It's no secret that this, the seventh (or eighth, depending on who you are) console generation of gaming, is all about the First Person Shooter. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I do think there are a lot of problems with the genre that nobody seems willing to fix such as heavy (and I mean HEAVY) scripting, limited weapons, overemphasis on plots that would get laughed out of the theater, and the dumbing down of AI opponents.
Now, while I could probably just spend the whole thread attacking this genre, I'm not going to. I instead want to focus on the best FPS games I've played this gen and focus on what they did right and what others should follow after for the genre.
GoldenEye
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nintendojo.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F09%2F6048_07_0025_20100726-a8qd3.jpg&hash=22e7724587288a627031995708da7f6c4d7b45b7)
Now, I'm sure everyone rolled their eyes when they saw this game being revealed. GoldenEye was one of the first "movie shooters", so everyone figured this would dumb down everything that made the original game great and make it into another COD clone. But, it didn't turn out that way. In my opinion, GoldenEye is the right way to do a movie shooter. There are scripted segments (usually not gameplay related, however), there are cutscenes, and some QTEs (which thankfully aren't abundant), and the game feels like you're playing a movie. However, GoldenEye overcomes a lot of the problems movie shooters tend to have despite being one. Variety of weapons (you can carry three and your phone, so it basically means you can carry 4 items total), optional encounters (you can wait and bide your time and stealthly approach situations or bypass them, in a recent playthrough I sniped out an entire enemy room before they noticed I was there by sniping smartly), varied objectives and locations, and despite having rechargeable health it isn't much of an issue because you don't have much of it and you will die fast if you suck too much (it's only really noticeable between encounters, not so much during firefights as it takes long to recharge)... Basically, it's a great FPS and it probably has one of the best single player campaigns this gen. There is most likely a HD port coming out, so if you don't have a Wii, I suggest giving it a go on the system of your choice.
Left 4 Dead
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fxboxlivemedia.ign.com%2Fxboxlive%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F108%2F1085660%2Fleft-4-dead-2-the-passing-20100423034339428-000.jpg&hash=854712c430ea58a50907d54a897c9e2233be89c9)
I'm basically lumping both games in here even if I do prefer the second one, but this is one of the best things to happen to the genre this gen. Left 4 Dead is part survival horror and part shooter (the second game has more emphasis on survival with melee weapons and defib units and such) with an emphasis on co-op that has yet to be matched with me and my friends. Since enemy spawns are completely random in this game, you have to rely on your reflexes and your teammates as there is no memorization apart from level layouts (which are also thankfully varied and interesting enough to help replays) leads to what is probably my most played game this gen. The AI for allies could be better, though.
Halo Reach
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.addictinggames.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F09%2Freach_e310_campaign02.jpg&hash=91c665f00eec49d272986a15da13fec9b2f0f5b6)
Remember Halo? It's back! In proper form! I already talked about this extensively in the Halo thread, so I'll try to keep it brief. Remember all those great things from Halo 1 that Bungie never brought to the sequels (or nerfed tremendously?)... All that is back here and it's better than ever. The game that essentially started the modern shooter boom manages to finally remember what people loved about the original that even the ripoffs and sequels didn't, and it is easily one of the best FPS games this gen.
BioShock
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.frictionlessinsight.com%2Frevpics2%2FBioShock%2FBioShockC.jpg&hash=dd11cbd83f8c27b2c1803fa6fa55bef98de5c561)
Another weird series to discuss, I find the second game is probably better on a technical level (better pacing, level design, and weapons/powers), but the original is probably the better experience of the two. When people complain about consoles being the reason FPSes are dumbed down (with linear level design, limited weapons, and scripted to oblivion) I sort of scratch my head as I remember this game. BioShock has pretty much everything the best PC shooters do in their campaigns, freedom and choice, just on a gamepad. If anything, this games existence should prove that it's the developers that hold the genre back and not the systems the games appear on. That said, download the patch and turn off vita-chambers... You will be sucked in.
F.E.A.R.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-XM0lPWqNB6A%2FTe-uVpKunnI%2FAAAAAAAAAHQ%2FEJ-06MKkYvw%2Fs1600%2Fbattle.jpg&hash=bc9d0a389896663560ad48d2958ac0a2c1743eb4)
This game is all about being tense. If my nerves weren't already completely shot, I probably would have fought my way through this all the way. But as it is, the game signifies what I felt like when I played games like DOOM and the like as a kid. It made me feel tense and wondering what would happen next. The weapons are powerful and the enemy is smart, the level design is carefully crafted and the developer wants you to suffer. It's pretty much how I imagined what this genre would turn into as I got older, and I couldn't be happier.
I obviously didn't include games like Mirror's Edge, Metroid Prime trilogy, or Condemned, because I don't consider them FPS games, but I do think they're great, too. So, those are what I consider the top 5 FPS games this gen. How about you guys?
I agree with you completely. Its not the genre that I have a problem with, but how much most games in the genre are lacking in creativity and any real sense of freedom. I HATE how scripted most FPS games are these days. I don't care how cinematic it looks if it forces me to do the same shit every time and makes fake challenge with its harder difficulty settings. I want to be able to take alternate paths, tackle objectives in different orders, deal with challenging enemy AI, and come up with different strategies to tackle difficulty situations.
I'm really glad that Halo: Reach made your top 5. Its also easily one of my favorite FPS games of this generation and probably one of my personal favorite games of the generation (not a top 10, but still one of the best I've played this generation, regardless). Its EVERYTHING that most other "popular" FPS games aren't doing. I have literally come up with dozens of alternate strategies while playing the game on Legendary that each work to different effect. And I have to say, this is the one of the only Halo games that's actually FUN to play on Legendary by myself because its difficulty relies completely on forcing the player to come up with clever strategies rather than the CoD Veteran method of just making enemies ridiculous accurate and forcing you to rely on luck more than skill and wit.
