The "fun-shooters" return. But why would anyone want that?

[Netrigan]

Old FPS's have no level design? No story? I don't think some folks commenting here have ever played those "older" shooters. Granted the story can be sparse, but here's a hint for you "The level design IS the story." This is true in at least DOOM, Duke Nukem 3D, Shadow Warrior, UnreaL. Maybe modern FPSers have gotten to used to their hands being held.

This is one of the biggest changes in the first person shooter. Not to say all older level design is good, but when it was good, it was amazing. As time marched on, the move toward "realistic" level design took over and after Half-Life, that was pretty much it for a level like "O" Of Destruction which dumps you in the middle of a huge fire fight in an open arena, from which you're pretty much forced to flee.

Would anyone build a military research facility, army base, or spaceport that looked anything like those old levels? Absolutely not, but when they worked, the flow was amazing.

Monsters in closets. Totally unrealistic, but nothing beats grabbing a blue key only to have all the walls lower to reveal dozens of baddies and having to fight your way out of the room.

 

[ChildofGallifrey]

Because variety is the spice of life. Practically the last decade of FPS games has been nothing but a grayish-brown, gritty realistic mush. Don't get me wrong, realistic shooters certainly have their place in the market (don't want the macho frat boys to be alienated, right? I mean, if every game released were like Psychonauts, the lightheartedness and creativity would make it so they would never game again).

It's fun to play a realistic shooter sometimes, but you know what? I live in the real world, and I don't particularly care for the real world. I game to get AWAY from the real world, so if gaming is only going to take me into a different part of the real world, I'll pass on that. Hell, if the game has to be set in a conceivably real-ish place, juxtapose it with something awesome and differnt, a la Psychonauts or Shadow Hearts.

I'm done with realism. I want fantasy to make a triumphant return.

 

[FoolKiller]

Simple...

First off I would like to say that my interpretation, if correct, is that the OP has given the misnomer of "fun-shooter" to FPSs that are not story-driven/story-intense. The story is merely there as a backdrop for the primary purpose of shooting things. Games that are not "fun-shooters" are games where the FPS is just a delivery mechanism for the story.

Its not true that these "simpler" concept shooters can't be fun. People just refer to Doom, Quake, Unreal Tournament, and Duke Nukem. But there is a company that makes a game that is not a "fun-shooter" called Half-Life, that also made a "fun-shooter" called Left 4 Dead. Both are great.

 

[LiftYourSkinnyFists]

So between bulletstorm, Duke nukem, and the upcoming serious sam sequel, throughout lots of threads, people on here have been celebrating the return of the so called 'fun-shooters'. A somewhat misleading term, that refers to the kind of fps we had before there was half-life, before there was Modern Warfare, before there was halo. The kind of fps we had before such games started to have stories beyond "demons / aliens / nazis over there, kill they ass". The kind of game we had in times where going into a room, having all doors close, and defeat x waves of enemies was considered clever level design, especially when it happened five thousand times per level, with nothing else.
In short: The kind of fps we had, before fps became any good.

Now, on the off chance of sounding sexist, maybe you need to be a guy to like that kind of games, but seriously - abandoning the story in favor of un-funny one-liners doesn't work. Bad Company 2 proved that much. And neither badassery, nor comedic effect requires you to abandon years of game-design progress.
So, I ask you dear escapist, why would anyone want such games to make a return?

Disclaimer: This is by no means a judgement on the upcoming games, I don't know those. It's just that all the "good old games" mentioned in the various discussions about these games, are from my perspective horribly boring, repetetive grindfests soaked in testosterone and immaturity, and that I'm trying to grasp why anyone would want a game coming out in 2011 to be like a game that wasn't any good in 1995.

I prefer those ones because I'm in it for a game and minor comedic effects rather than a completely retarded story with a main character that doesn't speak throughout the entire game.

That, and I'm 99% sure games like DOOM's level design beats the hell out of Half Life considering half life has an entire extra axis to work with that's quite poor and says a HELL of alot about companies like I.D. and the older style games.

It's almost the same with racing games... what on earth happened to a decent F-Zero X game or XG3-Racing...

Games have become more and more developed and have lost the real feel of what a game should be, I could spend so many more hours on Pac Man or Space Invaders rather than something like Half Life or Black Ops - I'm a fan of the halo series and the Call Of Duty games but they're still not what I would call fun.

 

[Zarmi]

We celebrate it because it means the FPS genre might actually be worth spending money on again, then. Call of Duty is shit. Halo is shit. Name me a few good FPS titles today, please. I can't find any. Either the game takes itself too seriously, and thereby cut out the entire "FUN" of gaming, which, guess what, is the point in the first place. To have fun. And who calls CoD realistic anyway? It's so far from the truth.. If you look for realism in games, then you've gone the wrong way, please turn 180 degrees and get the hell out of my sight.

