Coursework Survey on Shooters.
- Thread starter El Danny
- Start date
Recommended Videos
1. 3
2. Timesplitters 3, COD4, Half-Life, TF2.
3. PC
4. 1st
5. If they want, but I doubt it'll be successful
6. If they wan't to, sure.
7. Depends on their content
8. Yes
9. Depends
10. Destructive scenery has it's place but for more larger shooters, not for "twitch" games like Quake or COD. It just wouldn't work.
11. Yeah, and some shooters already have. *cough*Haze*cough*
13. 3, there were some strange omissions.
2. Timesplitters 3, COD4, Half-Life, TF2.
3. PC
4. 1st
5. If they want, but I doubt it'll be successful
6. If they wan't to, sure.
7. Depends on their content
8. Yes
9. Depends
10. Destructive scenery has it's place but for more larger shooters, not for "twitch" games like Quake or COD. It just wouldn't work.
11. Yeah, and some shooters already have. *cough*Haze*cough*
13. 3, there were some strange omissions.
3
Singleplayer: Freedom Fighters
Multiplayer: Battlefield Bad Company 2
PC, can't beat mouse/keyboard controls, mod support, and dedicated servers
No preference
No
No. Catering shooting games to any demographic outside of males 13-30 is a good way for a developer and publisher to lose lots of money.
No
Yes, although I would argue that Goldeneye and Rainbow Six were far more influential in the development of current-gen military-themed shooters with objective-driven gameplay.
Yes it should be a standard feature in all games in the genre. Games like Red Faction Guerrilla and Bad Company 2 show that is entirely possible.
Depends
It's something I would like to see in certain games, but most publishers will not back politically-charged games that can hurt sales or PR image. Therefore, there has to be a careful balance and consideration of all the issues.
3
1. How do you rate this generations shooters. From 1-5.
5
2. What?s your favourite shooter?
Halo Reach
3. What platform is better for shooters?
PS3/360
4. Do you prefer shooters in 3rd or 1st person?
1st
5. Do you think game developers should start experimenting with Smartphones as a new market for shooters?
No
6. Do you think developers should do more to market shooters towards women
Yes
7. Do you think any shooters should be marketed towards younger gamers (13 and below)?
No
8. Do you think that old shooters such as Quake and Doom have changed the development of shooters today?
Yes
9. Do you think destructible environments should play a larger role in shooters?
No.
10. If you answered ?Depends? on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
11. Do you think political elements should be touched upon by shooters?
Yes
12. If you answered ?Depends? on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
13. For my own feedback how would you rate this questionnaire?
5
5
2. What?s your favourite shooter?
Halo Reach
3. What platform is better for shooters?
PS3/360
4. Do you prefer shooters in 3rd or 1st person?
1st
5. Do you think game developers should start experimenting with Smartphones as a new market for shooters?
No
6. Do you think developers should do more to market shooters towards women
Yes
7. Do you think any shooters should be marketed towards younger gamers (13 and below)?
No
8. Do you think that old shooters such as Quake and Doom have changed the development of shooters today?
Yes
9. Do you think destructible environments should play a larger role in shooters?
No.
10. If you answered ?Depends? on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
11. Do you think political elements should be touched upon by shooters?
Yes
12. If you answered ?Depends? on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
13. For my own feedback how would you rate this questionnaire?
5
1. How do you rate this generations shooters. From 1-5.
4
2. What's your favourite shooter?
Max Payne 2: The Fall of Max Payne
3. What platform is better for shooters?
Pure performance, the PC is better. Other than that, there isn't really a difference.
4. Do you prefer shooters in 3rd or 1st person?
I prefer 3rd person for singleplayer and 1st person for multiplayer.
5. Do you think game developers should start experimenting with Smartphones as a new market for shooters?
Hell no.
6. Do you think developers should do more to market shooters towards women
Nope.
7. Do you think any shooters should be marketed towards younger gamers (13 and below)?
No.
8. Do you think that old shooters such as Quake and Doom have changed the development of shooters today?
Yes.
9. Do you think destructible environments should play a larger role in shooters?
I don't really care one way or the other. It doesn't play any role in my enjoyment of shooters.
