No Right Answer: Best FPS Plot Ever

[The Admiral]

There is a BioShock novel.

 

[maninahat]

Bio shock and Half-life? best plot, seriously?

DeusEx vs System Shock anyone?


BTW: I think I saw the MW series mentioned above, I really hope that was meant as a joke...

In my opinion, Far Cry II and Call of Juarez are better contendors. Half Life is a fairly generic dystopia story albeit told very well, whilst System Shock 2 is...well, another dystopia story told very well.

I say Far Cry, because of its clever meta-narrative (see blogs/recordings written by the characters outside the game) and its re-telling of Heart of Darkness. This version of the story is far more involving than most other adaptations. The ending sure can go fuck itself, but otherwise, Far Cry makes for an atmospheric and unusually provocative FPS.

I say Call of Juarez for its twin narrative. You play as a boy framed for murder, and his vengeful uncle, trying to kill the boy for said murder. In any other medium, it would be any old cat and mouse story, but because the game lets us play both the cat and mouse, there is a clever suspense around who kills who, or rather - who you end up killing. Unfortunately, it doesn't go through with it in the end, and turns into some shlocky "Aztec gold rush" in the third act, but I give it points for trying.

The best though is Zeno Clash. Hands down. You won't see another plot like it. Or rather, there are plots like it, but it is buried under such bizarre aesthetics and colourful characters, it won't feel familiar: A guy murders his mother and father, who are actually both the same person; a hermaphrodite stalk who leads of a tribe of cavemanesque freaks. The game is figuring out why you did it, what you'll do now you've done it, and what the god damn is going on.

 

[Winthrop]

Bioshock is way more of an FPS than an RPG. It just is.

But what about The Darkness? That had one of the most emotionally involving plots of any game I've ever played. It had a big affect on me anyway.

You're not alone on The Darkness, it deserved so much more attention than it got for it's story and colorful characters.

Bioshock 2 has to be on my list as well, people prefer Bioshock 1 it seems but as far as I can tell they only like it more for it's twist which really doesn't fulfill the entire game in my opinion.

I think the reason the darkness wasn't popular was the marketing. If I remember correctly it looked like a subpar plotless survival horror from the commercials to me. I know a bit of the plot now and it seems like a cool game, but the marketing just made it seem like it would be a boring typical shooter. Its a shame though it sounds really interesting.

 

[Yeager942]

I busted a gut at the ME3 ending reference.

 

[Andrew Andrew]

Going to have to go with Marathon + Halo as best FPS plot. I didn't read to see if anyone mentioned this, but Halo is the spiritual successor to Marathon, which had a KICK ASS story. Google Marathon story to see how amazing it is.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

infernal had a more interesting plot than bioshock.... almost better game play too. As for HL2...it was just to generic for me. HL1 is still great!

I prefer Doom 3. Go to hell, fight demons, what's not to like.

A game, Doom 3 is too busy trying to hide everything in darkness than be a fun game...it also did horribly since it was "cenimagic" and not a coherent game...

Thing about doom3 is that it's like HL1, you get there when the base is pretty status quo then everything goes to hell and you have to deal with the result. Which, as far as story telling goes is kinda of routine but it does help get the player engaged imo. I didn't have a problem with the darkness thing, even if you're in a pitch black room the Imps would light up before they began to attack so it wasn't a huge deal. The scripted sequences were cool as well and how they introduced all the bad guys in little spot lights. (though panning into the back of the head maybe is a bit silly today).

The only thing that bothered me about the gameplay is that it was super obvious when the spider guys were going to come out of the walls and attack you, because the little vents they used were never present in any other instance. That and the cyberdemon was too easy

I had 3 issues with Doom 3 one its not Doom, 2 its hella linear(far more so than HL1) and 3 it was ultra formulistic for the times albeit for the can't see for crap and ducttape seems to be not invented yet. I guess thats 4...but frankly it was a mess its not what people really wanted carmack just made a film game out of it because he is engine crazy but not much crazy for better gameplay/layouts.

Oh and 5 the multiplayer stuff was hella weak..... Its like Quake 4 did they even bother looking at Quake 2 and Quake 3..... then again the other half of the game is in quake wars......

