Has COD ruined the FPS experience forever?

[Cursed Frogurt]

I think multiplayer wise, shooters feel rather boring without some sort of unlock / perk system that became really popular with CoD4. If not, it better be damn fun and require coordination and never have a dull round, ya know, like Spies vs. Mercs (but that's not so much a shooter really).

 

[EricBC]

COD:MW really started the current trend of "realistic" type military shooters on the console (since Battlefield and Counter-Strike had the PC market wrapped up already), although the health system(s) that either allow you to regenerate like you're Weapon X or magic life canteens don't really add anything to the realism, but I digress.
When you get a game that sells really well like that there is a kind of rush to try to copy the game mechanics or try to capture the feel of that particular game. The really stupid thing is that the market quickly gets saturated with theme "me too" type of products, which eventually lessens the impact of the original product. When this happens the next big idea for the genre will begin to take hold, usually as a reaction to the current norm. This is why I think there is so much anticipation for Bulletstorm right now.
So to answer your question, no, COD didn't kill FPS. They just happen to sit comfortably near the top for now.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

I kinda see what you mean. FPS is, was, and always will be the single most preferred "delivery method" of video games. The reason for this being that First Person is the most immersive method of delivery. Sure you have shit like CoD that is a go to target, but you also have gold like Half-Life, Deus Ex, System Shock, Bioshock, Fallout 3.etc. All of these succeed because the FP helps them build a deep, immersive world that players can drop into.

CoD is a taint; a flesh wound on Gaming history! But i agree with the others and say that, Flesh wounds......they heal.
All we need is some bandages and We have nothing to worry about

 

[Bloodstain]

It's not COD's fault. It's the fault of those people who think COD IS SOOOO GREAT AND REALISTIC and are going to defend it anywhere, anytime.
There are a lot of those people.

 

[Jamous]

I think Crysis 2 isn't going to be dumbed down that much, although it might be a little. (Better not be that much *grumblegrumble*) And in answer to all games being too much or not enough like COD to be good? I call Bulletstorm. It looks AWESOME. And also not much like CoD.

I kinda see what you mean. FPS is, was, and always will be the single most preferred "delivery method" of video games. The reason for this being that First Person is the most immersive method of delivery. Sure you have shit like CoD that is a go to target, but you also have gold like Half-Life, Deus Ex, System Shock, Bioshock, Fallout 3.etc. All of these succeed because the FP helps them build a deep, immersive world that players can drop into.

CoD is a taint; a flesh wound on Gaming history! But i agree with the others and say that, Flesh wounds......they heal.
All we need is some bandages and We have nothing to worry about

Flesh wounds? We can take several. I have no limbs, and they are naught but fleshwounds.

 

[Clockwork Scarecrow.]

No, and I consider the idea foolish and insubstantial.

 

[IronCladNinja]

I wouldn't say its ruined the experience, but it has ruined the audience to a point that multi-player is once again becoming the biggest (if not only) selling point, to a large part of the gaming demographic. Won't last long though. This online-fps craze has happened before with Quake 1, 2, 3, and Unreal Tournament (Still love UT). Albeit, on a much larger scale.

 

[Wayneguard]

But yeah, the sooner CoD dies alongside all the real-life based shooters the sooner we get back to fun shooters like the early 90's.

You hold doom and wolf3d as the pinnacle of fps achievement?

 

[Zipa]

Halo has done far more damage tbh, most people now compare any shooter to halo much more so than CoD. And halo is just :|

 

[Guido656]

Hell no!! As long as Valve keep making games, then we are safe.

The Half-Life series are a bunch of games that you definitely can't say "that's too much/not enough like COD".

Team Fortress, sweet mother mercy you are the savior!

 

[Xaositect]

Not really. Its not like the FPS genre was this blossoming wellspring of originality and variance to begin with.

Its essentially the same shit people were doing all those years ago with doom: pointing and shooting.

Dont get me wrong, I do enjoy a good shooter game every now and again, but the genre is just the place for mindless, repetative bullshit and competative multiplayer. There isnt much to "ruin" - same shit, slightly different visuals etc.

Alpha Protocol being called an ME2 ripoff is insulting though, because ME2 is just a Gears of War ripoff, so how does that work? ME2 can hardly be called an RPG anymore anyway, just a shooter with a piss weak power system and a minimally interactive series of cutscenes.

 

[XT inc]

I don't see what people are hating so much about CoD. I mean besides the shady ass business they run. All it needs it to take 2-3 years off and come back with fluidity of movement, customizable character and gun options, forge and theater mode, zombies, custom game times to the nines, good killstreaks even ones banned from match making, really good rewards for playing etc.

You want to know why everyone hates CoD is because its a whore. It has zero, zip, nada integrity. It is there for you to buy and have all the little things that make it up as a whole, sure you aren't getting some meaningful world changing story experience but It'll do the things you like over and over again until a newer fresher one is ready for purchase.

you give them the time to tear apart and steal the best aspects of other hit games with their unapologetic attitude and lack of a fuck towards being original, and you'll get something with all the bells and whistles.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I hate to burst your bubble, but Duke Nukem is not a COD killer. The problem being that it's soo damn old, and been in production soo long that anyone below the age of 15 has never heard of the franchise before now, and therefore doesn't give a damn about it. This is the same demographic that plays COD every night before bed. The 2 demographics barely overlap, with most of the support for Duke Nukem coming from an older generation of gamer, so I dare say that Duke Nukem is no where near killing COD, since COD's fans won't really be buying it.

