Things appearing in every shooter.

[Dango]

Unbalanced guns, remember the days of Goldeneye 007 when killing someone took skill?

 

[Jekken6]

insta knifing. the knife should be a selectable weapon, not an instant one.

 

[Extraintrovert]

American leads. Come on people, they're not the only good guys in the world. When playing a WWII shooter, what's wrong with the British, French, or any of the neutral nations in the world who got invaded anyway? What about the Chinese?

The source appears to be nostalgia. World War II was the last time the USA as a nation felt that they were being the big heroes and saving the planet (they WEREN'T, if anything that title goes to the Soviet Union, but that isn't the point) as opposed to burning some poor third world country to the ground then pissing on the ashes for the lulz. As for China... I would pay big money to see a game set in the 1900s (or a nearby century) with them as a protagonist, but that won't happen while the USA needs something to fear.

On topic: I have to agree with what previous posters have said, both about the restrictive thinking of the original poster and the general interchangeability and unoriginality of the genre as a whole. God damnit, where is my Episode 3...

 

[blankedboy]

Contrary to popular belief, there aren't bullets in every shooter.
And there's almost definitely some shooters without guns (i.e. only bows or other similar mechanisms)...

I guess my contribution is dust.

Guomingdang

That's spelt Guomintang, felt I should point that out.

EDIT: Shit, sorry, I'm thinking of Kuomintang. Nevermind.

 

[xxcloud417xx]

snip

Your point is very valid, but I gotta stop you at Modern Warfare. Both games depicted the American forces thinking they were the most important people getting shit done. However, the SAS and TF141 missions hint that the Americans were really fucking up while these guys (I think they were all from the UK, correct me if I'm wrong) were busting ass to clean up their messes and get the job done.

Well actually due to the MW 2 story being so damn unclear, I'm not too sure if TF141 was strictly British (though I don't think it was since I think the leader was American). I assume it's an international organization kind of like team Rainbow from rainbow Six but who knows, not like story development is important anymore right?

Shooters nowadays are chock full of the same shit shooters had 10 years ago... They don't change and people still play them so devs must be doing something right...

Although I daresay that Portal broke the mold a bit by not having a gun that shot bullets, and actually having people think... Oh, and the lead was definitely not a Testicle.

 

[ShrooM_DoughKiD]

I don't know where you've been but or what the > are supposed to mean (trying to imply what came first?) but things like Flame Throwers and Grenade launches have been common things in games for quite a long time and they are actual weapon in the real world. It's like saying omg look all these videogames have guns, or knives or w/e other standard weapon.
The sticky grenade well that's an odd thing and I really don't know how to argue it.

Sticky Grendes have been used in wars before. Not anymore because we have RPG's and other types of Anti-Vehicle Artillery.

OT: Where'd all the fun go? The last truly fun FPS I played was Classic Doom 3, or PeZBOTS for CoD4

 

[ProfessorLayton]

Sorry but your wrong. Gears of war didn't have grenade launchers since the beginning. In fact there isn't a Grenade launcher in 1 or 2, unless you count the mortar from 2 which you shouldn't.

I think I know my stuff...

 

[ethaninja]

guns. blood. humanoids. lack of a deep story.

Ditto. And the main characters: A whiney douche, an over agressive ass, and a hardboiled antagonist.

 

[ethaninja]

Unbalanced guns, remember the days of Goldeneye 007 when killing someone took skill?

Agreed. However, I do like headshots that instant kill. But some guns are just stupid.

 

[Lt.Snuffles]

Just before I throw my well thought out argument into the ring, can I just ask why people hate MW2 so much? I really liked the characters and the story felt solid enough, and the levels seemed relevent.

OT: Not much of a bad reccuring theme between shooters, but in almost every one I've played, there is some super God weapon. In call of duty 4, you get the golden weapons, not so much an inprovement to the preformance of the gun but better then it's normal counterpart considerably. In Halo, the rocket launcher, Just cause 2, the minigun, WWII games, the stg44 etc.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Bad writing,limited gameplay and high prices(50+ for a 4 hour shooter).

 

[Phlakes]

Fragmentation Grenades that do not... Fragmentate.

Which really annoys me in Halo 3, because they have a completely separate grenade that DOES fragment.

 

[Zaik]

Shotguns that are inaccurate at like 15 yds.

 

[Confidingtripod]

mediocrity, I haven't played a good shooter since timesplitters 3

YES! where did the mad fun of shooting things go?

 

[Ironic Pirate]

Fun?

Oh, wait, that's DLC. Damn you, Kotick!

 

[seanmcdow]

regenerating health and being only able to carry 2 guns

 

[m.zajac]

Russians. Seriously, it's not the Cold War anymore.

 

[godofallu]

Sorry but your wrong. Gears of war didn't have grenade launchers since the beginning. In fact there isn't a Grenade launcher in 1 or 2, unless you count the mortar from 2 which you shouldn't.

I think I know my stuff...

I wouldn't call a boomshot a grenade launcher at all, but I guess it's close enough for you to consider it one. Argument ended, you win.

 

[DaDrum]

Just before I throw my well thought out argument into the ring, can I just ask why people hate MW2 so much? I really liked the characters and the story felt solid enough, and the levels seemed relevent.

the story was fine, it was just far too short and compared to cod4 and waw, it's veteran difficulty was a bit on the easy side.

just don't get me started on the multiplayer's faults...