11. Do you think political elements should be touched upon by shooters?
Not 'should', but very definitely 'could'.
13. For my own feedback how would you rate this questionnaire?
3. Questions seem a bit random.
4
2. What's your favourite shooter?
Max Payne 2: The Fall of Max Payne
3. What platform is better for shooters?
Pure performance, the PC is better. Other than that, there isn't really a difference.
4. Do you prefer shooters in 3rd or 1st person?
I prefer 3rd person for singleplayer and 1st person for multiplayer.
5. Do you think game developers should start experimenting with Smartphones as a new market for shooters?
Hell no.
6. Do you think developers should do more to market shooters towards women
Nope.
7. Do you think any shooters should be marketed towards younger gamers (13 and below)?
No.
8. Do you think that old shooters such as Quake and Doom have changed the development of shooters today?
Yes.
9. Do you think destructible environments should play a larger role in shooters?
I don't really care one way or the other. It doesn't play any role in my enjoyment of shooters.
11. Do you think political elements should be touched upon by shooters?
Not 'should', but very definitely 'could'.
13. For my own feedback how would you rate this questionnaire?
3. Questions seem a bit random.
1. 3 All seeming a bit samey. A few great ones, lots of copies.
2. HL2, Metro 2033
3. PC
4. 3rd
5. No
6.Women play videogames? Yes I guess. I don't really know. To be honest, women will play shooters because they like shooters, not cause it's targeted at them specificly, that's how I see it.
7. No
8. Yes
9. Depends
10. Will there be lots of variation? If not then there is no point. Watching the same things
getting destroyed over and over gets boring.
11. Depends
12. Fictional yesl. Past or present real ones, no.
13. 4 (there's a typo on question 12)
2. HL2, Metro 2033
3. PC
4. 3rd
5. No
6.
7. No
8. Yes
9. Depends
10. Will there be lots of variation? If not then there is no point. Watching the same things
getting destroyed over and over gets boring.
11. Depends
12. Fictional yesl. Past or present real ones, no.
13. 4 (there's a typo on question 12)
1. 2, too many generic shooters to justify the few good ones.
2. Timesplitters 2
3. PC
4. 3rd
5. No
6. Yes
7. No, a considerable amount of shooter players on all age rating shooters are kids.
8. Yes
9. Depends,
10. Because it could become given that shooters need to have it in, thus sacrificing other more important things for destructo-scenery.
11. Depends,
12. If done tastefully and meaningfully rather than a means of generating controversy.
13. 4, it was fine, no problems.
Hope this helped, and I hope your grade/mark is great!
2. Timesplitters 2
3. PC
4. 3rd
5. No
6. Yes
7. No, a considerable amount of shooter players on all age rating shooters are kids.
8. Yes
9. Depends,
10. Because it could become given that shooters need to have it in, thus sacrificing other more important things for destructo-scenery.
11. Depends,
12. If done tastefully and meaningfully rather than a means of generating controversy.
13. 4, it was fine, no problems.
Hope this helped, and I hope your grade/mark is great!
1. How do you rate this generations shooters. From 1-5.
1(bad) 2 3 4 5(good)
About 3. Some horrible things like Homefront, some bearable things like Killzone 3, some good things like Bulletstorm.
2. What?s your favourite shooter?
All time favourite is Team Fortress 2.
3. What platform is better for shooters?
Wii, PS3/360, Handhelds, PC, Other
I do prefer PC controls but the shooter market is moving steadily towards consoles.
4. Do you prefer shooters in 3rd or 1st person?
3rd 1st
I dont mind view perspective as long as i can see what im doing.
5. Do you think game developers should start experimenting with Smartphones as a new market for shooters?
Yes No
No.
6. Do you think developers should do more to market shooters towards women
Yes No
Its up to them.
7. Do you think any shooters should be marketed towards younger gamers (13 and below)?
Yes No
I cant imagine any shooter nowadays getting rated below 15.
8. Do you think that old shooters such as Quake and Doom have changed the development of shooters today?
Yes No
No. Quake and Doom are the origins of the shooter franchise. The game that is at the root of what it is now is Half Life.
9. Do you think destructible environments should play a larger role in shooters?
Yes No Depends.
Depends.
10. If you answered ?Depends? on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
Well if its a cover based combat game, like Killzone 3, its a good idea to make some cover spots destructible so the AI that already outnumbers you doesnt get so many firing angles on you too.
However if its a sraight game that measures health in how many bullets youve just deflected with your chin, no.
11. Do you think political elements should be touched upon by shooters?
Yes No Depends.
Depends.
12. If you answered ?Depends? on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
Depends on how close to real life the game wants to be.
Conversely, the closer a shooter has been to real life, the less good it tends to get.
13. For my own feedback how would you rate this questionnaire?
1(bad) 2 3 4 5(good)
An overall 3. Use less multiple choice questions.
1(bad) 2 3 4 5(good)
About 3. Some horrible things like Homefront, some bearable things like Killzone 3, some good things like Bulletstorm.
2. What?s your favourite shooter?
All time favourite is Team Fortress 2.
3. What platform is better for shooters?
Wii, PS3/360, Handhelds, PC, Other
I do prefer PC controls but the shooter market is moving steadily towards consoles.
4. Do you prefer shooters in 3rd or 1st person?
3rd 1st
I dont mind view perspective as long as i can see what im doing.
5. Do you think game developers should start experimenting with Smartphones as a new market for shooters?
Yes No
No.
6. Do you think developers should do more to market shooters towards women
Yes No
Its up to them.
7. Do you think any shooters should be marketed towards younger gamers (13 and below)?
Yes No
I cant imagine any shooter nowadays getting rated below 15.
8. Do you think that old shooters such as Quake and Doom have changed the development of shooters today?
Yes No
No. Quake and Doom are the origins of the shooter franchise. The game that is at the root of what it is now is Half Life.
9. Do you think destructible environments should play a larger role in shooters?
Yes No Depends.
Depends.
10. If you answered ?Depends? on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
Well if its a cover based combat game, like Killzone 3, its a good idea to make some cover spots destructible so the AI that already outnumbers you doesnt get so many firing angles on you too.
However if its a sraight game that measures health in how many bullets youve just deflected with your chin, no.
11. Do you think political elements should be touched upon by shooters?
Yes No Depends.
Depends.
12. If you answered ?Depends? on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
Depends on how close to real life the game wants to be.
Conversely, the closer a shooter has been to real life, the less good it tends to get.
13. For my own feedback how would you rate this questionnaire?
1(bad) 2 3 4 5(good)
An overall 3. Use less multiple choice questions.
1. 3
2. Counterstrike Source
3. PC
4. Depends on if the game is good or not, generally 1st
5. yes
6. yes, but in the vein of games like portal.
7. only if it would be a suitable game to market (I'm looking at you DS2!!!)
8. yes, these are the grandfathers of shooters after the ancestors of Maze Wars and Wolfenstein3D.
9. Yes, Going on the success of the Red Faction series, and the fact that destroying cover in cover based shooters should be an important part of gameplay.
11. Only relevant ones. If the multiplayer mode of a game is set in Afganistan, then why shouldn't the non US force be the Taliban?
13. 4, pretty good, but there are a few more things to ask about shooters, specifically Gameplay Mechanics and whay preferences people have to fast/slow games, long tactical/intense short scale games.
2. Counterstrike Source
3. PC
4. Depends on if the game is good or not, generally 1st
5. yes
6. yes, but in the vein of games like portal.
7. only if it would be a suitable game to market (I'm looking at you DS2!!!)
8. yes, these are the grandfathers of shooters after the ancestors of Maze Wars and Wolfenstein3D.
9. Yes, Going on the success of the Red Faction series, and the fact that destroying cover in cover based shooters should be an important part of gameplay.
11. Only relevant ones. If the multiplayer mode of a game is set in Afganistan, then why shouldn't the non US force be the Taliban?
13. 4, pretty good, but there are a few more things to ask about shooters, specifically Gameplay Mechanics and whay preferences people have to fast/slow games, long tactical/intense short scale games.