As for F.E.A.R., I agree with your thoughts on it but I don't personally count it as a game of this generation since it was released before the launch of the XBOX360, and I suppose you can call it a technicality of mine but I separate the generations by the console releases rather than anything by the PC, which is why I personally think of this gen starting with the X360's release. That said, I disagree with most people about F.E.A.R. 2 and think its an exceptional game. Easily one of my favorite FPSs of this generation (granted that I haven't played F.3.A.R. yet, so I can't comment on that one).
BioShock is the best example to me of how to do an atmospheric FPS game. Mechanically its a good game but barely above average. What makes it stand out so much is how unique it feels and how it really emphasizes the element of exploration and using your own ability to your strategic advantage. Sure, you can just blow through the game like a regular shooter just spamming your guns, but its so much more fun if you utilize your weapons and abilities in unique and creative ways. Easily one of the best FPS games of this generation.
As for L4D, I respect the game and its concept, but couldn't get into the 1st one, personally. I love what I've played of the 2nd game, however.
I still haven't gotten a chance to play the new Goldeneye, but whenever I do manage to get a Wii its one of the first 10 games that I'll get (which....still won't be for quite a long while, unfortunately).
I think that what so many shooters from this generation are doing wrong are that they are trying to overemphasize what they think makes a game "look" impressive rather than what makes it feel impressive to play through. Call of Duty just overemphasizes scripted moments and forces you to play the game the way the developers envision, rather than allowing the player to experiment with the game for themselves and play it in their own way. I don't mind games like that being around, but to me the major fault is that there are way too many CoD clones that just try to do what it does (and to even lesser effect) because developers are more interested in following what's popular as opposed to what's truly good. That's just my take on the genre's biggest problem anyways.
F.E.A.R. 2 is an excellent FPS that falls a bit short of the original but still manages to be fun and exciting throughout. I really liked F.E.A.R. 3 at first, but after letting it sink in for awhile, I'm not sure I actually think it's that good of a game. It's fun enough... but it doesn't hold a candle to either of Monolith's offerings (or even TimeGate's first) in terms of mechanics, level design, or story. Many other F.E.A.R. fans agree; it takes awhile to see it as mediocre, but most do eventually. F.E.A.R. 1, of course, is my favorite FPS of all time.
From what I've heard, F.3.A.R. is a fine game mechanically, but in terms of its overall design its pretty uninspired and feels like a standard shooter (a "good" standard shooter, as some fans seem to emphasize, but standard nonetheless). The general consensus on the game seems to be that its decent but not really very good (though at the same time far from being a bad game, as well).
Alright, here are my top 10 personal favorite FPS games:
10. Medal of Honor: Frontline (the only war game that I ever personally cared for)
9. Half-Life 2 (including the episode sequels)
8. BioShock
7. DOOM 3 (after replaying it, its actually pretty underrated, as its mechanically better than the average FPS and is just as atmospheric as BioShock is)
6. F.E.A.R. 2
5. Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath (hey, it counts as far as I'm concerned)
4. DOOM
3. Halo: Combat Evolved/Halo: Reach
2. TimeSplitters 2
1. F.E.A.R.
Keep in mind that I have yet to play games like DOOM 2, Duke Nukem 3D, and System Shock, which is why I didn't rank any of those. I'll give honorable mentions to both Goldeneye or Perfect Dark, but to be honest I was never a big fan of either of those 2 games.
Yeah, I kind of cheated with F.E.A.R, but I let it slide because it was that good. Most people are conflicted over which L4D is better, so I just sort of umbrella'd them.
It should be noted, I don't really like pure versus deathmatch in games so that's why they didn't come into play here. I only like two things; one player campaign and a co-op mode in my FPS games. The latter is the only type of mutliplayer I really like (even if its a team vs team thing), just because I prefer the unpredictability of working with others towards a common goal.
By the way, EK. GoldenEye might be getting a 360/PS3 port, so you may want to keep an eye out. As far as a single player campaigns go, it's probably more fun than any COD game for sure.
As for Medal Of Honor, I think all the games up to Frontline are pretty good, but Airborne was a bit of a gem. Being able to choose your starting point gave the game a lot of unpredictability and strategy, and the fact that enemies can come from anywhere make it a fun shooter. I'm really disappointed that instead of a true sequel we got a COD clone reboot.
Timesplitters 4 better be revealed soon and it better not be turned into a movie shooter. The original trilogy still has more content than almost every shooter released this gen.
I like versus death-matches just fine, when the game is skill based enough to actually be fun while not being overly complex to pick up and play. That said, I'm not really big on them, either, so they never hold my attention or interest for far too long. That's why I base how much I like a shooter purely on the quality and content of its campaign mode.
To be honest, I don't really care for Halo: Reach's multiplayer. I actually liked 2 and 3 better in that regard. That said, I still think Reach is a far superior game to those 2 because its campaign mode is just so much more robust. It allows you to play through each level the way you want to, for the most part, and even though its linear there are tons of open environments allowing you to experiment with different strategies and approach objectives in different ways. Sure, its still on the short side, but considering that I managed to replay it 5 times over without ever getting bored, whereas I wasn't even able to get more than half way through any CoD game period, kind of shows how good its actual content is in the game itself.
