Poll: What, in your opinion, makes for a bad FPS?

[The Breadcrab]

I've been on the Escapist long enough (Read: not that long) to hear people complain about pretty much every FPS in existence at one point or another. However, I'm trying to pinpoint exactly what people dislike about the so called 'modern FPS', or at least the most widely hated aspect of them. MW3 is coming out and BF3 is already spinning in consoles/straining PC graphics cards, so without further ado, I allow you to vote on the aspects of modern FPS games that you hate the most, and why.

Is it regenerative health? Maybe you feel there is little freedom in the design? Or is the standard 'kill russians, save USA' plot what turns you off? Also, what makes for a 'good' FPS in your opinion? I want to know! Poll and comment away!

EDIT: If you can, PLEASE try to state an example of what you think a good shooter is! I keep hearing negativity towards games these days but rarely do I hear praise unless it's a review of the game itself. Shout out some of your FPS favorites! Doesn't matter what generations they're from, we want to see some examples.

 

[distortedreality]

I think it would have to be a combination of the stuff you've listed - personally it's never one thing that would make a bad game. If I was to name one thing though, the biggest killer would be poor feeling/sounding weapons. I mean if the guns in an FPS don't feel and sound awesome, there's no real point to playing.

But having said that, if something picks up the slack, like say for example everything else in Deus Ex, then it'll still be a good game.

 

[tippy2k2]

It's none of those items. All of those things are OK as long as the game play is good. There are examples of great games with each of these "issues" but the game play wins out.

Regen Health/Two Weapon: Halo
Linearity: Half-Life
Focus on realism: Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
Boring Weapons: Call of Duty 2
Cliche: Modern Warfare 2
Generic Art: Well, most modern FPS's
Short Length: Portal (Or Homefront)

 

[SovietSecrets]

None of those really. If the game isn't fun to me (mostly that it runs bad) then the game is bad. I hated the ending of BF3, but it didn't make me hate the game. Runs smooth and is just fun in general to play.

 

[s0p0g]

boring weapons for sure. the assault rifle from FEAR 1 comes to mind; it was good, no question, but it was so... boring. so i didn't use it ^^
i don't want to imagine a game full of boring weapons *shudder*

 

[Lucian The Lugia]

I couldn't decide on which of the things I hated most, to be honest. I'm not much of an FPS enthusiast, but there are two I love that I feel most shooters should be a bit more like.

I'd say my top hated reasons are the regenerative health (except in TF2's case with the Medic), emphasis on realism, two-weapon only rule, and the overall lackluster and grey style. Team Fortress 2, which is one of my favorite and currently still played FPS games sort of suffers from the limited weapon count, but you can't really pick up weapons in game and each class has their own unique and customizable loadouts to make up for it.

An example of a good FPS which should REALLY come back with a 4th installment is the Timesplitters series. It was funny, over-the-top, charming, and fair, and there was a lot to do. Hell, if you knew how, you could've made your own mini story mode-esque missions in the MapMaker. Sure, some levels in TimeSplitters embrace the shooters of today with dull greys and browns, but the cast of characters makes up for it. And the weapons, oh GOD the weapons. There were your basic COD/Battlefield weapons, but then you had the futuristic ones, three or four different mines, and probably one of my favorites, the INJECTOR, a needle gun that if any enemy took two shots from it, they'd inflate and BURST.

I think my love for games like TF2 and Timesplitters are what keep me from playing things like Gears, COD, or Battlefield. I am, however, interested in picking up Bulletstorm (despite Yahtzee's commentary) because it sounds like it'd have the same color and charm as Timesplitters. (he also intrigued me with the novelty kills and types of weapons)

 

[everythingbeeps]

Too many things to be able to pick just one item off the list, because it just depends on the game. I can handle a 2 weapon limit if other aspects are good. Linearity isn't always bad. Realism works sometimes and not other times.