Answers in bold.El Danny said:If you could take them time to do this, that'd be great.
Also I need to interview a 'Professional' who's obviously made a career in some way or another with Shooters. Can be done over Email, or if you're in the UK, over the phone.
Thanks in advance.
Disclaimer: I don't really play that many shooters, especially modern ones.
Battlefield 2
CoD 4
3. To be honest, I wouldn't really know. I just know that the ones I played are less fun than my favorite, but I think a large part of that is because I suck at them. My biggest problem with most modern shooters is that I often can't see the enemies good enough.
Counter-Strike Source
Battlefield 2
CoD 4
PC. Mostly because I can't seem to get a hang of moving around with thumbsticks. But I also think/know that the mouse is inherently better for shooters anyway.
First. Aiming is often bullshit in 3rd.
I think there's nothing wrong with experimentation. But do I think that this is something that really needs to be done? No.
I don't really care, or see how that could happen. I advise a gender-neutral marketing campaign so as not to alienate potential female customers, but I my gut says that aggression-based will probably always appeal more to men on average.
No. 1) because I don't want to see any more controversy about that and 2) you don't "need" to do that anyway. If you market something at 16 or 18 year olds, younger kids will think it's cool anyway. I personally couldn't care less if someone let's their young kid play a shooter (although it can depend a little bit on the game). That is for the parents to decide.
Yes (and no). As some of the first shooters, they no doubt heavily influenced today's game developers. But on the other hand, I am seeing very little of these games back in modern shooters (except of course that you walk around and shoot things). Most modern shooters tend to be more "realistic".
Yes, destructible environments are awesome. This would open up many opportunities for strategic play (and destroying stuff can be just plain fun).
Depends. They shouldn't have to, but they should be able to. What I mean by that is that I don't think it is necessary (so the answer to your literal question is "no"), but people also shouldn't ***** about it when they do. Games are a medium just like books, music and television and they should be treated as such. If someone wants to make a game about playing as Al-Qaeda shooting Western soldiers, they should be able to.
3. I don't like that I could only answer "depends" in some questions. Also, some questions could maybe be clearer.
1. 3
2. Resident Evil 4, Call of Duty 4, Timesplitters 3.
3. PC
4. 1st
5. Yes
6. Yes
7. Yes*
*It would need to be presented in a specific way to be allowed to be sold to younger children. That onld FPS game based on Unreal Tournament using Nerf weapons comes to mind as a good starting point.
8. No
9. Depends
10. If it makes sense to have destructable environments from a game design perspective; if there are a lot of enemies then the player should not be in a situation where they have no cover or lack some other way to fight through the gunfire.
11. Depends
12. Again, where it makes sense for the game, though this time more on a perspective of setting. Not sure if it is a true example, but the now cancelled Six Days in Fallujah should not have been dropped. I blame both Konami, the Media and the somewhat disproportionate reaction of some members of the public for this. The game had every right to exist.
13. 3
2. Resident Evil 4, Call of Duty 4, Timesplitters 3.
3. PC
4. 1st
5. Yes
6. Yes
7. Yes*
*It would need to be presented in a specific way to be allowed to be sold to younger children. That onld FPS game based on Unreal Tournament using Nerf weapons comes to mind as a good starting point.
8. No
9. Depends
10. If it makes sense to have destructable environments from a game design perspective; if there are a lot of enemies then the player should not be in a situation where they have no cover or lack some other way to fight through the gunfire.
11. Depends
12. Again, where it makes sense for the game, though this time more on a perspective of setting. Not sure if it is a true example, but the now cancelled Six Days in Fallujah should not have been dropped. I blame both Konami, the Media and the somewhat disproportionate reaction of some members of the public for this. The game had every right to exist.
13. 3
1) 3
2) Killzone 3
3) I like the 360 controller, but PS3= sexy graphics
4) 1st
5) They could, but I don't have a smartphone. Nor would I play them if I did.
6) No, all the girl gamers I know find out about games like I do. (I'm a guy)
7) No, I would draw the absolute line at 15-16. I will say until they are mature enough to understand it is just a game, they should not be able to play it. Reguardless of age.