For me, the ideal shooter campaign is something that can allow for both freedom, strategy, and increased skill level (demonstrated by how much faster you can complete a level when you're good at it). It feels really rewarding to blow through a level and take minimum damage, and not have to spam ammo to kill enemies. I think that's what most FPS games don't focus enough on, though. Like I said before, I don't mind all the CoD games and their clones out there, but they just aren't for me. I sincerely wish there were more games that deviated from those sorts of games in order for a more fresh experience, personally.
You guys pretty much hit the nail on the head with my beef with FPS. It's not the genre itself, but the lack of innovation. For every BioShock, there are five Call of Duties. That said, there are still plenty of games in the genre I love. Aside from the ones already mentioned like BioShock 1 and 2, Half-Life 2, etc. I also want to chime in and add...
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F3Zwms.jpg&hash=423d5afe55c0f1d29c6c175892db0ee27a21be15)
Borderlands
A game that's far from perfect and has little more to it than "go here and kill a bunch of guys" and yet it manages to be so damn fun. To get the fullest enjoyment from it you really need to play the co-op with some friends but when you do it's a blast. It's up there with the most fun I've had with my 360, easily. I can't wait for Borderlands 2.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FE6xJm.jpg&hash=aa17cae4689e98779a549d52d94597a5663697a4)
DOOM/DOOM II
The classic FPS game that really laid the foundation for the genre. Just about every gamer grew up playing DOOM and it's amazing at just how well the games manage to hold up. Action packed levels with great layouts and secrets galore, grotesque monsters lurking around every corner, awesome weapons, and let's not for the badass soundtrack. You might want to take your time beating the first stage of the original DOOM just because the soundtrack is that good.
As someone who just played through DOOM II, I agree. The level design is just crazy in that game. One of my favorite things in the game is how all the hidden weapons and items in the levels that reward you for exploring the level.
Borderlands needs randomized dungeons and a raised level cap to 99 in the sequel. If it had those two things, I'd still be playing it right now.
I don't think I've played 5 this gen. I only have Bulletstorm and Condemned 2. Well I do have Killzone 2 and I think this Aliens game is a FPS but I don't have a PS3.
Some footage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgwMf6w2qIY) of the HD version of GoldenEye.
Note that every single glimpse of combat in that video could have been approached differently (Yes, even that vent part). That's why it's IMO, such a great FPS.
Eurocom needs to make more Bond games.
Here's my full review of F.3.A.R. now that I've given it some time to settle. This post is loooooong, so be warned, but I think fans of the series should read it, especially if they haven't played the new one yet:
F.E.A.R. 3 is a good game, but it's not a F.E.A.R. game. Sure, you can slow down time, Alma's in it, and the AI is excellent, but at it's core, it's Gears of War in first person. It ticks the boxes for most of the series' basic components, but it doesn't do anything in a way that a fan would probably want. The key mechanics, setting, and story have almost nothing to do with the franchise, and it feels more like a cheap knock-off or a quick cash-grab than a true sequel.
Let's get the story out of the way first. To put things bluntly, it makes no fucking sense. F.E.A.R. 3 (henceforth referred to as "Extraction Point 2") begins nine months after Project Origin with the Point Man (the original game's silent protagonist) held captive by Armacham in Mexico. Making no reference whatsoever to F.E.A.R. 2: Reborn, Paxton Fettel returns as a ghost capable of directly killing people. It's actually
less sensible than TimeGate's "explanation" in the expansion packs. Anyway, Jin is apparently the only other F.E.A.R. team member now (and is also about 10 years younger than she was the last time we saw her), so ol' Pointy and his bro go on a road trip back to Fairport to rescue her (how is it still standing after a humongous explosion and nine months of insane pregnancy-induced tremors? good question). Betters and Holiday are never seen, heard from, or mentioned. Aristide, Manny, and Stokes aren't either, for that matter.
There are no answering machine messages or intel documents. Instead, there are lame cutscenes in which little of merit happens and Beckett is basically declared useless by the new writers. The story is, in a word, insulting, with the ending being the worst part regardless of which one you get. Oh, and the entire game has about as many attempted scares/creepy parts as the F.E.A.R. 2 demo. Yeah.
The gameplay is great! But it's not F.E.A.R. Aside from being a shooter where you can slow down time, it plays almost nothing like the previous entries in the series. For instance, you have a two-weapon limit and regenerating health now. There's also a cover system, which is completely necessary, because the enemies are very smart and know how to bring the pain. Again, it's fun, but it's not what I want from a F.E.A.R game. This isn't so much an evolution or a downgrade from previous titles as it is one that's completely different in style and execution. This can most easily be seen in the fact that every time you get three headshots in a row or stay in cover for 60 seconds, you get a pop-up at the bottom of the screen telling you how many points you earned, which go toward unlocking shit. That's right, you don't search for reflex boosters in this game, you get them from an arcade-style points system. In fact, Extraction Point 2: Electric Boogaloo has no exploration at all; the linear levels are further compounded by the aforementioned lack of answering machines and intel documents. Sure, there's the occasional alternate path, but that doesn't really do anything except net you extra points for absorbing the essence of corpses.
The actual shooting feels satisfying for the most part, though, and the return of explosive contact grenades is definitely welcome. The mech levels are less hilariously awesome than the ones in Project Origin, but they're much better designed and are good for more than just stupid fun this time around. Unfortunately, you have to unlock your melee kicks, and they've been gimped slightly. The roundhouse has been removed entirely, leaving you with only a very poorly animated bicycle kick and the ever-useful slide kick. It's worth noting that it is impossible to do a fresh run of the game on the PC, as I could not find an option to reset my unlockables anywhere on the menu and the level-up progress is tied to your Steam account (all copies run through Steam). Xbox and PS3 gamers can simply make a new user profile if they'd like, however.
