No Right Answer: Best FPS Plot Ever
- Thread starter Firefilm
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You're not alone on The Darkness, it deserved so much more attention than it got for it's story and colorful characters.Scrustle said:
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 agree that Bioshock did have a generally more engaging plot, although much of what Bioshock did was also present in Half-Life and HL 2. Most of the best parts of both games lie in the world that they build, presenting details through the environment. I liked Half-Life 2's characters a lot more, since that game had a load of NPCs you could identify with. Odessa Cubbage, anyone? No? Okay, Barney Calhoun, you got to love Barney.
The plot and for that matter the whole game of Bioshock is just a clone System Shock 2, only SS2 did pretty much everything way better. The setting, characters, dialog, audio logs, ghosts, plot-twist etc, all felt better and more fitting in SS2.
Not to mention System Shock 2 had real depth to it, with actual rpg elements, an inventory system and various choices you had to think carefully about. Also it was really, really scary and challenging.
By the way this isn't just some fanboy nagging about the "good old days", I actually played Bioshock before I played System Shock 2 but I still thought SS2 provided a greater and more satisfying experience, despite its obvious lower production value and somewhat clunky mechanics.
Not to mention System Shock 2 had real depth to it, with actual rpg elements, an inventory system and various choices you had to think carefully about. Also it was really, really scary and challenging.
By the way this isn't just some fanboy nagging about the "good old days", I actually played Bioshock before I played System Shock 2 but I still thought SS2 provided a greater and more satisfying experience, despite its obvious lower production value and somewhat clunky mechanics.
Bioshock is a weird one for me; a lot of the story did't work for me until the twist. Okay, so you're a random dude who just happens to crash land in the middle of the ocean where this under water city is built? Bullshit. But then once the twist comes around... Everything just fell into place.
I still hate how the plasmids are introduced. You just happen to walk up to vending machine with a needle and jam it into your arm... There was no 'would you kindly' or 'this is why you HAVE to do this'. That was stupid and a big turn off.
I still hate how the plasmids are introduced. You just happen to walk up to vending machine with a needle and jam it into your arm... There was no 'would you kindly' or 'this is why you HAVE to do this'. That was stupid and a big turn off.
Good god. They're both wrong.
Firstly, Bioshock shouldn't even be in contention. Bioshock took EVERYTHING that was good about System Shock 2 and diluted it to a luke-warm water. That still makes for a good game, but nowhere NEAR as good as SS2. Also, the story of BS2 was...well...BS.
Half Life isn't about an experiment going wrong and trying to get to the surface. About 1\4 of the way through the game, you get to the surface and suddenly the marines are trying to kill you to contain the situation. From then on, it creates a wonderfully trapped environment where you're put in a situation that makes it better to go on suicidal missions as it's better to go out dying than laying down.
Half-Life should be up there, but come the fuck on. Where's Deus Ex 1 for crying out loud? No One Lives Forever? Ugh.
Firstly, Bioshock shouldn't even be in contention. Bioshock took EVERYTHING that was good about System Shock 2 and diluted it to a luke-warm water. That still makes for a good game, but nowhere NEAR as good as SS2. Also, the story of BS2 was...well...BS.
Half Life isn't about an experiment going wrong and trying to get to the surface. About 1\4 of the way through the game, you get to the surface and suddenly the marines are trying to kill you to contain the situation. From then on, it creates a wonderfully trapped environment where you're put in a situation that makes it better to go on suicidal missions as it's better to go out dying than laying down.
Half-Life should be up there, but come the fuck on. Where's Deus Ex 1 for crying out loud? No One Lives Forever? Ugh.
No love for Mass Effect or Deus Ex HR? Not that it was a bad episode - if anything I liked how they seemed more aggressive than usual in attacking each other's arguments. But in a debate between Bioshock and HL, I respectfully vote 'none of the above.'
This is what I always wondered about the beginning of Bioshock: "I'm in this strange underwater world, what is this? A big glowing needle? I guess I will just stab it into my arm then"
Are you telling me you wouldn't stab yourself with a giant needle containing unknown glowing liquid you found on the ground in an underwater city? That is just not normal.Monty McDougal said:
Seriously though there are a number of possible explanations that I placed in spoilers.
In order of likelihood and what comes to mind
1. Hypnotic Command
2. He knew what it was to some extent
3. He is a Junkie
1. Hypnotic Command
2. He knew what it was to some extent
3. He is a Junkie
OT: I would say Half-Life wins on a technicality. While the plot for Bio-shock was wrapped up more neatly (mainly because it is wrapped up) it has those RPG elements which in my book is cheating.
Personal Favorite: Portal
Best FPS plot? Well, they should have inserted the Sci-Fi in the title, we have Thief, and it have a wonderful plot too, Darkest Corners of the Earth, another great game, if you look at the plot, Arx Fatalis was also great! So yeah, I know people love Half-Life, and I do belive it's a very good game, but not THAT good. Bioshock had a lot of short comings, some quite annoying, and a mechanic I didn't enjoyed at all, the Clone Machine. But it could follow Kyle advice and become a book series.
Honestly, I did not find Half-Life's story engaging that much. It just didn't mesh with me for whatever reason, it just felt like I was a dude who was walking from action point to action point so that the story could be moved on by other people. I dunno, I think it's because I never really felt like I was in the story, it was always Gordon Freeman, which is something I don't understand when people say that FPSs make "you" the main character. I highly disagree, especially when they give you a name or a voice or whatever, which is what they do with Gordon. I want to learn about him, about his previous life, about his connections, how he would actually react to things. Instead everyone just jokes that he's a mute and he stands around, jumping on tables, waiting for the scientist to start up the teleportation machine already.
