own people, but that interest only lasted a few mins too....
Give Fallout 3 a go. You get a very good tutorial and opening storyline which is very involving and it's also down to you to mould your character depending on what attributes you want them to have from the beginning.Failing that, a copy of Half Life 2 for the 360 isn't that expensive and I find it very engaging. I may be biased though, considering how much I played the original.
CypherP said:
Steve Evil said:
If freedom is what you're after, have a look into Far Cry 2, several miles worth of territory to make your way round, a story, driving and many ways of going about each objective.
Although I agree that there is a lot of freedom in this game, the mission scripting and going back and forth to the same locations does get very dull. IMHO, I had this game for a week and traded it in as I was getting bored of having so much open space and yet by following the story, only covering the same locations.Weapons were fun though!
CypherP said:
Steve Evil said:
If freedom is what you're after, have a look into Far Cry 2, several miles worth of territory to make your way round, a story, driving and many ways of going about each objective.
Although I agree that there is a lot of freedom in this game, the mission scripting and going back and forth to the same locations does get very dull. IMHO, I had this game for a week and traded it in as I was getting bored of having so much open space and yet by following the story, only covering the same locations.Weapons were fun though!
Well I'll have to try and see.
I guess what I'd love would be a revamped Doom. 100% the same levels, gameplay but with modern graphics. That'd suit be perfectly.
I found Far Cry 2 dull as dish water, talk about repetitive (my opinion of course) but S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series, now I enjoyed those (played two of them, Chernobyl and Pripyat). Bit grittier and moodier and sort of led but in a loose way that you can get on with it and wander at will. Fallout or S.T.A.L.K.E.R. for me for the best feeling of free play (in my defence I have not long started to play PC games).
Buy ARMA 2, Far Cry, Far Cry 2, Crysis. All allow you to complete missions pretty much as you want from whatever direction you want with fixed amounts of enemies who will do different things depending on what you are doing.
The driving around and respawning guard posts in Far Cry 2 will prob drive you mental though.
The driving around and respawning guard posts in Far Cry 2 will prob drive you mental though.
Edited by xr287 on Monday 8th November 12:20
Gassing Station | Video Games | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff