Is it really worth it to bash every popular FPS?

[Bishop99999999]

I think that at this point the CoD hate has come full circle, and bashing Modern Warfare is actually more mainstream than Modern Warfare (at least on the internet).

I for one am happy because I actually enjoy the spectacle. And after BF3's disappointing single player, I'm ready for a competently done and completely ridiculous showing by MW3.

 

[TheGreekGeekPrick]

The debate about the validity of bashing on x or y genre and/or game reminds me of the global warming debate between the two extremes.

Yes, some of it is done purely because it's funny (mainly anything revolving the increasingly irritating fanbases), but pretending they don't present an issue at all will eventually come back and bite us. The problem with popular shooters isn't what they are and it's certainly not the fact that they're popular (an attitude that has effectively spawned the Internet anti-nonconformist, i.e. the guy who disagrees with the supposed "nonconformists", but maintains all the pretense and smug attitude).

The problem with these games is simply the fact that they dominate the industry. They're not just at the top, they outright dominate it. No variety, different flavor or color is to be found, save for the occasional title that may pop up once every blue moon. That's not a good thing about either the genre or the industry as a whole.

Worse yet, they represent an attitude that's been rubbing off on other genres as well. Somebody already mentioned the RPGs and they're not wrong; but it's the same idea that's seeping into their territory now. So, yeah, if you like COD or Halo you're fine, but there's something wrong to watch out for in the bigger picture.

 

[Xanadu84]

The biggest problem is that people confuse quality with context. Call of Duty, for example, was praised highly around the first Modern Warfare game because it did something different and innovative. It then continued to evolve and iterate about as quickly as beloved games like Mass Effect of Half Life, but it got attacked for being stagnant and cliche. This is because of the constant slew of games that tried to be Modern Warfare clones. If Modern Warfare were to disappear for 15 years, and re-emerge in a world where all shooters are Serious Sam style cheese fests, Modern Warfare would be put on a pedestal by, "Core" gamers as a savior of creativity and good design. People attacking popular shooters arn't really angry at the game itself. They are angry the stagnation of the medium at large. And honestly, lack of variety is the source of most video game criticisms. A scantily clad piece of feminine eye candy isn't bad, its that every female in video games are like that. good graphics arn't bad, its bad that everyone seems to feel like they are priority 1. Regenerating health isn't bad, the lack of games that truly benefit from a style of play that benefits from health packs is bad. And so on.

Oh, also, some innovations by popular games are innovative and cause popularity by changing the game away from what some gamers expect. Call of Duty introduces elements of randomness and a focus on kill streaks that don't match shooter expectations. It's not bad, but it does confuse old players while drawing in new ones. Old gamers basically try Call of Duty's pancakes and say, "This is horrible French Toast!" Well of course it is, it's not french toast.

 

[getoffmycloud]

I just tend to ignore the people who bash all FPS games as unoriginal because people say they want something new but when it comes along nobody buys it. Perfect example here is Bulletstorm if you used the skillshot mechanic well it didn't like a normal FPS and it was a lot of fun but hardly anyone bought it so that just sends a message to developers that nobody wants anything new and we shall just go back to making the same game over and over again.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

FPSes are clogging triple-A gaming. We are well on our way to another crash if this isn't choked to give way for other genres.

 

[Terminate421]

Every FPS these days is the same damn formula, with the same damn regenerating health, with the same damn linear campaign, with the same damn kids online.

Bottom line: All these stupid AAA title FPS games are recycled shit.

This is not:

The same as this:

I love my FPS's and I must laugh at the poeple who claim they are all the same. We heres something for them,
"RTS's are all the same, you piont and click on people and tell them where to go to their deaths and you can't do anything to help them"
"JRPG's are the same, all they do involve is clopping down halls and dealing with menu screens up the ass while STANDING STILL in combat waiting just to do an attack."
"Fighting games haven't changed since 1999"
"Sports games are like RTS's, unless its golf or baseball in which case you play two quick time events to play"

Heres the thing, FPS's are great, they all allow us to actually control a character totally, so if I want to make a decision, my character does it. I am not bound by some sort of way to move or kinds of attacks, just what I have at my disposal. (Assuming the game allows me to do that.) It just...having the ability to choose what I need to do at a certain moment feels much better than simply using fire spell on ice dragon.
As Yahtzee said, "Why can't we just have a button that bonks them on the head?!" Pretty much means that the idea is that I want to remain in total control of my character during combat.