I enjoyed Bioshock more because it truly subverts a lot of what we expect in games. The whole twist of "Would You Kindly" really makes you think about how games are designed in a critical way, and it avoids the issue I have with Half-Life in that the character is never brought into question; it's about the world around him, allowing me to truly get into the character I'm playing despite him having a name. I dunno, that's just me.
I enjoyed Bioshock more because it truly subverts a lot of what we expect in games. The whole twist of "Would You Kindly" really makes you think about how games are designed in a critical way, and it avoids the issue I have with Half-Life in that the character is never brought into question; it's about the world around him, allowing me to truly get into the character I'm playing despite him having a name. I dunno, that's just me.
well mass effect wasnt a first person shooter but i am surprised deus ex wasnt mentioned. i never thought bioshock had that great a story. the "would you kindly" thing was a pretty awesome twist but i wasnt blown away by anything about that game. half life creates a really immersive world but lets be honest, its strength has never been the story. the story isnt bad but its certainly not anything special eitherRobotDinosaur said:
Bioshock's plot: Guy explores a messed up world to learn the interesting story about how it got so messed up...then guy decides he doesn't like the story and does his best to screw up the ending.
Half-life's plot: Guy caught in a bad situation tries to save his colleagues and not die as things get worse and worse around him.
Both of them are on the action end of survival horror where the protagonist doesn't have much more motivation than "you're in a bad situation...try not to die". Both try to tack on a more noble motivation near the end and the fact that we see these as "plot twists" is a sad commentary on the state of the plots up until then.
Half-life does a MUCH better job of "show don't tell"; BioShock does a better job of back-story and world building;, but the plots within the games are nothing much.
I'd have to agree with the commenters above who listed Halo, Mirrors Edge, No One Lives Forever, and Thief as having better in-game stories. And of course, if we're counting BioShock as a FPS, then Deus Ex is certainly in the discussion too. Those all establish a world with a compelling conflict and fleshed-out antagonists, plausibly explain why you are a central character in that conflict, then let you go to work PRO-actively instead of RE-actively being herded along.
Half-life's plot: Guy caught in a bad situation tries to save his colleagues and not die as things get worse and worse around him.
Both of them are on the action end of survival horror where the protagonist doesn't have much more motivation than "you're in a bad situation...try not to die". Both try to tack on a more noble motivation near the end and the fact that we see these as "plot twists" is a sad commentary on the state of the plots up until then.
Half-life does a MUCH better job of "show don't tell"; BioShock does a better job of back-story and world building;, but the plots within the games are nothing much.
I'd have to agree with the commenters above who listed Halo, Mirrors Edge, No One Lives Forever, and Thief as having better in-game stories. And of course, if we're counting BioShock as a FPS, then Deus Ex is certainly in the discussion too. Those all establish a world with a compelling conflict and fleshed-out antagonists, plausibly explain why you are a central character in that conflict, then let you go to work PRO-actively instead of RE-actively being herded along.
What Half Life did well was its ability to immerse a player fully into a world and environment with the most barebones elements of plot. There is no extensive exposition, your character never speaks - you're literally dumped in medias res into the life of guy who, if it wasn't for the passing comments of some security guards, you wouldn't know the name of. And everything happens without anyone explaining it and somehow, it all works. You honestly do feel like you're living the life of Gordon Freeman - unlucky man caught in a terrible situation facing completely inexplicable things like aliens popping out of midair.
It's the opposite of most shooters nowadays - shooters now try to include as much exposition as possible to give you context and immersion, but in actuality, that can work against you - there can be too much contrast between the dialogue-heavy cutscenes with the best friend, the romantic interest, the commander, the main villain, the computer techie, etc. and the dialogue-empty gameplay parts where you just keep shooting moving things.
Half-Life didn't have that contrast and the developers did a great job setting the details to make sure the immersion was preserved. When a helicopter shot a rocket at you, no one told you, "Look out, they're shooting rockets. To dodge the rocket, take cover behind a wall, then shoot back!" or whatever.
However, on the flipside, it also limited the depth of story that could be explored. It never shifts to another perspective, there's never a long briefing. You're strictly limited to the perspective of one guy. So in Half Life, you don't get to meet a lot of characters, trace their arcs, their development, experience a richness of dialogue and plotlines, get all the backstory and necessary information for a deeper understanding of everything that's going on. Its strength of immersion also inhibits its storytelling - in fact, it doesn't have much "storytelling," really. It's entirely a slice-of-life - just a very traumatic and painful slice-of-life that happens to address the fate of humanity and the Earth.
It's the opposite of most shooters nowadays - shooters now try to include as much exposition as possible to give you context and immersion, but in actuality, that can work against you - there can be too much contrast between the dialogue-heavy cutscenes with the best friend, the romantic interest, the commander, the main villain, the computer techie, etc. and the dialogue-empty gameplay parts where you just keep shooting moving things.
Half-Life didn't have that contrast and the developers did a great job setting the details to make sure the immersion was preserved. When a helicopter shot a rocket at you, no one told you, "Look out, they're shooting rockets. To dodge the rocket, take cover behind a wall, then shoot back!" or whatever.
However, on the flipside, it also limited the depth of story that could be explored. It never shifts to another perspective, there's never a long briefing. You're strictly limited to the perspective of one guy. So in Half Life, you don't get to meet a lot of characters, trace their arcs, their development, experience a richness of dialogue and plotlines, get all the backstory and necessary information for a deeper understanding of everything that's going on. Its strength of immersion also inhibits its storytelling - in fact, it doesn't have much "storytelling," really. It's entirely a slice-of-life - just a very traumatic and painful slice-of-life that happens to address the fate of humanity and the Earth.
I really feel Kyle crowbarred himself in the foot invoking similarities to Lost as part of his defense of a good plot.