1) I agree. Duke Nukem is not a CoD4 killer. But it's not trying to be one either from the looks of things. Call of Duty is about shiny graphics, pseudo-realism, and creating an online container for all the world's spoiled douchebag brats. Duke Nukem is a recreation of a movie comprised of equal parts spoof, cinemax and action exploitation.
Totally different themes and intentions.

2) Duke Nukem's current technical production run can't be older than 3 years now. People still think that production for the game has been contiguous for all these years. It hasn't. It's been sporadic. Why else has it taken this long? Because the production ended and restarted several times. This isn't the culmination of 13 years hard work; it's a modern interpretation of a design document from the late 90s only this time with a release schedule finalized.

Though I admit, the trailer for DNF looks surprisingly good and even kind of fun. I'm hoping the game doesn't forget to do the same.

On topic:
Call of Duty 4 is what's currently popular. Prior to Modern Warfare, it was Gears of War. Prior to that, it was Halo 2. Prior to that Halo 1. (for consoles)

Simply put, so long as Call of Duty dominates the FPS genre, derivative works will appear (that is, clones, or games that use design concepts specifically lifted from Call of Duty 4) until people get tired of it.

I'm not all that impressed with CoD4 or its two official clones (MW2 and Black Ops), though I am tired of people telling me how stupid I am for not playing/liking it. That's the one major problem I have with the game; the hype. I don't want to play it, and I don't care about the game itself, yet media, friends and other gamers continuously try to jam it down my throat.

 

[gigastar]

But yeah, the sooner CoD dies alongside all the real-life based shooters the sooner we get back to fun shooters like the early 90's.

You hold doom and wolf3d as the pinnacle of fps achievement?

I see you didnt read my post correctly. I specifically mentioned fun shooters (underlined). As in shooters that dont have us cowering behind chest-high-walls or around corners whenever a bullet comes within a kilometer of our character. Also one thing I miss dearly in shooters is a clear indication of just how many more bullets you can take to the chin until you need to activate your testosterone-fueled healing factor.

Also I stictly judge games by their single-player content unless its multiplayer-based.

That said my favorite shooters at this moment are Dead Space 2 and Team Fortress 2.

 

[Iwana Humpalot]

Nope, it hasn't. I still enjoy playing cod, but i have to agree that i'm getting tired of it little by little.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I hate to burst your bubble, but Duke Nukem is not a COD killer. The problem being that it's soo damn old, and been in production soo long that anyone below the age of 15 has never heard of the franchise before now, and therefore doesn't give a damn about it. This is the same demographic that plays COD every night before bed. The 2 demographics barely overlap, with most of the support for Duke Nukem coming from an older generation of gamer, so I dare say that Duke Nukem is no where near killing COD, since COD's fans won't really be buying it.

1) I agree. Duke Nukem is not a CoD4 killer. But it's not trying to be one either from the looks of things. Call of Duty is about shiny graphics, pseudo-realism, and creating an online container for all the world's spoiled douchebag brats. Duke Nukem is a recreation of a movie comprised of equal parts spoof, cinemax and action exploitation.
Totally different themes and intentions.

2) Duke Nukem's current technical production run can't be older than 3 years now. People still think that production for the game has been contiguous for all these years. It hasn't. It's been sporadic. Why else has it taken this long? Because the production ended and restarted several times. This isn't the culmination of 13 years hard work; it's a modern interpretation of a design document from the late 90s only this time with a release schedule finalized.

Though I admit, the trailer for DNF looks surprisingly good and even kind of fun. I'm hoping the game doesn't forget to do the same.

I never said that I thought Duke Nukem was trying to be a COD killer, the guy I quoted did. I was just pointing out that he's wrong, and even if Duke Nukem wanted to be a COD killer, it wasn't going to happen.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Uh...I thought Halo ruined the FPS franchise. Is it Call of Duty's turn to take the blame for it? Because it if it, I'm pretty sure they got some of their ideas from Halo.

Nothing's been ruined for me. I enjoy Call of Duty and I enjoy other FPS games too. F.E.A.R 3 is coming out soon and I bought Medal of Honor on release day. People that compare games to one specific game in that field (normally said person's favorite game) bother me. It's not as good as Call of Duty because it's NOT CoD. Go play that and leave me alone. And those that say "It's so much better than CoD" I'm happy for you. Now let me play Call of Duty in peace.

 

[SalamanderJoe]

Yeah somewhat. I think Call of Duty is now basically the standard formula for the FPS in our generation, and that's why Bulletstorm, Duke Nuken Forever and Bodycount all appeal to the dormant but still niggly part of the human mind that likes bursting into a room and killing shit, kicking muntants in the groin and taking an RPG to the face and hardly registering it, rather than taking one hit and restarting the checkpoint for a 43rd time. (I still hate Black Ops on Veteran...)