The first two F.E.A.R.s were corridor shooters, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. In fact, they were the best corridor shooters of all time! In Perseus Mandate: The Next Generation, on the other hand, you'll be hard-pressed to find any corridors at all outside of the first interval. The open environments are fun to fight in, sure, but the tense feeling of running and gunning through an abandoned office building or a creepy hospital you got in Monolith's games is gone when you're fighting in a slum or suburb ripped straight out of Modern Warfare 2. Occasionally uninspired level design wouldn't be such a problem if there were more than 8 stages, especially when one of them features no combat outside of a terrible boss battle. People tell me that I play shooters too quickly to enjoy them (an outright lie, I might add), but Extraction Point: The College Years is 4 and a half hours long, and that's being generous, seeing as how adding up all the average completion times the game gives you at the end of each level offers up a total slightly less than that. No, Day 1, being able to play the game as Fettel once you've finished it once as Point Man doesn't make your game any longer.
Phase Casters aside (which are pretty much F.E.A.R. 2's Remnants but actually difficult to fight), the new enemy types suck. No one wants to spend an entire level shooting zombies in a series that's always been strong in firefights with human enemies. The new mutants are basically larger versions of the second game's Abominations (because those were so much fun to fight, right?) and appear maybe two or three times throughout the entire campaign. The game also features no Replicas, which is kind of silly, but not a problem.
Until you realize what it means.
Give up? It means there are no cloaking Assassins. That's right, the coolest and scariest enemies in the entire series don't even appear in 2 Extractions 2 Points. I remember my first encounter with them in the original game... I damn near pissed myself. And who could forget Snake Fist's death scene in Project Origin? Fucking classic. But no, the Assassins are entirely absent.
The worst part about For A Few Extractions More? At first, you'll love it. You'll think you got your money's worth. You won't realize that you're never getting that $50 back until it's set in for a bit. It's at this point you'll understand that this isn't F.E.A.R., this is merely an imitation. It's not a bad game. You'll have fun. But unless this is your first foray into the series, wait until it's $15 on Steam or Amazon before you pick it up, because it'll leave a bad taste in your mouth if you love the first two games as much as I do.
Quote from: Desensitized on August 19, 2011, 12:58:10 AM
Some footage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgwMf6w2qIY) of the HD version of GoldenEye.
Note that every single glimpse of combat in that video could have been approached differently (Yes, even that vent part). That's why it's IMO, such a great FPS.
You're going to love Deus Ex.
Looks awesome, btw.
Know you guys are going to hate me for this(or already have..) but god damn, I cannot wait for Battlefield 3. Can't wait for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 either. Yes, I said it. The full name. Not MW3, definitely not Modern Warfare 3. Doesn't sound like a big deal, but sure damn is to me. Bringing back the old red dot sights from Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare got my attention.
But enough hyping, thought it was nice of "them" to enhance the Spec Ops game-play experience. Rather than having the same mode from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2(Get used to it, I will be doing this for a while.), Sledgehammer Games improves Spec Ops with purchasing weapons, calling in squads, and AC-130s.
I'm still going straight to campaign when I buy it, but I can't wait to play on Spec Ops Survival mode. Multi-player is looking good(the 5-second preview at the end of the Spec Ops trailer), stacking kill-streaks are back and it seems like Infinity Ward is focusing on game-play rather than graphics. That's a plus. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, Bioshock: Infinite, Batman: Arkham City, Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary, and some XBLA titles to choose from for Christmas are on my wishlist. :anger:
You're not alone. I have Battlefield 3 pre-ordered for PC. I've been waiting so long for the return of jets and 64-player MP, man, you don't even know!
The Sledgehammer CoD game was canceled (http://neogaf.net/forum/showthread.php?t=441721)
Shock, gasp, surprise.
Foggle:
Very interesting review on F.E.A.R. 3, Foggle. It sucks to see that its a let-down compared to the first 2 games, but I still want to play it. Going by your review, though, I'll probably wait until it comes down in price to $10-$15 before I buy it (much like what I did for Halo 3: ODST). The gameplay looks fun so I should at least get my money's worth for that price, but its a shame that so little effort was put into making this game actually feel like a true F.E.A.R. game. I mean, I had low expectations for the game as it is, and for what its worth the game seems to be better than how I expected it to turn out (to be honest I half expected a train-wreck), so I'm sure its definitely worth playing either through a rental or through a much lower price, but overall I'm disappointed that this series didn't get the proper third game conclusion that it deserved.
The first F.E.A.R. is hands down the best FPS game that I have ever played, personally. The 2nd game isn't quite as great as the first game but I still completely disagree with all of the people who find it to be a lackluster game. Its EASILY one of the best FPS games that I have played from this generation (though, to be perfectly honest, I think that Halo: Reach may now be my personal favorite; but it doesn't make F.E.A.R. 2 any less awesome in my eyes). I also didn't mind that it wasn't really scary because to me neither was the first game. It instead succeeded in having a very immersible and occasionally creepy atmosphere, which is good enough for me.
Oh, and as for Battlefield 3 it honestly looks like the only war-themed game this generation that I would really love to play. Unfortunately I can tell that shit needs a damn fine PC to run it at even decent quality, so unfortunately this is yet another great game that I won't get to play. :(
As far as FPSs go, though, I've recently gotten interested in id Softaware's upcoming game, Rage. Why? The fucking AI, that's why. For the longest time I just ignored the game because it looked like a generic shooter (and for what its worth on the outset it does), but when I saw some demos of it and realized what id was going for, I was really impressed by how much emphasis they were putting on the enemy AI and how the game seems to be more about strategically fighting your way out of touch situations (much like F.E.A.R., Halo, and Half-Life games), as opposed to just mowing through enemies like in your standard movie FPS game. I'm certainly going to keep my eye out for this game.