I am aware there are morons trying to be the next Call of Duty, but its business, eventually they will see their sales plummet and then try to make something else.

I don't mind other genres (Except RTS's, not my thing) but seriously? Hating things for popularity is like hating religion because everyone does it. It's pointless.

 

[Don Savik]

You know people would hate on something else IF THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE!
90% of the games being released are FPS. Battlefield, Bioshock, Sydicate, Call of duty, Serious Sam and Xcom
The non FPS games include Arkham Asylum and Skyrim.(Only counting multiplats here)
See the numbers?

Have to stop you there. Serious Sam may be an fps, but its the exact opposite of today's modern fps. Its not stale, the campaigns are fun, there's no regeneration health or cover system. Sorry as a fan (see profile pic) I just have to put that out there.

Also, its just a perspective. Are we debating fps's or shooters?

 

[Vault Citizen]

Seriously, every day I come on the Escapist I see three new threads about how popular FPSs are unoriginal and are ruining the industry. This topic is like the freakin' Hydra- every time one thread dies, two more sprout up in its place. Can we give it a rest?

I won't lie- I like FPSs, and if they're popular all the better. I enjoy online play, I enjoy cheesy campaigns, I enjoy some of the outdated mechanics (though I must say that although I love Halo, regenerating health grinds my gears a bit in games like Call of Duty). I don't expect every game to be the equivalent of the Divine Comedy in terms of writing. Hell, even our most advanced games still display some pretty mediocre writing (I personally believe that the Mass Effect writing is highly overrated).

Is it really that bad to have some fun that we just demonize so many popular games? More coming later, time for school right now.

There's school on a Saturday now?

It depends on your location and what country you go to but yes, there are places which have school on a Saturday. The prep and secondary schools I went to both had a half day of school on a Saturday (and a half day on a Wednesday), I think in England it is only private schools that do this and even then I'm not sure if they all do.

 

[TheGreekGeekPrick]

Heres the thing, FPS's are great, they all allow us to actually control a character totally, so if I want to make a decision, my character does it. I am not bound by some sort of way to move or kinds of attacks, just what I have at my disposal.

This is a contradictory statement. You are bound by what you have at your disposal, which is why you can't launch your sidearm onto someone's head if you run out of bullets.

You're also arguing linearity and restriction in a genre that relies on it. When I played Black Ops, I spent a good time just staring at my AI teammates looking at the big nothing on the horizon, because I hadn't moved to the spot that would trigger the next scripted sequence.

 

[Terminate421]

You know people would hate on something else IF THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE!
90% of the games being released are FPS. Battlefield, Bioshock, Sydicate, Call of duty, Serious Sam and Xcom
The non FPS games include Arkham Asylum and Skyrim.(Only counting multiplats here)
See the numbers?

Have to stop you there. Serious Sam may be an fps, but its the exact opposite of today's modern fps. Its not stale, the campaigns are fun, there's no regeneration health or cover system. Sorry as a fan (see profile pic) I just have to put that out there.

Also, its just a perspective. Are we debating fps's or shooters?

I believe its just shooters, people find Gears of war the exact same thing to Call of duty nowawdays, its kind of just...wrong to do that.

I am aware of trends of shooters being the same at some point, but thats for moronic decisions (See Space Marine, the game thats obviously trying to be Gears of war). People make...dumb judgements based on certain games, if it allows me to point a gun at things, all of a sudden its the same, when they hardly pay attention to the mechanics such as physics, combat systems, the gun itself, etc.

 

[Terminate421]

Heres the thing, FPS's are great, they all allow us to actually control a character totally, so if I want to make a decision, my character does it. I am not bound by some sort of way to move or kinds of attacks, just what I have at my disposal.

This is a contradictory statement. You are bound by what you have at your disposal, which is why you can't launch your sidearm onto someone's head if you run out of bullets.

