There are many genres in video games.
When a genre becomes popular enough and there are developers with enough different ideas that end up creating enough different games from some others,usually a genre has to split itself in sub-genres.
That's what happened with RPGs some time ago.
They split to two different major genres: The Western RPGs and the Japanese RPGs.
These two genres have different gameplay mechanisms,and they follow different directions,and these differences make them quite different experiences,and thus people split the RPG genre to two different sub-genres.
They are both RPGs,but they play so differently they deserve to being characterized with some different name.
I think it's about time the same thing to happen to the FPS.
For years the FPS followed a different logic:
Whenever a good game offered a new gameplay feature,the rest of the games in this genre would copy and adopt that feature.That way the FPS kept evolving in to something that became more and more different from the first games.
Instead of watching developers differentiate themselves and say "No we won't adapt these new features but we are going to keep our gameplay the way it was always been" like RPG developers did,FPS developers say "Yes,whenever a game sells well and has a new feature,we will adopt this feature whatever happens".
Through many changes,the FPS evolved in to something with very different gameplay and design direction that it once had.
But there is a problem in that.
The problem is that there are many gamers out there who just didn't liked some gameplay changers that became standards in the genre.
The genre evolved so much from what it was,that many people who liked it in the past now they don't,and they express their disappointment that they don't get any games with the gameplay they like anymore.
Let's use a music genre as an example.
There are lots of people who like Heavy Metal.Far later after Metal was founded,some people started changing their play style and lyrics,and created Emo. Imagine if all Metal bands would turn to emo.Metal fans would become outraged and disappointed.Fortunately this never happened,and emo is being considered as a sub genre of a larger genre,and not an evolution of the whole genre.
But unfortunately something like that happened in a video game genre,the FPS.
The FPS games started becoming something very different than what they where.
Once upon a time FPS games had a load of about 30 to 60 levels,and a basic factor of their gameplay was exploration.
In wolfenstein 3d,Doom,Duke Nukem 3D etc,the role of exploration was very big,and to offer you the fun of exploration developers created Large complex levels stuffed with secret areas to reward you for exploring.At many of those games you would even get lost trying to find a way out of the maze like levels.
Another element of FPSs was that they where made in order for you to have fun shooting enemies.
These games had variety of different enemies to enjoy killing them,and offered you a great variety of weaponry that you could carry with you,so you can have fun killing your enemies with different ways.Goldeneye had 31 different guns.
Another core part of FPSs was the lots of things developers added to their games to improve their replay value.Secret levels,secret rooms,unlockable stuff like extra guns that you unlock after you beat the game in a difficulty level,etc.
And of course we shouldn't forget that a basic core element of FPSs was the Survival factor.
FPSs where games made for survivalists,and where all designed so they can give you that feel that Fallout: New Vegas gives you with each 'hardcore' mode.
In FPSs you had to eat to get back your health,conserve the ammo you got,and be extra careful when fighting enemies because health was not regenerating.
How the genre evolved,and how it is now ?
Modern day FPSs lacked what made old FPSs fun,and their feel.
The basic elements of exploration and survival based gameplay and feel are missing.
The features that the games would include to reward you for playing,like the accomplishment feeling you would get whenever you would discover a secret area is missing.
The core idea that FPSs would offer you fun by allowing you to watch how different enemies would die with different weapons,is forgotten since most games tend to only have a single or two variations of enemies,and the weapons they include are small in number,and those games also limit you on how much weapons you can carry.
The things that would add replay value like unlockables are missing.
So,FPS games ended up missing lots of things that made them funny in the past,things that many people loved and don't get in modern games.
But what modern FPSs are giving us instead ?
Modern day FPSs have taken a different direction.
They focus too much on becoming like movies,they are movie wannabes.
How that inflicts in to the games ?
The core element of fun that would be watching hundreds of enemies getting killed by your guns and feel good for it,is replaced with another core element,the one that provides fun by watching your character how he does and what happens to him in a move like way.
That means that gameplay becomes more simplistic or "streamlined" or "dumbed" as some people like to call it,so the game can be a more passive entertainment,like movies are.
In favor of making FPS games feel more like movies,the trend is to add lots of cutscenes,and restricting the things the player can do in the game.
The games doesn't get secret rooms or unlockable content because they would make games feel less like movies.