Desensitized:
I'm really glad that the Goldeneye remake is getting an HD port. I was always interested in playing it and was kind of bummed out that it was only a Wii exclusive (since I still don't have that console). But, I am really excited to see that its now coming to a platform that I have, and I'm truly eager to play through it.
I'm always quick to point out that F.E.A.R. 2 is still a great game despite not quite stacking up to the original. Many PC elitists complain about "consolization," which is certainly a valid point when referring to the terrible HUD (which was fixed in Reborn, I might add), but aside from that, it's definitely a brilliant game all around and people are way too hard on it. Not as good as the first, but it really had a lot to live up to.
I actually recommend that you pick up F.E.A.R. Files now that the "canon" storyline has gone to shit. Extraction Point is far better than F.3.A.R. and may even be on par with Project Origin as long as you ignore a certain scene that makes absolutely no sense and contains TERRIBLE voice acting (you'll know what I'm talking about when you see it). While it does kind of ruin Alma's character, it's certainly a far better outcome for her than what exists in the newest edition. Perseus Mandate is quite mediocre overall, but you'll probably still have some fun with it since the core gameplay is classic F.E.A.R. It's also the only game in the series that could actually be considered "scary," which helps elevate it a bit.
If you ever get a computer capable of running F.E.A.R., I implore you to check out this mod (http://www.moddb.com/mods/sadobash) (and the same goes for anyone else reading this post). It is, in a word, brilliant. There's no story outside of "Paxton Fettel is back after Reborn; go kill him again" and the English grammar is hilarious due to the only developer being Russian, but everything about the actual gameplay is pure class. This guy is a mapping god; the levels have crazy branching paths and open areas that really give the AI a chance to fuck you up (I got flanked many times in one interval alone). Better still, the stages are all quite lengthy and contain no mid-level load-times as far I can tell. There are even a couple of scripted events and scare scenes that he made himself, along with an incredibly badass moment where you enter a huge parking lot only to find ATC troops having a large-scale firefight with a group of Replicas. This is preceded by an elaborate (and completely optional) journey to a secret area featuring a radio playing humorously unfitting music, a health booster, and a Repeating Cannon that ends up being quite useful in the following battle. Despite only having 3 intervals as of right now, it's the best F.E.A.R. experience I've had since the original game and I wholeheartedly recommend it to anyone and everyone.
Damn! Did one guy make that all by himself? If so, then that's one dedicated fan. I mean, it sounds like they should have hired him to design F.E.A.R. 3 rather than just relying on the regular guys at Day 1 studios.
Yeah, it's just one guy as far as I can tell. I've played some damn good single-player mods before, but this is by far the best and it's one of the few made by a single person. There's no new voice acting, so what story there is is told through stitched-together pieces of dialogue from the first game and expansion packs. It works better than you'd think, honestly. It even includes some lines I've never heard before, which may have been locked away in the game files.
Quote from: Desensitized on August 19, 2011, 12:58:10 AM
Some footage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgwMf6w2qIY) of the HD version of GoldenEye.
Note that every single glimpse of combat in that video could have been approached differently (Yes, even that vent part). That's why it's IMO, such a great FPS.
Eurocom needs to make more Bond games.
Thank God there will be a 360 version
I've never played a Deus Ex game before but Human Revolution looks really good. Its been getting good review scores and while I'm sure the console versions probably aren't as good as the PC version, they seem to run just fine and aren't really getting any special lower scores separate from the PC version, so its safe to assume that I can play it on the XBOX360 and it will still be a good game.
I probably won't be able to afford a full-priced game but I'll see if I can take some of the money I earned this summer out of my savings to buy it if its really worth the $60 price-tag (it'll be the first full-priced game that I have bought in years, if that's the case).
The only thing that turns me off about the game is that I hear that the AI are real pushovers until about the last quarter of the game or so in which the enemies become tougher and maneuver around much more. I personally love very tactical AI in any shooters that I play, so its a bit of a disappointment if they are too easy to kill, but the game still looks really good, overall.
I played the leaked beta build on Give Me Deus Ex difficulty (Hard mode), and the AI was decently intelligent. The enemies aren't as smart as F.E.A.R.'s Replicas or Halo's Elites, but they're still pretty good at using tactics; flanking you, taking cover, etc. Also, you die pretty goddamn fast on that mode (3 or 4 hits and you're gone), so it really requires you to do a lot of thinking before charging in (and helps promote stealth gameplay, which is my favorite part of the game anyway ;)).
I'm installing the full version right now. The Augmented Edition box is really nice. If the entire game is as consistent as the beta was (I'll let you know), this will definitely be both my personal GOTY and one of the best games I've ever played.
Crysis is now out on consoles, for $19.99, meaning I could actually play it. Since I'm sure someone here has already played through the game, how would you say it compares to other shooters (or its sequel which I also have not played) currently flooding the market?
I only played a tiny bit of it a couple of years back on my friend's powerhouse of a computer (at the time, anyways), so I can't really give it any proper judgements. It seemed kind of interesting, but didn't seem all that amazing for all of the hype it got (the graphics looked great, yeah, but I'm not impressed by great graphics alone). Well, to its credit I think that the AI were pretty above average compared to other games in the genre and I always love stuff like that in FPS games (and in this regard the sequel is the complete opposite with nearly brain-dead AI). It also has big open evironments and lots of room for strategy especially with how your suit gives you various different abilities, so I'd say its certainly an entertaining shooter from the hour or so that I played of it. If its only $20 and you have the cash to spare, I can't imagine it would be a bad purchase, but you should probably get the opinion of someone who has played the game in full since, like I said, I only got to play a small portion of it.