You're also arguing linearity and restriction in a genre that relies on it. When I played Black Ops, I spent a good time just staring at my AI teammates looking at the big nothing on the horizon, because I hadn't moved to the spot that would trigger the next scripted sequence.

I will re-edit that.

I sounded like a moron...

 

[Don Savik]

Heres the thing, FPS's are great, they all allow us to actually control a character totally, so if I want to make a decision, my character does it. I am not bound by some sort of way to move or kinds of attacks, just what I have at my disposal.

This is a contradictory statement. You are bound by what you have at your disposal, which is why you can't launch your sidearm onto someone's head if you run out of bullets.

You're also arguing linearity and restriction in a genre that relies on it. When I played Black Ops, I spent a good time just staring at my AI teammates looking at the big nothing on the horizon, because I hadn't moved to the spot that would trigger the next scripted sequence.

There's plenty of non scripted shooters but nobody cares to find them or try them bcuz cod and battlefield hating is ssooooooo mainstream right now.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Seriously, every day I come on the Escapist I see three new threads about how popular FPSs are unoriginal and are ruining the industry.

I think its more that we are sick of the same thing over and over again. Even the protagonist tends to look/be the same.
I found Gears of War 3 mindnumbingly boring. I actually loved Crysis 2 but then you can play that as more of a stealth game than an FPS.
I can say okay fps games are maybe not for me. But don't tell me I don't have a right to complain when EVERY major game coming out seems to be an FPS. Even Blizzards next mmo is an fps... :<


I think this whole anti FPS thing is an anger born out of fear. Fear that the definition of gaming will become 'online multiplayer FPS'

 

[Terminate421]

Heres the thing, FPS's are great, they all allow us to actually control a character totally, so if I want to make a decision, my character does it. I am not bound by some sort of way to move or kinds of attacks, just what I have at my disposal.

This is a contradictory statement. You are bound by what you have at your disposal, which is why you can't launch your sidearm onto someone's head if you run out of bullets.

You're also arguing linearity and restriction in a genre that relies on it. When I played Black Ops, I spent a good time just staring at my AI teammates looking at the big nothing on the horizon, because I hadn't moved to the spot that would trigger the next scripted sequence.

There's plenty of non scripted shooters but nobody cares to find them or try them bcuz cod and battlefield hating is ssooooooo mainstream right now.

You are CLEVER!! (No, seriously that was pretty funny)

I just had this image of a non-scripted shooter in which the battle continues on without the player. The player runs to take out a generator and leave all his soldiers behind. He finishes, turns around and the soldiers took off with all the vehicles. I think scripting is there for a reason.

 

[TheGreekGeekPrick]

There's plenty of non scripted shooters but nobody cares to find them or try them bcuz cod and battlefield hating is ssooooooo mainstream right now.

Oooooor, the non-scripted, decent shooters are getting burried in obscurity by the overabundance of CoD clones (and CoD itself), making at least some of the complaining somewhat valid.

 

[SextusMaximus]

If someone has a valid reason to dislike them (most do) then yes, rather obviously, it is worth bashing them if the time spent on them could have gone to masterpieces.

 

[TheGreekGeekPrick]

I just had this image of a non-scripted shooter in which the battle continues on without the player. The player runs to take out a generator and leave all his soldiers behind. He finishes, turns around and the soldiers took off with all the vehicles. I think scripting is there for a reason.

Of course it's there for a reason. It just shouldn't be allowed to rely on it for everything. Half-Life was largely scripted but the game didn't go bonkers if you deviated from the intended path for two seconds.

 

[The-Epicly-Named-Man]

I half agree with you, in that a) Hating things because they're popular is retarded, and b) Hate threads are equally stupid. On the other hand, complaining about certain popular FPSs is entirely justified. I'm sorry, but when I say "Halo's shit" or "COD hasn't been interesting since MW1", I'm not just whining because I'm an attention seeking wanker, I genuinely dislike Halo and COD post-4. They both suffer from the same affliction; uninspired sequels rehashing what's been before (only COD's somehow fell, hit it's head and caused permanent brain-damage along the way). I'm sick of it, I'm sick of people defending it.

 

[The-Epicly-Named-Man]

Mother-f*cking double post. Nothing to see here, move on.