8) Everything, good or bad, has influenced shooters today. As the old saying goes, "If you do not learn from your past, you are doomed to repeat it."
9) Yes, I love being able to tactically sculpt the battlefield to my liking. No more corner camping for you!
10) see above
11) Depends
12) If done well, not particularly biased one way or another, and relivent to the story.
13) 4, but don't feel bad. I NEVER give ANYTHING 100% reviews. As nothing is ever perfect.
2) Killzone 3
3) I like the 360 controller, but PS3= sexy graphics
4) 1st
5) They could, but I don't have a smartphone. Nor would I play them if I did.
6) No, all the girl gamers I know find out about games like I do. (I'm a guy)
7) No, I would draw the absolute line at 15-16. I will say until they are mature enough to understand it is just a game, they should not be able to play it. Reguardless of age.
8) Everything, good or bad, has influenced shooters today. As the old saying goes, "If you do not learn from your past, you are doomed to repeat it."
9) Yes, I love being able to tactically sculpt the battlefield to my liking. No more corner camping for you!
10) see above
11) Depends
12) If done well, not particularly biased one way or another, and relivent to the story.
13) 4, but don't feel bad. I NEVER give ANYTHING 100% reviews. As nothing is ever perfect.
1. 3 (a few are really good, many are average or even taking steps back).
2. Team Fortress 2, Red Orchestra, Bad Company 2, metro 2033 and the Half-life series.
3. PC only
4. 1st person is preferred but that doesn't mean you can't make a good 3rd person shooter (they just usually are console ports and aren't optimized for the PC, though I did really enjoy Uncharted 2 on the PS3).
5. Don't care, I don't have a smart phone.
6. Don't know how the industry would do that except by not exaggerating characters.
7. I don't trust 99% of developers who make FPS games to make one for children that isn't stupid, so no.
8. They lead to current ones I'm sure, but I have no idea what Quake is like (never played it).
9. Depending on the shooter (ie, TF2 doesn't really need it, but its great in other games especially Red Orchestra or Battlefield) destructible environments can be awesome and really add realism.
10. Its a lot of extra work and depends on what kind of shooter it will be, Team Fortress 2 is a fun wacky slightly cartoony shooter that doesn't need destructible maps, but if a shooter is at least pretending to be realistic then it should have destructible enviroments as we can do them and its time for shooters to keep advancing, not going backwards or stagnating (aka Call of Duty).
11. Depends.
12. Only if relevant to the setting and time period and preferably only if they do a good job of tyeing it in.
13. 3, not bad but could ask more about gameplay mechanics, story, etc.
2. Team Fortress 2, Red Orchestra, Bad Company 2, metro 2033 and the Half-life series.
3. PC only
4. 1st person is preferred but that doesn't mean you can't make a good 3rd person shooter (they just usually are console ports and aren't optimized for the PC, though I did really enjoy Uncharted 2 on the PS3).
5. Don't care, I don't have a smart phone.
6. Don't know how the industry would do that except by not exaggerating characters.
7. I don't trust 99% of developers who make FPS games to make one for children that isn't stupid, so no.
8. They lead to current ones I'm sure, but I have no idea what Quake is like (never played it).
9. Depending on the shooter (ie, TF2 doesn't really need it, but its great in other games especially Red Orchestra or Battlefield) destructible environments can be awesome and really add realism.
10. Its a lot of extra work and depends on what kind of shooter it will be, Team Fortress 2 is a fun wacky slightly cartoony shooter that doesn't need destructible maps, but if a shooter is at least pretending to be realistic then it should have destructible enviroments as we can do them and its time for shooters to keep advancing, not going backwards or stagnating (aka Call of Duty).
11. Depends.
12. Only if relevant to the setting and time period and preferably only if they do a good job of tyeing it in.
13. 3, not bad but could ask more about gameplay mechanics, story, etc.