I don't mind regenerative health, because I don't play for challenge. It's no less realistic than picking up a band-aid and being instantly healed. FPS games are unrealistic. All of them. So to quibble over health regeneration seems silly.

But I'll look at this from another angle: to me, the BEST thing about a modern FPS is the atmosphere. I can overlook most other shortcomings if the atmosphere is good. So I guess to me, the worst thing an FPS can do is have a bland, uninteresting atmosphere. Most war FPS games are guilty of this, obviously.

On the other hand, a game like Homefront, which is guilty of almost everything on your list, was one I still fairly enjoyed, because the atmosphere/environment was compelling. What should have been a bland war shooter became more interesting to me because it took me to some pretty intriguing locations.

 

[Smooth Operator]

"All of the above" option missing, that's what I would pick.

 

[w9496]

I think a bad community makes a bad FPS. If your team won't help you, you won't win.

 

[ResonanceGames]

The game frequently taking control away from me is the worst. Don't ever point my view somewhere for me (Crysis 2) or play some stupid animation while I'm trying to accomplish my goal.

If your game make me "press X repeatedly to remove Dog" or constantly knocks my character over then makes me watch a pre-rendered animation of him getting back up to his feet, I will break the DVD in half.

See every COD/COD-wannabe campaign, as well as Duke Nukem Forever, for the worst examples of this.

 

[IamSofaKingRaw]

The people that said 'linearity' should have just answered I hate FPS's in general, because nearly every FPS is extremely linear (except RAGE which was average).

 

[Grimsinger]

I think the real problem is a lack of focus. Trying to make a game cinematic, exciting, have a great story, lots of explosions, cool guns, tits, major gore, ect ect ect, is just too much. A lack of focus always shows, no matter what you do, so I think just trying to focus one one or two things, it will improve games, not just fps,over all.

 

[yahtzeefreeman]

Too much focus on realism. If all games are realistic, what is there to escape to? Although there are some good realistic games (Battlefield 3), the industry needs to have some fun with the games before they become less about fun and more about training for the military.

 

[TheIronRuler]

I've been on the Escapist long enough (Read: not that long) to hear people complain about pretty much every FPS in existence at one point or another. However, I'm trying to pinpoint exactly what people dislike about the so called 'modern FPS', or at least the most widely hated aspect of them. MW3 is coming out and BF3 is already spinning in consoles/straining PC graphics cards, so without further ado, I allow you to vote on the aspects of modern FPS games that you hate the most, and why.

Is it regenerative health? Maybe you feel there is little freedom in the design? Or is the standard 'kill russians, save USA' plot what turns you off? Also, what makes for a 'good' FPS in your opinion? I want to know! Poll and comment away!

It's bleedin' broken. These are segments of gameplay broken up by cutscenes, and then these segments of gameplay are broken up by QTEs. It's very annoying to play such a game. If you have levels, then let me start them from the begining till the end, don't break it up with cutscenes. If you insist on dialogues, have it scripted in between fighting when you're moving to a new area.
The graphics are amazing, yet the game is just too short. It's nice to look at but you'll burn through the single player campaign in a weekened.

 

[Shadowstar38]

The two weapon limit for sure. In Halo in particular Im shown that when not in use the pistol goes in a holster on one side and the assult rifle goes on my back. That still leaves one side of my body and some free hands, and dont tell me all that is to heavy to carry.

This is mostly a problem because I love pistols and I dont want to have to put it down whenever the game decides I need to be a sniper for this one part( COD and Battlefeild are guilty of this).

 

[Wintermoot]

allot of things
regenerating health
two weapon BS
short SP

 

[TitanAtlas]

Regen health, the plot, quick time events (why the FU** do they even do this!?) and short lenght....

 

[loc978]

First two options, but I voted the first one, simply because I have a burning hatred for fast-regenerating health.

As for shooters I like... Unreal Tournament(1999) with its million mods/map packs/et cetera installed (it gets pretty samey after awhile with no mods, the weapons and maps are a little lackluster).