Level design also suffers restrictions,as levels become more linear,so you can only go the places and do the stuff that the scenario tells us to do,as protagonisst in a movie would do.
The number of the levels is also hitting low limits,in order to make the games last shorter,since movies are shorter and those games have to feel like movies.
We watch FPS games become more restricting,linear,simplified,short games with more cutscenes and scenario and less gameplay.
Now that I cleared up how there are two different schools in the FPS genre,I should say that none of these two is better or worse than the other one.
Both styles are enjoyable by different gamer demographics,and it's up to someone's personal taste what he likes better or not.
Somebody hopes that FPSs one day will be even more like movies,perhaps short 2 hours experiences where you watch a large cutscene and you only press some buttons QTE style to make the plot move ahead,while somebody else hopes that FPSs will return to their roots and become larger and deeper experiences.
Because of that,I think that both demographics should get to play the games they like.
I think that the FPS genre should officially be split in to two sub-genres so both players that want a more 'gamecore' experience with games that play like games,and players that want a more 'movie like' experience with games that play like movies,have tons of games to play!
Developers IMO should start clearing up their minds when they say that they will make a new FPS game,and have a clear idea of the direction and the sub-genre their game is going to be.
These are the two different sub-genres:
1)Gamecore FPS
At this sub-genre you got medkits,you can carry all the weapons you can find,it has large non-linear levels allowing you to explore,and have secret rooms and unlockables.It emphasize in the fun of shooting,exploring,discovering,and interacting with the world.
They are made up the same way a fun park is made up.That means that they have many things for you to have fun,even if they don't make lots of sense in reality or can't be explained in a movie like script.
These games doesn't forget that they are games,and are designed like ones.
2)Cinematic FPS.
Games of the second sub-genre have health regeneration,a weapon limit,linear levels,and doesn't have secret rooms or unlockables.
They emphasize in the fun a movie could give you,having lots of cutscenes,making you walk in linear levels to follow the movie-like script well,and their gameplay is more passive and simplified because it doesn't want to attract your attention with funny gameplay stuff,but they want you immersed in the game's movie like plot.They usually last as long as a big movie. (3-4 hours)
When a genre becomes popular enough and there are developers with enough different ideas that end up creating enough different games from some others,usually a genre has to split itself in sub-genres.
That's what happened with RPGs some time ago.
They split to two different major genres: The Western RPGs and the Japanese RPGs.
These two genres have different gameplay mechanisms,and they follow different directions,and these differences make them quite different experiences,and thus people split the RPG genre to two different sub-genres.
They are both RPGs,but they play so differently they deserve to being characterized with some different name.
I think it's about time the same thing to happen to the FPS.
For years the FPS followed a different logic:
Whenever a good game offered a new gameplay feature,the rest of the games in this genre would copy and adopt that feature.That way the FPS kept evolving in to something that became more and more different from the first games.
Instead of watching developers differentiate themselves and say "No we won't adapt these new features but we are going to keep our gameplay the way it was always been" like RPG developers did,FPS developers say "Yes,whenever a game sells well and has a new feature,we will adopt this feature whatever happens".
Through many changes,the FPS evolved in to something with very different gameplay and design direction that it once had.
But there is a problem in that.
The problem is that there are many gamers out there who just didn't liked some gameplay changers that became standards in the genre.
The genre evolved so much from what it was,that many people who liked it in the past now they don't,and they express their disappointment that they don't get any games with the gameplay they like anymore.
Let's use a music genre as an example.
There are lots of people who like Heavy Metal.Far later after Metal was founded,some people started changing their play style and lyrics,and created Emo. Imagine if all Metal bands would turn to emo.Metal fans would become outraged and disappointed.Fortunately this never happened,and emo is being considered as a sub genre of a larger genre,and not an evolution of the whole genre.
But unfortunately something like that happened in a video game genre,the FPS.
The FPS games started becoming something very different than what they where.
Once upon a time FPS games had a load of about 30 to 60 levels,and a basic factor of their gameplay was exploration.
In wolfenstein 3d,Doom,Duke Nukem 3D etc,the role of exploration was very big,and to offer you the fun of exploration developers created Large complex levels stuffed with secret areas to reward you for exploring.At many of those games you would even get lost trying to find a way out of the maze like levels.
