I like them if they have a creative premise. I can play old school fps games all day. I am not a multiplayer person so a good campaign is necessary. Playing through real life military situations in first person is not what I got into them for. Put some aliens or monsters in them.
I hate FPS's.
- Thread starter retyopy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Even, say, Bioshock? Really? I mean, I'm a pacifist too. I can't harm a fly... literally. I capture them and let them out of my window. But I don't have a blanket hatred for the FPS genre. There's some good ones out there. Halo wasn't bad, and I rather liked the first one especially. And the aforementioned Bioshock is one of my favorite games, despite the fact that I'm usually more RPG-oriented.retyopy said:
...Plus... almost every game requires you to "take another human life" in some fashion, whether it's a climactic boss fight or what.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that there's good FPSs and bad FPSs just like there are good games of any other genre and bad games of any other genre, at least in my opinion. Perhaps you just haven't found the ones you would like?
I blame it on all the FPS-games that came out every single month with the same theme and very little differences. I'm looking at you: Battlefield, Medal of Honour, Modern Warfare! It's all the same...
That doesn't mean I hate all FPS's. Some shooters can be fun, if they have a story behind it or elements (like strategy or RPG) that make them less generic than the rest of the herd. Games like Half-Life, Gears of War, Mass Effect, Fallout 3, Deus Ex and Bioshock I don't mind playing.
That doesn't mean I hate all FPS's. Some shooters can be fun, if they have a story behind it or elements (like strategy or RPG) that make them less generic than the rest of the herd. Games like Half-Life, Gears of War, Mass Effect, Fallout 3, Deus Ex and Bioshock I don't mind playing.
I like different FPS games for different reasons, but yes, a lot of them are kind of crap. Especially the ones sponsored by Wally McChesthigh.
COD is a fun time killer, I like it because its just pure fun. I've been put into a trance by COD, there was no screen, there was no controller, there was just me, and the game.
Halo has a good story, and the MP is fun. Reach being my fav.
Battlefield I've never gotten to play a full game because my game is bugged, but from what I can tell its pretty fun.
COD is a fun time killer, I like it because its just pure fun. I've been put into a trance by COD, there was no screen, there was no controller, there was just me, and the game.
Halo has a good story, and the MP is fun. Reach being my fav.
Battlefield I've never gotten to play a full game because my game is bugged, but from what I can tell its pretty fun.
Well I suppose then that this is just one genre that is not your cup of tea. Fps are typically designed around the desire to make the player feel like they are the character. So like Twilight which has a bland protagonist that girls could replace with themselves, fps often lack central characters with any real well "character." That however takes me out of the experience. I want to know who the guy I am playing is. He needs depth and hobbies, at the very least he need to do more than grunt and shoot. But since most of them are war based you cannot exactly have a bunch of witty wise crackers or philosophical gurus on the field I feel it just would not fit. People were upset about the characterizations of Tyson and Rios in the first Army of Two. EA changed the voice actors and their personalities the pair lost something after that. That said I loved Resistance 2 because Nathan Hale actually spoke. First game he had fewer than 5 lines he was by no means a stellar character but he existed. Fun fact super soldier Nathan Hale is voiced by the same guy who voiced super soldier Captain America in Marvel Ultimate 2 . I know it sucks but experimentation in this uber expensive development environment is just not something companies are comfortable doing. I apologize for the Twilight analogy but I felt it fit. I however do not feel that the two have any overlap outside of the main character thing.
Well, if you can't differentiate between the value of some pixels and some people, maybe you shouldn't play games where you shoot them, and maybe I should thank you for not wanting to play them.
I don't mind fps games, I'm just not big on them. I don't like realistic military shooters like Battlefield or Cod, but I like shooters that have a very sci-fi feel to them like Resistance: fom, Fallout 3, crysis, borderlands, and bioshock.
But I prefer action/adventure games.
But I prefer action/adventure games.
I don't see how pacifism has any impact on your ability to engage in virtual homicide. Furthermore, essentially every game ever made is centered around combat and taking the lives of others. Just because the enemies in Mario and Sonic burst into coins, doesn't mean you haven't just killed them. Try playing Half Life 2 (best FPS game in existence IMO) if you haven't and see how you do with that.
retyopy said:
...but seriously, if you don't like the idea of shooting people, a genre defined by shooting people might not be your thing. OTOH, there are plenty of games that use WASD+Mouse to move around that don't necessarily involve killing people. Minecraft is either mostly or entirely non-violent, and pacifist runs in Morrowind and (to a lesser extent) Oblivion are completely viable for most quests.
They're okay, so long as I play them in moderation. I've never understood why people play just one certain FPS for months. I have to drift away every so often to a nice strategy game or maybe a Terraria/Minecraft binge. The kind where I tell myself that 'I'll just spend about an hour working on my base, then lurk around YouTube for a bit.' The next thing I know, It's been all day and I've built a doom fortress by hollowing out most of the inside of a mountain, dug multiple pits to the center of the earth, and slain enough monsters that in any other situation most likely would've meant extinction.
If you think taking the life of pixels are not for you then there really arent many games out there. Tetris maybe? Even Plants Vs. Zombies got killing in it :| Even though its not humans...are we talking just humans?retyopy said:
Portal doesnt have much killing, but it isnt exactly a shooter either.
I like shooters. Or I used to. Nah. I still do, they are just...more dull than before. For the most parts at least. Singularity was great. Bioshock as well. And if you like multiplayer Bad Company 2 should keep you fed quite a while.
Well, you're not really hurting other people because it's not real. However, a lot of them have become bland games with a few token elements with a lot of cursing.
I like FPSes just fine for what they are. I don't spend too much money on them in a year, given that I'm basically paying for a shooting gallery, but they're great stress relievers, more engaging than an action movie and...you know...'splosions.
If you're a pacifist, however, the FPS genre just might not be for you.
If you're a pacifist, however, the FPS genre just might not be for you.
I have.retyopy said:
They are not concepts of humans, they are empty shells, designed in a way to make them look like humans. To say they are a copy, a clone of humans is to imply some sort of intelligence, or consciousness to some degree. They have neither, and to imply they are a "concept" of us is insulting to one of the highest degrees, as you have insulted yourself(unless of course you are an alien, which I doubt), and another 7 billion people who do not deserve to be insulted in such a way. I suggest you think before you speak next time.