Poll: Shooters

[tk1989]

In my opinion you can't just group all FPS games into two different categories....

 

[Halfbreed13]

CoD always seems to mix the two wonderfully. You can have intense run and gun moments in multiplayer and such, but then you have stealth and urban warfare that is just amazing

CoD is one of the few series I've played every one of so far and with every one I just start to get into it when I suddenly just lose interest. Not sure exactly why, but it might be the combination of the two styles you're refering to. I start acting stealthy when maybe I should be guns ho, and vice versa. It's probably I just prefer one style or the other. When I'm in the mood for some guns-a-blazin', I don't want to suddenly have to crouch and hide.

Well, I play the multi player themost, and I found that if I wanted to, I could play it like a stealth game with UAV jammer and such, or I could go nut and run in guns ablazin

 

[Gizmo]

I personally like it in the middle some tactical parts some fast paced parts.

 

[Halfbreed13]

I personally like it in the middle some tactical parts some fast paced parts.

ditto

 

[balimuzz]

Rainbow Six is brilliant, but then again, I do love to just blast my way through some aliens in Halo, so I have to go with both. I just can't decide between the two. OH!!! I know! I like to use V.A.T.S!!!

 

[Ophiuchus]

Easy ones that don't involve grenades or multiplayer.

 

[Gaming_Purist]

I really like Left 4 Dead, co-op. Don't see myself ever playing it solo though. It almost reminds me of Gauntlet in it's simplistic, friend-friendly fun.

I agree. Have you tried Vs. or Survival mode? I thought co-op was grand until I played the other two modes which totally changed the game and are great fun.

I played a little of Quake 3 and thought it delivered it's purpose well, fast action fun, but couldn't get into it too much. Probably because what time I was spending on shooters at the time was in Unreal Tournament with friends. Might give Quake another shot.

Just be aware that Q3A takes a lot of practice and commitment to play at an even an above-average level, and can seem daunting to new players because of the high barriers to entry (there are people who have been playing this game non-stop since Q3A, after all) although the matchmaking system does a pretty good job of countering this issue. It is very rewarding to play however being a 'pure' shooter per se and I find it helps increase my accuracy and general competency in other fps's as well. A fast mouse also helps (2000 dpi or higher).

As for Rainbow Six, right now I'm playing my way through Vegas 2 and though it's gotten very frustrating, I'm still really enjoying it. Been planning on going back and playing the first one next, though I might go with RS3 instead since you recommend it.

Vegas 2 is widely regarded to be the weakest of the two. Maybe start with the first one? Vegas 2 is still great fun but at times gets very repetitive. I often found myself having to resort to being very cheap to beat some areas. One thing Vegas does do very well is the teammate AI and their ability to find cover. Without naming names, a lot of other tactical shooters will see AI teammates gleefully run out and do a dance while getting mowed down.

 

[LooK iTz Jinjo]

Being the epic gears fan that I am... Tactical... I don't like the run-and-gun style of halo. Gears is good because it's not to slow, but it's still got the tactics to it, there's massive strategy to it (The way my friends and I play it)

 

[Audemas]

Depends on my mood. I'm a fan of both tactical and fast-paced shooters so i can pick just one. My vote goes toward both.

 

[Falconknight06]

I'm not a big fan of shooters unless I'm playing multiplayer. I guess it would depend on the game as to which type I like.

 

[-Seraph-]

Fast paced for Online and Tactical for single player. Tactical online has never worked for me, it only feels good when you play with smart people or friends, random joes will just fuck it up too much. Fast paced online I find far more enjoying, like UT, quake, Halo, and CS (a mix of both really).

 

[lizards]

tactical nothing is more rewarding for me to see my team follow orders and perfectly exucute or my plan and see the other team run away in terror or die

 

[Lord Beautiful]

I tend to be much better at tactical shooters, so I'll go with that.

 

[mtk2a]

Options, options, options.

I really enjoy sandbox shooters that give you choices on how to approach an objective in multiple ways. This is one of the main reasons I'm a fan of Crysis.

 

[neuromasser]

What about both?

You prefer both to either one? Does that mean you don't like either or just have no opinion?

I like both types, it depends on my mood what I'm gonna play. I also like games than try to implement both styles. Hope that clears it out.

 

[joystickjunki3]

Ohhhhhh, you mean FPSs.

Totally thought you might have meant the real shooters.

 

[CuddlyCombine]

Tactical, all the way. Run-and-gun shooters are boring and repetitive; duck behind cover until enemy stops firing, stand up and blow him to bits. Encounter stronger enemy, defeat with some difficulty, acquire stronger gun, repeat whole process.

Tactical, meanwhile, lets you be creative. I remember playing the first Splinter Cell and just spending hours in the prison sequence shooting out all of the lights, so that the security guard would draw his flashlight, go to investigate the door, and I would drop down behind him and incapacitate him. Awesome.

 

[Panzer_God]

WHen I play shooters I just want a simple set-up. Preferably 'bad guy, shoot, kill, find next bad guy, shoot kill, etc.' Beyond that everything else is either a bonus or a distraction. Sandboxworld shooters are either the shining jewel on the very tip of the crown of the genre or their the really smelly gunk that's been sitting in the back of the fridge for a few to many years. It's all in how it's done. I just got very offtrack didn't I?