 

[Gigano]

Well, a bit of variety is always good. While I'd take Bioshock over Unreal Tournament any day, there should be plenty of room for both kinds of games (and the military style one's etc.) on the middle road, and offerings have been slim in the category of "fun-shooters" of late. Like anything else, serious grimy war dramas should be taken in moderation.

Though there's of course always also highly specialized niche shooters like this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Flashpoint:_Dragon_Rising] for those who take the tactical aspects of the genre very seriously, or this [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.244740-Microsoft-Bans-Panties?page=1] for those who most certainly don't take anything in it seriously.

 

[Sonicron]

First, I've had my fill of shooters that take themselves too seriously. A game that advertises itself by embracing outright silliness is very appealing to me right about now.

Second, as far as I'm concerned realism in games can eat a dick. I spend most of my day in the real world, and when I play a video game I'd like to get as far away from reality as possible, which is not an option with that Call of Duty shit.

 

[Bomberman4000]

Because I'm tired of games that take themselves so fucking seriously.

Yeah that.

There's always a shift in the way certain style of games are made and this is a phase that FPS are going through. You have to mix it up sometimes because even if you have good games that all fall into the same categories and have similar characteristics players are going to get tired of it. Mass Effect is one of my favorite games but I don't want 6 games that play just like Mass Effect. I'll get tired of it.

Don't worry, your super-realistic shooters aren't going anywhere in all their shades of brown and grey and "real" weapons I can't tell the difference between anyway.

 

[Wardnath]

This is exactly the reason why games like Timesplitters were created.

 

[Sandytimeman]

I have a feeling you didn't grow up in the era of "the good ol days"

Anyway, before this ground became well trod and boring it used to be ground breaking and new. And even though by today's standards it may be boring and repetitive they are viewed very kindly. In addition the humor from the Serious Sam, Duke Nukem, and etc games is something I'm longing for after having played 1,000,000,000 :

DUDE HARDCORE, THIS IS LIKE TOTALLY REALISTIC!

Having a game that gives you the same gameplay you love with a bit of fun mixed in as opposed to always trying to toe the line in terms of how to one up its previous game in hardcore grittiness.

 

[RowdyRodimus]

I keep reading that everyone wants story with their games and then in other threads they complain that games don't have enough replay value. You think it might be because once you are done with the story you are done, limiting the replay value?

That's one of the reasons the old school shooters need to come back, what story there is is just there to give you a reason to have fun and shoot things with big guns.

 

[Spectrum_Prez]

Meh, wake me up when someone buys out the rights to No One Lives Forever. Mmmm, Cate Archer...

To be fair, I could just watch the tv show about her dick brother, Sterling. Or at least that's how I situate it.

 

[Uber Waddles]

Its a breath of fresh air.

Over the last few years, FPS's became so uptight, that if you found a way to unclench their assholes, a large stick would fall out.

While they made advances to the genre, they boiled down to weapons that felt the same, enemies that were uninteresting, and a game that took itself so serious it became stick-up-the-ass predictible.

I liked Bulletstorms demo for the same reason I liked the A Team movie. It was ridiculous, over-the-top, didnt take itself too seriously, and the characters where having as much fun as I was.

Mixing the old "fun shooters" with modern mechanics can really innovate games, and make it so FPS's arent as dull. Hell, I loved Reach simply because the armor abilities added depth other than run and gun.

 

[jhlip]

Any game that lets me launch a man into the air, shoot him in the face and rewards me for it despite its lack of realism is a good thing in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, I love my "realistic" shooters, but a little break from reality and maturity never hurt anyone. So why not give them a try?

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

Someone mentioned Timesplitters earlier... now THAT I would like to see.

Seriously though, question for everyone squealing over Duke Nukem atm. If you met him, in a real life situation, how long before you would want to take a claw hammer to the Aryan, misogynistic prick's balls?

The King is nothing more than an overdone power fantasy for 90's computer nerds who secretly look up to the physical ideals of the people who bullied them at school, and if he was real all the muscles and the one-liners would just be compensating for his extremely small penis and he would have the respect of no-one!

Give me Master Chief any day. Not only does he kill aliens, he doesn't act like he's god's gift because of it either, he just kills some more aliens instead.

 

[Nicarus]

Because I'm tired of games that take themselves so fucking seriously.

And the wise man speaks!

But yeah...I like a good story and whatnot, but what's not to love about just blowing !@#$ up for the fun of it?

 

[DVS Storm]

I just want to play something different. I think the story is the core part of the gaming experience usually but I just want to have fun sometimes. And well COD games do not have good stories and neither does Halo(Halo has a good story in the books but the games just fuck it up). These modern "realistic" shooters are just getting really boring.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

I prefer no story to a bad story and since no FPS other than half life has been half life-quality I actually see this as an improvement.


It's the only logical step, so many people are only into it for the multiplayer anyways so why bother with stories if you're not actually setting out to tell a story in the first place but are just integrating it into your game cause it's the law or something.