Also I obviously can't speak for how well the game holds up in terms of being ported to weaker powered consoles than the hardware that it was built to run on.
I was watching Giant Bomb's Quick Look of the game and it really does look quite interesting. I never really kept up with the game, but I wasn't aware it seemed to have so many tactical options in it.
If I get and extra $20, I might give it a go.
If the console versions get good enough reviews, then I may end up getting it for Christmas. As for my upcoming Birthday, I'm mainly looking to get Arkham City. Any other money that I might get I'll end up saving up towards getting a Nintendo DSi.
Crysis is okay. The first half is absolutely awesome, but the second half really sucks. It's fun, but outside of the first few levels, it's more of a tech demo than anything.
If you're looking for a cheap FPS, I'd recommend getting either of the Serious Sam HD games. Both are fun as hell.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fd%2Fd8%2FGoldeneyeemulated4lw.jpg&hash=4c01ed34f8f8ef2e112356504f5edd13609188e1)
My favorite.
As for Crysis... I don't know anything about the game except the graphics are insanely good, and that you can get a frog to fly away.
Goldeneye is a good FPS and a good N64 game along with Rare's other famous FPS, Perfect Dark. However, to be honest I never got too big on either of those games, myself. It doesn't even have to do with whether they have aged well or not (as I still find DOOM to be one of the best FPS games that I have ever played despite how dated its gameplay is for most people), but rather both games just felt more OK to me than great. Don't get me wrong, I had tons of fun playing Goldeneye's multiplayer with friends and the campagin mode was pretty solid, but I always merely saw it as being a good title, not a great one. Of course I'm in the minority on that one, anyways.
So far, my favorite FPS so far has been F.E.A.R., ever since Foggle got me to start playing it. Admittedly its not a very original game nor did it really revolutionize the genre like other FPS titles can claim, but that is irrelivant to me. In terms of being refined and just downright fun to play, I think its the best experience that I've had so far, and thanks to its amazing AI (which are still among the best of the best in gaming, today), it pretty much ensures that the game never plays out exactly the same way, since the AI aren't all just completely scripted like in other games and actually use varrying tactics on you. It makes a huge difference because what could have just become an average run 'n gun game becomes a very tactical shooter that forces you to strategize and play smart rather than just mindlessly shoot things up. Of course, I don't mind that other type of gameplay either, like how its used in DOOM, but overall I just prefer the more tactical sort of gameplay that this game offers.
If you like DOOM like I do, then you should really give DOOM II a try. I love DOOM, but DOOM II really took everything to another level that I didn't think it could go to. Also, you know me, but Perfect Dark is still one of my favorites in the genre.
My top 10 would probably be (in no order)
Perfect Dark
DOOM II
Halo
Timesplitters: Future Perfect
Duke Nukem 3D
Left 4 Dead 2
GoldenEye Wii
DOOM
Timesplitters 2
F.E.A.R. (this is going to be my Halloween game this year so I can finally beat it)
Honorable mentions to Battlefield 1943 (I love the chaos and craziness that can occur), both BioShocks, Borderlands, and the first few Medal Of Honor games. I still need to play Deus Ex, System Shock 1 and 2, and a few other PC classics, but I look forward to eventually playing them.
Oh yeah, and Foggle, I got both Serious Sam encounters on XBLA when they were on sale. I haven't touched 2 yet, but 1 was pretty intense.
Oh yeah, I plan on playing DOOM II one of these days. I haven't touched the game since I tried a few stages of it on the PC over 10 years ago, so I remember nothing about it, but even if it was just more of the same of the first game it would still be awesome. I have heard that its at least twice as good which makes me want to get it even more. The reason that I've been holding off is because after beating the first game again last year I wanted to leave a bit of a gap in time before playing DOOM II so as not to hamper my enjoyment of it (as much as I love the first game, its formula could get repetitive so I didn't want to get burned out on playing DOOM II half way into the game). Of course its been more than long enough since I touched the first game, so I can jump into the sequel the next tiem I get a chance to, which will probably be after I beat Resident Evil 4 (and possibly Arkham City as well if I end up getting that for my birthday).
Quote from: Desensitized on October 07, 2011, 11:23:43 PM
I still need to play Deus Ex, System Shock 1 and 2, and a few other PC classics, but I look forward to eventually playing them.
Those aren't really shooters... I mean, you can easily blast through Human Revolution like an FPS, but if you try to play the original Deus Ex or System Shock 2 like a shooter, you're going to be both frustrated and disappointed.
Serious Sam: The Second Encounter is far better than the first. It's also a LOT harder. In a good way. ;)
Quote from: Foggle on October 07, 2011, 09:40:32 PM
Crysis is okay. The first half is absolutely awesome, but the second half really sucks. It's fun, but outside of the first few levels, it's more of a tech demo than anything.
If you're looking for a cheap FPS, I'd recommend getting either of the Serious Sam HD games. Both are fun as hell.
NOO! I played the First Encounter or w/e it's called demo and it's too much of a grind. Please give me other console port recs.
Yeah, Serious Sam is a really hard game. Personally, I can't see it being playable with a gamepad, but you guys are a LOT better at console shooters than I am.
Have you tried Painkiller? There's an Xbox version that I remember being just as good as the original on PC.
The original Half-Life also has a pretty decent PS2 port, but there's a good chance that your computer can play the PC version since it's so old.
I definitely want to play Painkiller. Fragfests are favorite type of shooter.