Well, obviously they wanted to make the game more atmospheric like Fear sort of thing, whereas Doom 2 is probably closer to something like Bulletstorm or Painkiller in the speed and style of game play. So . . . I mean if they want to scare the player, they need to make the player character not super badass whereas in Doom he kinda was right. The key to fear is making the character feel weak and scared of the potential enemies that might get him. At least in my opinion. The scariest game I played was actually Thief Dark Project, because combat wise the guy sucked and the sound design and atmosphere were great especially when you got into the super natural areas.

I get it but it didnt make that good of the game mainly due to shallow content, it needed better built level layoutss , levels that take into account vertical layouts. I was expecting so much more from Doom 3 and Quake 4(rage even has generic linear level layouts, least it was slightly better than D3/Q4) and what I got was a mostly generic shooter experience only Doom 3 was more frustrating due to it being more film than game.

And games being more of a visual thrill ride than a game just irritates me to no end , its a game focus more on non shallow game play and level design I am tired of "playing" movie.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

I gotta say Bioshock disappointed on a lot of levels, and arguing things like the audio logs and plot with more plot... Sounds like you're describing its spiritual predecessor, System Shock 2 (SS1 had audio logs to boot)... Aaanyway, great episode guys

THANK YOU SIR. I agree with YOU.

SS1 is probably my favorite game ever, but SS2 had a "better" plot in that you followed the journey of Dr Polito, first to the twist (which Bioshock TOTALLY ripped off btw) and then, more importantly, through her gradual realisation that she was responsible for so much that had gone wrong, ending in her suicide at the end of the game. It's one of those games that rewards multiple plays not just because of the game mechanics and RPG elements, but also the story - it's great on the first playthrough, but each time you play you get more and more from it, to the point that her final message becomes genuinely poignant.

Bioshock? GREAT game up until the third act, but once the twist is out of the way, it goes to hell very very quickly. The great villain Andrew Ryan gets swapped out for a pompous ass, the gameplay suffers, and the penultimate level is an unavoidable escort mission while you're dressed in a cumbersome vision-restricting suit (which you also have no choice but to wear in the finale). Up until that point the story and gameplay had been married to each other fairly well, but after that everything just loses it. Which is a damn shame because I love the concept of the game and much of the execution in the first two thirds of it.

 

[TitanAura]

I should have known the mention of Alan Rickman would result in a point....

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

infernal had a more interesting plot than bioshock.... almost better game play too. As for HL2...it was just to generic for me. HL1 is still great!

I prefer Doom 3. Go to hell, fight demons, what's not to like.

A game, Doom 3 is too busy trying to hide everything in darkness than be a fun game...it also did horribly since it was "cenimagic" and not a coherent game...

Thing about doom3 is that it's like HL1, you get there when the base is pretty status quo then everything goes to hell and you have to deal with the result. Which, as far as story telling goes is kinda of routine but it does help get the player engaged imo. I didn't have a problem with the darkness thing, even if you're in a pitch black room the Imps would light up before they began to attack so it wasn't a huge deal. The scripted sequences were cool as well and how they introduced all the bad guys in little spot lights. (though panning into the back of the head maybe is a bit silly today).

The only thing that bothered me about the gameplay is that it was super obvious when the spider guys were going to come out of the walls and attack you, because the little vents they used were never present in any other instance. That and the cyberdemon was too easy

I had 3 issues with Doom 3 one its not Doom, 2 its hella linear(far more so than HL1) and 3 it was ultra formulistic for the times albeit for the can't see for crap and ducttape seems to be not invented yet. I guess thats 4...but frankly it was a mess its not what people really wanted carmack just made a film game out of it because he is engine crazy but not much crazy for better gameplay/layouts.

Oh and 5 the multiplayer stuff was hella weak..... Its like Quake 4 did they even bother looking at Quake 2 and Quake 3..... then again the other half of the game is in quake wars......

Well, obviously they wanted to make the game more atmospheric like Fear sort of thing, whereas Doom 2 is probably closer to something like Bulletstorm or Painkiller in the speed and style of game play. So . . . I mean if they want to scare the player, they need to make the player character not super badass whereas in Doom he kinda was right. The key to fear is making the character feel weak and scared of the potential enemies that might get him. At least in my opinion. The scariest game I played was actually Thief Dark Project, because combat wise the guy sucked and the sound design and atmosphere were great especially when you got into the super natural areas.