1. How do you rate this generations shooters. From 1-5.
- 3
2. What's your favourite shooter?
- hmm... multiplayer: BF:V (the old one), for singleplayer it'd be Max Payne 1
3. What platform is better for shooters?
- PC
4. Do you prefer shooters in 3rd or 1st person?
- can i say "depends"? guess not... well, then FPS
5. Do you think game developers should start experimenting with Smartphones as a new market for shooters?
- nah, it's called smartPHONE, not smartLittleExpensiveThingWithTooSmallScreenForShooters
6. Do you think developers should do more to market shooters towards women
- no (if women, as well as men, know themselves, they'll know what they want/want to try, so it's ok the way it is)
7. Do you think any shooters should be marketed towards younger gamers (13 and below)?
- yes (unless they don't try to be red screen - so real!, because shooter is a game mechanic, nothing more)
8. Do you think that old shooters such as Quake and Doom have changed the development of shooters today?
- yes (copy what is successfull)
9. Do you think destructible environments should play a larger role in shooters?
- Depends
10. If you answered 'Depends' on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
- destructible environment is a game mechanic; it depends on the individual game if this mechanic makes sense/works/is fun for the specific game. e.g., i didn't miss crashing houses in... BF2/V/2142/1942, Q3A, UT(1999 i believe?), and still don't, because these games are not designed to use this specific mechanic
11. Do you think political elements should be touched upon by shooters?
- Depends.
12. If you answered 'Depends' on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
- i assume you meant question 11? if so: political themes/elements are probably a mechanic for storytelling (in its widest meaning), so there's no real room for that in MP (because no-one will care, since the MP is about shooting, not contemplating the deeper message of the game); also, a "yes" to this question would mean that every shooter should somehow be political, which forbids fun shooters like bulletstorm (most recent example i know of). but in general, i think that games should first and foremost be about fun, not political discussions; there are forums and many other ways to talk about those. still, if the devs manage to put some really "intelligent" and meaningful (in rl) stuff in their game, go ahead (no, not a game like homefront. that only makes me roll my eyes)
13. For my own feedback how would you rate this questionnaire?
-a 4.5 (there's always room for improvement, but this one is good )
- 3
2. What's your favourite shooter?
- hmm... multiplayer: BF:V (the old one), for singleplayer it'd be Max Payne 1
3. What platform is better for shooters?
- PC
4. Do you prefer shooters in 3rd or 1st person?
- can i say "depends"? guess not... well, then FPS
5. Do you think game developers should start experimenting with Smartphones as a new market for shooters?
- nah, it's called smartPHONE, not smartLittleExpensiveThingWithTooSmallScreenForShooters
6. Do you think developers should do more to market shooters towards women
- no (if women, as well as men, know themselves, they'll know what they want/want to try, so it's ok the way it is)
7. Do you think any shooters should be marketed towards younger gamers (13 and below)?
- yes (unless they don't try to be red screen - so real!, because shooter is a game mechanic, nothing more)
8. Do you think that old shooters such as Quake and Doom have changed the development of shooters today?
- yes (copy what is successfull)
9. Do you think destructible environments should play a larger role in shooters?
- Depends
10. If you answered 'Depends' on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
- destructible environment is a game mechanic; it depends on the individual game if this mechanic makes sense/works/is fun for the specific game. e.g., i didn't miss crashing houses in... BF2/V/2142/1942, Q3A, UT(1999 i believe?), and still don't, because these games are not designed to use this specific mechanic
11. Do you think political elements should be touched upon by shooters?
- Depends.
12. If you answered 'Depends' on question 9, please explain your reasoning.
- i assume you meant question 11? if so: political themes/elements are probably a mechanic for storytelling (in its widest meaning), so there's no real room for that in MP (because no-one will care, since the MP is about shooting, not contemplating the deeper message of the game); also, a "yes" to this question would mean that every shooter should somehow be political, which forbids fun shooters like bulletstorm (most recent example i know of). but in general, i think that games should first and foremost be about fun, not political discussions; there are forums and many other ways to talk about those. still, if the devs manage to put some really "intelligent" and meaningful (in rl) stuff in their game, go ahead (no, not a game like homefront. that only makes me roll my eyes)
13. For my own feedback how would you rate this questionnaire?
-a 4.5 (there's always room for improvement, but this one is good
)