My little brother downloaded Half-Life for us back in high school (and Max Payne) Fuck yes.
Serious Sam 3: BFE. Good lord. Greatest old-school FPS since Painkiller. Even better than Hard Reset.
Desen and E-K, y'all motherfuckers MUST get this game once the console version comes out.
I never played 2 (not TSE, I mean the actual 2), I heard pretty bad things about it. Did this one really manage to live up to the originals?
Yeah, it definitely lives up to the originals. It's basically The Third Encounter.
Serious Sam 2 isn't that bad, btw. The cutscenes are trash and it's nothing compared to the other games, but it's still very fun.
I haven't played a Serious Sam game before but I'll definitely look into it. ;)
As far as FPS games, I was looking into Goldeneye Reloaded, but it looks like its been getting very mixed reception. It seems that both fans and critics agree that its somehow genuinely inferior to the Wii version of the game, though some say its still good and worth picking up whereas others say that the HD console version is a big downgrade and merely an average game. Has anyone else played Goldeneye on the X360 or PS3? If so, would you say its worth getting over other FPS games available?
I was thinking of putting it on my Christmas list, so I was just curious to find out.
The First and Second Encounters both have demos on the XBLA store. You should give 'em a try!
I've played a decent amount of my friend's Goldeneye Reloaded game. I thought it was pretty damn good. Never tried the Wii version, though.
I haven't tried the HD version, sorry. The Wii version is great, though.
I'm guessing I'd hate the game.
Gametrailers has best FPS of all time list. This is what it is:
10. Unreal Tournament
9. Doom
8. Team Fortress 2
7. Battlefield 2
6. Starsiege: Tribes
5. Halo 3
4. Half-Life 2
3. Counter-Strike
2. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
1. GoldenEye 64
It is wrong.
Well as long as Perfect Dark isn't on the list... :sly:
I'm surprised that BioShock isn't on this list given how much GT usually loves to suck that game's dick. I mean, I like it too, but GT praises that thing up the ass, yet its somehow not present on this list.
Anyways, here are my thoughts:
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on December 05, 2012, 05:18:27 PM
10. Unreal Tournament
Haven't played any of the Unreal games, so no opinion.
Quote9. Doom
Should probably be DOOM II, but haven't played it yet, and still need to finish the first one.
Quote8. Team Fortress 2
I still don't get it....
Quote7. Battlefield 2
Haven't played; no opinion.
Quote6. Starsiege: Tribes
Same as above.
Quote5. Halo 3
Halo: Combat Evolved and Halo: Reach have far better campaign modes, but I guess multiplayer trumps everything....even if nobody plays this game online anymore
Quote4. Half-Life 2
Reasonable pick for the top 5, IMO.
Quote3. Counter-Strike
Can't really get into online multiplayer games, but it probably deserves this rank I guess.
Quote2. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
Set this about 8 spaces back and its placement might make sense.
Quote1. GoldenEye 64
:lol:....And GT likes to criticize other people of supporting old games through blind nostalgia....yet somehow Goldeneye is better than every shooter that ever came out, including PC shooters and its own spiritual successor, Perfect Dark, which most people would say is the superior Rare FPS games.
COD4 is the only one where they picked the best one from each series, IMO.
I'm still completely baffled as to why anyone prefers GoldenEye over Perfect Dark. PD literally does everything better. Also, lack of Duke Nukem 3D and Halo 1 (over 3) is sort of glaring.
Honestly, someone like Foggle could probably make a better list since he's so familiar with the genre. But I bet even he would agree that some choices are just weird.
Got up to level 22 in Doom II...this could take awhile. Also the barrels level was decent fun. I actually wish it had even more of them. .3.
Quote from: gunswordfist on December 05, 2012, 06:00:38 PM
Got up to level 22 in Doom II...this could take awhile. Also the barrels level was decent fun. I actually wish it had even more of them. .3.
The first time I played that level it was so nerve-wracking. I think I even had to outrun an explosion at one point...
Their list isn't that bad, really. Some of the choices are questionable, but I can respect the fact that they at least tried with this one. Here's mine, though, since Spark requested it:
10. Unreal Tournament 2004
9. Borderlands 2
8. Doom 2
7. Duke Nukem 3D
6. Serious Sam: The Second Encounter
5. Tribes 2
4. Painkiller
3. Halo
2. Half-Life 2
1. F.E.A.R. (yay for biased picks)
I thought GT hated FEAR?
Oh well, interesting list!
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on December 05, 2012, 06:09:26 PM
I thought GT hated FEAR?
Do they? I remember them giving F.E.A.R. 2 one of the highest scores it got.
QuoteOh well, interesting list!
Thanks. Truthfully though, there should be two lists; one for single-player/co-op, and one for competitive multiplayer.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on December 05, 2012, 06:04:31 PM
Quote from: gunswordfist on December 05, 2012, 06:00:38 PM
Got up to level 22 in Doom II...this could take awhile. Also the barrels level was decent fun. I actually wish it had even more of them. .3.
The first time I played that level it was so nerve-wracking. I think I even had to outrun an explosion at one point...
I thought you HAD to be caught in an explosion at first. But then I used my brain and stopped getting blown up on purpose on the first two. I just had the enemies blow themselves up as I ran away.
Quote from: Foggle on December 05, 2012, 06:07:27 PM
Their list isn't that bad, really. Some of the choices are questionable, but I can respect the fact that they at least tried with this one. Here's mine, though, since Spark requested it:
10. Unreal Tournament 2004
9. Borderlands 2
8. Doom 2
7. Duke Nukem 3D
6. Serious Sam: The Second Encounter
5. Tribes 2
4. Painkiller
3. Halo
2. Half-Life 2
1. F.E.A.R. (yay for biased picks)
I really want to pick up Duke Nukem 3D. It's at the top of my list of next XBLA games to pick up. I just need to decide on a good 800 point multiplayer game to go with it.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on December 05, 2012, 06:09:26 PM
I thought GT hated FEAR?