I get it but it didnt make that good of the game mainly due to shallow content, it needed better built level layoutss , levels that take into account vertical layouts. I was expecting so much more from Doom 3 and Quake 4(rage even has generic linear level layouts, least it was slightly better than D3/Q4) and what I got was a mostly generic shooter experience only Doom 3 was more frustrating due to it being more film than game.

And games being more of a visual thrill ride than a game just irritates me to no end , its a game focus more on non shallow game play and level design I am tired of "playing" movie.

Interesting debate going on here. I'll add my two cents. I definitely think both of you guys have made good points.

I think you're right about the main character needing to be "weak" in order to create genuine fear. (This was why the early levels of System Shock 2 were so damn scary. Well, this and the suicidal zombies screaming "KILL MEEE!" at you, the fantastic sound design, the oppressive atmosphere, the corpses everywhere, the ghosts, and those freaking psychic monkeys that were so hard to hit with the damn wrench...)

But I think Doom 3 generally missed the point. We don't need audio logs in a Doom game. Basically I think it was trying, and failing, to be a spiritual successor to System Shock, instead of to that game... what's it's name again... oh yeah... DOOM. The original games had you soaking up damage like a tank and being surrounded by the hordes of Hell. Doom 3, not even close to that. It failed as a story-driven game (seriously, name one human character in Doom 3? I actually finished the game and I couldn't do it...) and it also failed as a shoot-'em-up.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

infernal had a more interesting plot than bioshock.... almost better game play too. As for HL2...it was just to generic for me. HL1 is still great!

I prefer Doom 3. Go to hell, fight demons, what's not to like.

A game, Doom 3 is too busy trying to hide everything in darkness than be a fun game...it also did horribly since it was "cenimagic" and not a coherent game...

Thing about doom3 is that it's like HL1, you get there when the base is pretty status quo then everything goes to hell and you have to deal with the result. Which, as far as story telling goes is kinda of routine but it does help get the player engaged imo. I didn't have a problem with the darkness thing, even if you're in a pitch black room the Imps would light up before they began to attack so it wasn't a huge deal. The scripted sequences were cool as well and how they introduced all the bad guys in little spot lights. (though panning into the back of the head maybe is a bit silly today).

The only thing that bothered me about the gameplay is that it was super obvious when the spider guys were going to come out of the walls and attack you, because the little vents they used were never present in any other instance. That and the cyberdemon was too easy

I had 3 issues with Doom 3 one its not Doom, 2 its hella linear(far more so than HL1) and 3 it was ultra formulistic for the times albeit for the can't see for crap and ducttape seems to be not invented yet. I guess thats 4...but frankly it was a mess its not what people really wanted carmack just made a film game out of it because he is engine crazy but not much crazy for better gameplay/layouts.

Oh and 5 the multiplayer stuff was hella weak..... Its like Quake 4 did they even bother looking at Quake 2 and Quake 3..... then again the other half of the game is in quake wars......

Well, obviously they wanted to make the game more atmospheric like Fear sort of thing, whereas Doom 2 is probably closer to something like Bulletstorm or Painkiller in the speed and style of game play. So . . . I mean if they want to scare the player, they need to make the player character not super badass whereas in Doom he kinda was right. The key to fear is making the character feel weak and scared of the potential enemies that might get him. At least in my opinion. The scariest game I played was actually Thief Dark Project, because combat wise the guy sucked and the sound design and atmosphere were great especially when you got into the super natural areas.

I get it but it didnt make that good of the game mainly due to shallow content, it needed better built level layoutss , levels that take into account vertical layouts. I was expecting so much more from Doom 3 and Quake 4(rage even has generic linear level layouts, least it was slightly better than D3/Q4) and what I got was a mostly generic shooter experience only Doom 3 was more frustrating due to it being more film than game.

And games being more of a visual thrill ride than a game just irritates me to no end , its a game focus more on non shallow game play and level design I am tired of "playing" movie.

Interesting debate going on here. I'll add my two cents. I definitely think both of you guys have made good points.

I think you're right about the main character needing to be "weak" in order to create genuine fear. (This was why the early levels of System Shock 2 were so damn scary. Well, this and the suicidal zombies screaming "KILL MEEE!" at you, the fantastic sound design, the oppressive atmosphere, the corpses everywhere, the ghosts, and those freaking psychic monkeys that were so hard to hit with the damn wrench...)

