FPS is not the same as "shooter."

[oktalist]

It's decadent because games must focus on mechanics. Calling Go "romantic" is completely decadent. The same decadence as animation not focused on movement or poetry with free verse.

Those tend to be the best poems and animations IMO. And saying that games must focus on mechanics is like saying that books must focus on being a few hundred pieces of paper bound together with stitching and glue. Mechanics in games are neccessary but not always sufficient. If your aim is to tell a story, then whatever the medium, the story is still paramount.

When a child says "can I go to the bathroom," you understand them. But that doesn't mean you don't try to correct them.

Huh? Correct them how?

Edit: FWIW, I agree with your general principle. But not zealously enough to want to start a thread about it and crush all opposing viewpoints. Not even zealously enough to want to proclaim an opinion on the matter one way or the other unless pushed to do so.

 

[Et3rnalLegend64]

Correct grammar is "May I?" Of course the child is physically capable of going to the bathroom, but he/she is actually asking for permission. The can/may issue is so fixed in our heads that most people have no idea nowadays.

 

[Woodsey]

Yes, but most people aren't big enough numbnuts to not realise what is implied when you call something a shooter.

[small]zing![/small]

When a child says "can I go to the bathroom," you understand them. But that doesn't mean you don't try to correct them.

That's a grammatical error, this is a word that's mostly (and still correctly) assigned to something.

 

[oktalist]

When a child says "can I go to the bathroom," you understand them. But that doesn't mean you don't try to correct them.

Huh? Correct them how?

Correct grammar is "May I?" Of course the child is physically capable of going to the bathroom, but he/she is actually asking for permission. The can/may issue is so fixed in our heads that most people have no idea nowadays.

So is HF seriously saying he would correct someone who made such a "mistake"?

And the dictionary says it's okay, anyway.

 

[Dastardly]

You keep coming back to this odd point that games are defined solely by mechanics, but it just doesn't ring true in any regard.

If that were true, there would be no reason for characters to take any human shape... or any shape at all. It could be grey blocks shooting tiny blue blocks at large red blocks in a field of green and yellow blocks--as long as the mechanics are the same.

Of course, that's like saying a bowl of plain spaghetti is exactly the same as a bowl of spaghetti with sauce, or with cheese, or with meatballs. It's ridiculous and myopic.

Mechanics are ONE way to organize video game taxonomy, but they are not the ONLY. Some folks, in fact, argue whether they are even the most important. And it's a valid argument.

I love zombie games. The genre of these may be considered "horror" in the broadest sense, or "survival horror" in a more specific look, or even "zombie apocalypse," which is a subgenre of survival horror (itself a subgenre of horror). To me, I enjoy these games regardless of the specific mechanics (FPS, TPS, RPG, yadda yadda), so it's perfectly acceptable (and even preferable) to classify them by the genre of the subject matter.

You're trying to define them solely by the mechanics through which this subject matter is delivered. That's like saying all books are the same, because they use covers and pages, on which words or pictures might be printed. Sure, we could classify them by subject matter... but that would be "decadent."

(Incidentally... you keep-a using that word. I doona think i' means what you think i' means.)

 

[Professor Idle]

This is embarrasing.... I can't imagine why someone would have an issue with it.

 

[SextusMaximus]

Calm down, they're all technically shooters. People understand that, there are more FPSs on the market TPSs.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

unnecessary distinctions...

I seriously cannot fathom how you can think we don't need to sort Time Crisis and Contra into different genres. Quit talking about games if you can't understand something so obvious.

Maybe you should stop talking about game before you come off as a nitpicky pretentious troll. Oh wait, too late.

OT: the blanket term shooter doesn't bother me. Few people would simply call Starfox or Ikaruga a "shooter". most would say something like "space flight shooter" or "top down arcade shooter". Bottom line, they're both shooters, just as FPS, TPS, and any other genre in which you shoot things. A person COULD play Mirror's Edge as a shooter, it's just not encouraged or in the spirit of the game. And as for Thief, that's just improperly classified. That should be considered a FP stealth game, just as Splinter Cell would be a TP stealth game.

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

Eh, I don't understand what the big deal is. An FPS is a shooter. A TPS is a shooter. A cat is an animal. A sponge is an animal. Why should we get upset about general descriptive words? And if people are getting confuse about something, why get angry about it? There will always be confused people. Its not their fault, they're just new to the medium of video games.

All camels are mammals, but not all mammals are camels.

 

[EightGaugeHippo]

FPS: Shooter from the 1st person perspective
TPS: Shooter from the 3rd person Perspective
Shooter: all of the above.

FPS is a sub genre.

 

[Halo Fanboy]

snip

The thing is that mechanics are the most important thing because they are what define games: "a set of rules." Aesthetics are important for adding enjoyment to something but it isn't the ivory pieces that make Chess a quality game.

 

[TheHecatomb]

This will lead to one thing only. Every game developer that thinks he's done things a little different will want it's own genre for just that new game. It's what happened to Metal music, every freaking band has it's own genre these days. South Australian Bestial War Death Metal. Uh huh.

You have to stop specifics at a certain point. When you eat out and order steak, would you like the waiter to ask you for a full report on it's chemical components, exact date, GPS location and emotional state of the cow's death and a full biography with day-to-day activities or do you just want him to ask of you'd like it medium or rare?

 

[Okysho]

Guys guys, just look at his name. Now tell me it's not a troll.

Hori and vert SHMUPs

Pardon my French, but what the fork is a SMUP?

SMUP I'm guessing stands for Shoot 'em Up, like Tohou or Raiden.

'Scuse my Spanish but what the heck is a "gun shooter"? I though that's why shooters were called shooters! They use guns! Do some shooters shoot using massage chairs, so we have "massage chair shooters?"

call me a noob, what is a gun shooter

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

You keep coming back to this odd point that games are defined solely by mechanics, but it just doesn't ring true in any regard.

If that were true, there would be no reason for characters to take any human shape... or any shape at all. It could be grey blocks shooting tiny blue blocks at large red blocks in a field of green and yellow blocks--as long as the mechanics are the same.

Of course, that's like saying a bowl of plain spaghetti is exactly the same as a bowl of spaghetti with sauce, or with cheese, or with meatballs. It's ridiculous and myopic.

Mechanics are ONE way to organize video game taxonomy, but they are not the ONLY. Some folks, in fact, argue whether they are even the most important. And it's a valid argument.

I love zombie games. The genre of these may be considered "horror" in the broadest sense, or "survival horror" in a more specific look, or even "zombie apocalypse," which is a subgenre of survival horror (itself a subgenre of horror). To me, I enjoy these games regardless of the specific mechanics (FPS, TPS, RPG, yadda yadda), so it's perfectly acceptable (and even preferable) to classify them by the genre of the subject matter.

You're trying to define them solely by the mechanics through which this subject matter is delivered. That's like saying all books are the same, because they use covers and pages, on which words or pictures might be printed. Sure, we could classify them by subject matter... but that would be "decadent."

(Incidentally... you keep-a using that word. I doona think i' means what you think i' means.)

It's arguments like this that make me think of just how silly the "games as art" debate really is. I'm not calling you out personally, but the whole mindset about games that your statement represents is alien to me, despite becoming more common as time goes on. To me, games are, first and foremost, games. Any aspirations to being an art form have to be in the service of the gameplay, otherwise you may as well be watching a movie. I think this is why games like Half Life 2 and Bioshock tend to get pulled up more often in games as art arguments than, say, Metal Gear or Final Fantasy. They all have a message, and they all tell a story, but the difference is that the first two that I listed do it through the gameplay in a way that is unique to the medium, while the latter two do it through story telling techniques borrowed from film and prose.

That last bit is getting off the topic of my post, but it goes to show that, in this medium, the gameplay itself is much more important than the story -- and, actually, the example you gave of how games would be just as fun without the human looking characters is true; think of all the love Minecraft gets, despite its primitive graphics. There may come a time when games are sorted by story type, but I hope it never does, because, frankly, at that point games will no longer be worth playing to me. When game mechanics become unimportant, we'll see a lot more games with crappy mechanics.

 

[Halo Fanboy]

Guys guys, just look at his name. Now tell me it's not a troll.

Hori and vert SHMUPs

Pardon my French, but what the fork is a SMUP?

SMUP I'm guessing stands for Shoot 'em Up, like Tohou or Raiden.

'Scuse my Spanish but what the heck is a "gun shooter"? I though that's why shooters were called shooters! They use guns! Do some shooters shoot using massage chairs, so we have "massage chair shooters?"

call me a noob, what is a gun shooter

http://insomnia.ac/archive/genres/gun_shooting/

 

[Okysho]

'Scuse my Spanish but what the heck is a "gun shooter"? I though that's why shooters were called shooters! They use guns! Do some shooters shoot using massage chairs, so we have "massage chair shooters?"

call me a noob, what is a gun shooter

http://insomnia.ac/archive/genres/gun_shooting/

THat's just a rail shooter. Does it really need it's own sub-genre?

This is why the thread is getting hammered and OP is getting called a troll... Why do rail shooters and "gun-shooters" need distinctions? What does that make rail-shooters on the Wii? "remote-shooters?" Whether you point with a joystick or with an IR sensor is that really basis for a whole new sub-genre?

It's like Top-downs. Shoot 'em ups from the top instead of the side. Does it need it's own sub-genre?

Oblivion is an RPG, but can be played (and generally is) from first person. Does that make this a first person RPG?

come on... fact of the matter is, there's too many names for too little distinction!

 

[TheComedown]

Sorry what? Why cant I be unspecific? People ask me what type of music I like, I say metal or hardcore, I'm not going to list out things like grindcore/metalcore/deathcore etc etc, most people would look at me funny and say "what?" Most people dont know that shit, nor really want to know. How is that being anti-intellectual? that statement in itself is so mind numbingly stupid I dont really know what else to say.

Don't know music so I can't fully understand the comparison but as a general rule, if you want someone to understand you then you want to be as specific as possible. You can talk about what bands you like or something. Overly general conversation is shallow chatter.

Sorry what? You're still struggling to make sense(let alone hold together an argument, only 1 response(a very week one at that) ignoring my other point, scores 1 - 0 my way buddy).

Sub genres nit pick, and often will only have a rather small difference from the previous genre, games music movie, its all pretty similar, and unless you're talking to someone who loves to get picky and collects stamps, a broad term is fine.

So if I'm having a conversation with someone and we talk about games or something, and they ask "what kind of games do you like" to which I would would respond "Shooters" and they would be like "awe sweet", whats wrong with that? Is it ignorance to like a whole set of games? Or should I sit there and list a whole bunch of technical nit picky terms for similar genres?

"Howdy neighbor"
"Hows it going bill?"
"Pretty good, whatchya been up too?"
"Not much, just been chilling playing same games"
"Sweet, what types of games do you like?"
"Well Ted, I like to play all sorts of different games including Hori and vert SHMUPs"
"What the fuck is that Bill? I didn't know you could get aids from playing video games?"
"Neither did I"
"What other games do you like Bill?"
"Well I also like Gun Shooting games"
"Wait a minute aren't all shooting games gun shooting games?"
"Well actually no Ted, some Shooting games don't have guns, sometimes they have these things that shoot plungers or shrink rays"
"Well I'll be... you learn something new every day"
"I also like Rail Shooter games and Run n Gun games"
"Bill you shouldn't really be running with guns, you could trip and have an accident"
"Thanks for the tip Ted. I'm also a fan of Topdown Shooters"
"What are they Bill, it sounds like something I would like, sitting up high in a tower or cloud and shooting people in the head from above, sounds pretty cool"
"No Ted, thats not how they are played" (by now Bill is getting pretty bored and frustrated of his neighbors silly questions and his clear disinterest for the conversation)
"Are there anymore you like to play?"
"Yeah, I also like to play FPS, TPS, VS shooting games"
"What are those Bill?"
"Well FPS stands for First Person Shooter, TPS stands for Third Person Shooter, and VS the VS in VS shooting games stands for Valium shooter."
"You know Bill, all those games have or at least have references to shooting, why didn't you just tell me that you like shooters, or shooting games?"
"Well Ted, Halo Fanboy said that it is stupid and ignorant to say that and that we should all say the EXACT genres of games that we like"
"Oh, Halo Fanboy sounds like a bit of an idiot, you should probably ignore him from now on"
"Yeah, thats the plan, catch you later Ted, I think my roast is burning"

(2 - 0)

 

[Halo Fanboy]

^ I doubt you actually would claim to like so many genres but regardless if you told him that you like shooters without liking SHMUPs you would be lying. If someone doesn't understand something in a conversation then you can just explain it to them you don't have to dumb down the conversation.

 

[Rock Beefchest]

You keep coming back to this odd point that games are defined solely by mechanics, but it just doesn't ring true in any regard.

If that were true, there would be no reason for characters to take any human shape... or any shape at all. It could be grey blocks shooting tiny blue blocks at large red blocks in a field of green and yellow blocks--as long as the mechanics are the same.

Of course, that's like saying a bowl of plain spaghetti is exactly the same as a bowl of spaghetti with sauce, or with cheese, or with meatballs. It's ridiculous and myopic.

Mechanics are ONE way to organize video game taxonomy, but they are not the ONLY. Some folks, in fact, argue whether they are even the most important. And it's a valid argument.

I love zombie games. The genre of these may be considered "horror" in the broadest sense, or "survival horror" in a more specific look, or even "zombie apocalypse," which is a subgenre of survival horror (itself a subgenre of horror). To me, I enjoy these games regardless of the specific mechanics (FPS, TPS, RPG, yadda yadda), so it's perfectly acceptable (and even preferable) to classify them by the genre of the subject matter.

You're trying to define them solely by the mechanics through which this subject matter is delivered. That's like saying all books are the same, because they use covers and pages, on which words or pictures might be printed. Sure, we could classify them by subject matter... but that would be "decadent."

(Incidentally... you keep-a using that word. I doona think i' means what you think i' means.)

It's arguments like this that make me think of just how silly the "games as art" debate really is. I'm not calling you out personally, but the whole mindset about games that your statement represents is alien to me, despite becoming more common as time goes on. To me, games are, first and foremost, games. Any aspirations to being an art form have to be in the service of the gameplay, otherwise you may as well be watching a movie. I think this is why games like Half Life 2 and Bioshock tend to get pulled up more often in games as art arguments than, say, Metal Gear or Final Fantasy. They all have a message, and they all tell a story, but the difference is that the first two that I listed do it through the gameplay in a way that is unique to the medium, while the latter two do it through story telling techniques borrowed from film and prose.

That last bit is getting off the topic of my post, but it goes to show that, in this medium, the gameplay itself is much more important than the story -- and, actually, the example you gave of how games would be just as fun without the human looking characters is true; think of all the love Minecraft gets, despite its primitive graphics. There may come a time when games are sorted by story type, but I hope it never does, because, frankly, at that point games will no longer be worth playing to me. When game mechanics become unimportant, we'll see a lot more games with crappy mechanics.

Agreed, see Hard Rain as a example. Wonderful story, innovative and clever idea. Completely ineffective as a game.

 

[FateDarkstar]

Isn't a shooter a shooter no matter the genre? SUB or not? I mean.. call me an ignorant ***** if you will, but it still has SHOOTER in its name.. are you all that anal about it? Geez.. And for the record: I didn't even know that there was a different genre of shooters isn't it about having fun and not about what shooter is better? Thats why I enjoyed fallout so much, you can pratically shoot anyone (excluding the kids, though let me tell you if they would let me I would have lighten Little Lamplight up like the fucking 4th of July) And yes.. you may have consequences in the end, but its still fun right?