Another element of FPSs was that they where made in order for you to have fun shooting enemies.
These games had variety of different enemies to enjoy killing them,and offered you a great variety of weaponry that you could carry with you,so you can have fun killing your enemies with different ways.Goldeneye had 31 different guns.
Another core part of FPSs was the lots of things developers added to their games to improve their replay value.Secret levels,secret rooms,unlockable stuff like extra guns that you unlock after you beat the game in a difficulty level,etc.
And of course we shouldn't forget that a basic core element of FPSs was the Survival factor.
FPSs where games made for survivalists,and where all designed so they can give you that feel that Fallout: New Vegas gives you with each 'hardcore' mode.
In FPSs you had to eat to get back your health,conserve the ammo you got,and be extra careful when fighting enemies because health was not regenerating.
How the genre evolved,and how it is now ?
Modern day FPSs lacked what made old FPSs fun,and their feel.
The basic elements of exploration and survival based gameplay and feel are missing.
The features that the games would include to reward you for playing,like the accomplishment feeling you would get whenever you would discover a secret area is missing.
The core idea that FPSs would offer you fun by allowing you to watch how different enemies would die with different weapons,is forgotten since most games tend to only have a single or two variations of enemies,and the weapons they include are small in number,and those games also limit you on how much weapons you can carry.
The things that would add replay value like unlockables are missing.
So,FPS games ended up missing lots of things that made them funny in the past,things that many people loved and don't get in modern games.
But what modern FPSs are giving us instead ?
Modern day FPSs have taken a different direction.
They focus too much on becoming like movies,they are movie wannabes.
How that inflicts in to the games ?
The core element of fun that would be watching hundreds of enemies getting killed by your guns and feel good for it,is replaced with another core element,the one that provides fun by watching your character how he does and what happens to him in a move like way.
That means that gameplay becomes more simplistic or "streamlined" or "dumbed" as some people like to call it,so the game can be a more passive entertainment,like movies are.
In favor of making FPS games feel more like movies,the trend is to add lots of cutscenes,and restricting the things the player can do in the game.
The games doesn't get secret rooms or unlockable content because they would make games feel less like movies.
Level design also suffers restrictions,as levels become more linear,so you can only go the places and do the stuff that the scenario tells us to do,as protagonisst in a movie would do.
The number of the levels is also hitting low limits,in order to make the games last shorter,since movies are shorter and those games have to feel like movies.
We watch FPS games become more restricting,linear,simplified,short games with more cutscenes and scenario and less gameplay.
Now that I cleared up how there are two different schools in the FPS genre,I should say that none of these two is better or worse than the other one.
Both styles are enjoyable by different gamer demographics,and it's up to someone's personal taste what he likes better or not.
Somebody hopes that FPSs one day will be even more like movies,perhaps short 2 hours experiences where you watch a large cutscene and you only press some buttons QTE style to make the plot move ahead,while somebody else hopes that FPSs will return to their roots and become larger and deeper experiences.
Because of that,I think that both demographics should get to play the games they like.
I think that the FPS genre should officially be split in to two sub-genres so both players that want a more 'gamecore' experience with games that play like games,and players that want a more 'movie like' experience with games that play like movies,have tons of games to play!
Developers IMO should start clearing up their minds when they say that they will make a new FPS game,and have a clear idea of the direction and the sub-genre their game is going to be.
These are the two different sub-genres:
1)Gamecore FPS
At this sub-genre you got medkits,you can carry all the weapons you can find,it has large non-linear levels allowing you to explore,and have secret rooms and unlockables.It emphasize in the fun of shooting,exploring,discovering,and interacting with the world.
They are made up the same way a fun park is made up.That means that they have many things for you to have fun,even if they don't make lots of sense in reality or can't be explained in a movie like script.
These games doesn't forget that they are games,and are designed like ones.
2)Cinematic FPS.
Games of the second sub-genre have health regeneration,a weapon limit,linear levels,and doesn't have secret rooms or unlockables.
They emphasize in the fun a movie could give you,having lots of cutscenes,making you walk in linear levels to follow the movie-like script well,and their gameplay is more passive and simplified because it doesn't want to attract your attention with funny gameplay stuff,but they want you immersed in the game's movie like plot.They usually last as long as a big movie. (3-4 hours)