But I think Doom 3 generally missed the point. We don't need audio logs in a Doom game. Basically I think it was trying, and failing, to be a spiritual successor to System Shock, instead of to that game... what's it's name again... oh yeah... DOOM. The original games had you soaking up damage like a tank and being surrounded by the hordes of Hell. Doom 3, not even close to that. It failed as a story-driven game (seriously, name one human character in Doom 3? I actually finished the game and I couldn't do it...) and it also failed as a shoot-'em-up.

Like most post 00 games its half assed, focusing too much on the visual aspect of it and forgetting the core gameplay aspects . I enjoyed it when it tried to be a FPS-RPG hybrid(I liked the logs desu) I did like the story but there was not enough stuff to do inbetween killing the random rare encounter the game was far too streamlined I had much more fun with Daikatana than anythign from ID since Quake 3(least it had great level layouts). If they went the full FPS-RPG route and made it more like SS2 with better level layouts it would have worked well regarding single player. But they aimed their sights to low. And Dead space 3 will be aimed lower sadly.

edit
Just an FYI I had as much fear trying to explore every bit of the maps on ULTIMATE DOOM trying not to die, looking for ammo/armor/specials you know the things they streamlined out of modern games because its too frustrating for the average player.

 

[sethHex]

I love Bioshock... BUT! You have to remember that Half-life created a fantastic story with almost zero dialogue. It?s all pacing and environment. Even the aged graphics and controls wouldn?t stop me from playing now. Bioshock sets a good example to story telling but HL did it without all the bells and whistles and years before.

 

[Veldt Falsetto]

So...Metroid Prime won yeah?

 

[BrunDeign]

Best FPS Plot Ever

Dan and Kyle achieve the impossible yet again! An entire debate based around the best first person shooter plot ever, with absolutely no spoilers! Who comes out on top from this particular point of view?

Watch Video

LIES! BLATANT LIES!

Did you not hear Dan call your character a clone when referring to the Bioshock game?

Also I really would have wanted to hear Chris argue about Metroid Prime.

 

[Firefilm]

Best FPS Plot Ever

Dan and Kyle achieve the impossible yet again! An entire debate based around the best first person shooter plot ever, with absolutely no spoilers! Who comes out on top from this particular point of view?

Watch Video

LIES! BLATANT LIES!

Did you not hear Dan call your character a clone when referring to the Bioshock game?

Also I really would have wanted to hear Chris argue about Metroid Prime.

But he isn't a clone, so it isn't a spoiler. More a test tube baby, really.

 

[DrgoFx]

Bioshock is way more of an FPS than an RPG. It just is.

But what about The Darkness? That had one of the most emotionally involving plots of any game I've ever played. It had a big affect on me anyway.

I must agree here. The Darkness had an amazing emotional experience. This would show what kind of person I am, but there have only been three moments in gaming where I've been on the verge of tears. The moment I accidentally eliminated all the Quarians in Mass Effect 3. The ending to Batman Arkham City. The Epilogue in The Darkness.

I'm not much of a tear jerker with things that don't personally affect me, but those three moments were damn close.

 

[Scrustle]

Bioshock is way more of an FPS than an RPG. It just is.

But what about The Darkness? That had one of the most emotionally involving plots of any game I've ever played. It had a big affect on me anyway.

I must agree here. The Darkness had an amazing emotional experience. This would show what kind of person I am, but there have only been three moments in gaming where I've been on the verge of tears. The moment I accidentally eliminated all the Quarians in Mass Effect 3. The ending to Batman Arkham City. The Epilogue in The Darkness.

I'm not much of a tear jerker with things that don't personally affect me, but those three moments were damn close.

Same here. The ending of the game is kind of anti-climactic since the "final boss" is just a normal guy who takes nothing to take down, but the epilogue was so moving.

 

[Jennacide]

There is a correct answer. It's System Shock 2.

 

[Lawlhat]

The Darkness maybe? The original one, not that second one that I pretend doesn't exist

 

[Britisheagle]

Great video but I have to agree, I love Bioshock. Like Half Life also but it is a shame that there is no conclusion.