They gave both F.E.A.R. and F.E.A.R. 2 relatively high scores, and even nominated F.E.A.R. 2 for best FPS of 2009, so they definitely have nothing against that series. They gave F.E.A.R. 3 very average reception, but their review seemed pretty fair for that game.
Honestly, GT isn't that bad of a site. They are definitely biased, but out of all of the big game review websites, they are far from being as bad as the likes of IGN, Game Spot, Destructoid, etc., and from what I've seen while they are guilty of overrating a lot of the big franchises, they do give a lot of other game's fair shakes as well, and they were one of the only sites that didn't give RE6 a bad review just because everyone else was doing it (that's what most reviews that I saw for the game felt like they were doing, IMO, regardless of the actual quality of the game). That said, if GT is overly biased against any paritcular games, its definitely Sonic games. They wouldn't even accept Sonic Colors as a good game, and apparently they are convinced that Sonic is supposed to be about nothing but speed, and anything that deviates from that in the slightest is terrible and unworthy of the status of the classic games. They did give Sonic Generations a positive review, but since then they seem to refuse to even acknowledge that it exists since they still trash on Sonic a lot and claim that he hasn't had a single good game (not counting the All-Star racing games, both of which they gave good reviews) since Sonic Adventure (as in, they hate every game from Sonic Adventure onward).
Quote from: Foggle on December 05, 2012, 06:07:27 PM
10. Unreal Tournament 2004
9. Borderlands 2
8. Doom 2
7. Duke Nukem 3D
6. Serious Sam: The Second Encounter
5. Tribes 2
4. Painkiller
3. Halo
2. Half-Life 2
1. F.E.A.R. (yay for biased picks)
Awesome list! :thumbup:
I'm surprised that you'd put Halo so high, though. :o
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on December 05, 2012, 08:55:58 PM
I'm surprised that you'd put Halo so high, though. :o
It's the full package. You've got an awesome single-player campaign with full co-op, and an excellent competitive multiplayer mode to go along with it. The enemy AI is really good in the former, and both have cool vehicles and great open level design. The shooting doesn't feel as good to me as the other games on the list (except for maybe HL2), but the experience as a whole is good enough to make it deserving of such a high placement.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on December 05, 2012, 08:54:36 PM
They gave both F.E.A.R. and F.E.A.R. 2 relatively high scores, and even nominated F.E.A.R. 2 for best FPS of 2009, so they definitely have nothing against that series. They gave F.E.A.R. 3 very average reception, but their review seemed pretty fair for that game.
Sadly, F.E.A.R. 3 isn't quite up to par with the previous games (though it might be better than Perseus Mandate). The first two levels are absolutely AMAZING, but it kind of falters after that. The regenerating health and two-weapon switch are also lame. It's certainly not without its good points, but the boring zombie levels, incredibly short length, and bastardization of canon really drag it down. Still worth playing for <$25, though.
QuoteNES: You've been vocal about how you wish Conker's Other Bad Day had been made. Is there any other specific Rare game that never had a sequel (other than Conker) that you would have loved to see a sequel for and why?
CS: Perfect Dark 1... And no, I?m not being facetious. I was working on the sequel don?t forget and I know what it could have been.. Maybe one day someone will sneak the story doc online (I know I?m not the only one still holding a copy), and you guys can judge for yourselves if it was worth making. I think it would have been really good, not to blow my own trumpet, and set the game up for at least one follow up after that. In fact, the ending required a follow up, as it was planned as a 2 game storyline with a cliffhanger at the end of the first. Here's a teaser.. The Epilogue to part 1 had this title : 'The Death Of Jo Dark'?
:'(
Quote from: Foggle on December 05, 2012, 09:13:20 PM
It's the full package. You've got an awesome single-player campaign with full co-op, and an excellent competitive multiplayer mode to go along with it. The enemy AI is really good in the former, and both have cool vehicles and great open level design.
And it also has awesome music (IMO).
I have heard people say that the game hasn't aged well because it feels monotonous, which kind of brings up the point that the game kind of sort of needs to be played at a certain difficulty to be truly appreciated. Some people find normal challenging enough which is fine (though then they tend to complain about stuff like no warning for grenades and whatnot, but the game is mostly fair as far as I'm concerned). However, for people who find normal to be mostly pretty straightforward and easy, they shouldn't continue playing on normal and should instead move to the next highest difficulty. Halo is at its best when you are playing a difficulty that's just above your normal level of skill which creates a challenge and forces you to actually utilize the open level design and various weapons to your strategic advantage.
I also once heard someone complain that Halo felt like it was trial and error gameplay, which made me want to say something that I would usually never say, but in this case....their playing it wrong. By playing it wrong, I mean that the only way the game would be trial and error gameplay is if they never tried to adjust their strategy and just tried to keep doing the same thing at parts that they were dying at with minor variations every now and then. To be clear, if a player is trying to bum-rush a group of enemies and finds that they die 3 or 4 times in a row doing that, then its a clear sign that they should be trying something completely different than what they are doing. It'd be dumb to try the same tactic yet again and just figure that you have to kill the enemies faster before they have a chance to kill you. The game is incredibly open and many times can allow you to attempt almost any strategy that you can think of. In such instances, I would use a vehicle to mow down a bunch of enemies that I couldn't take down on foot if it was made available to me, or conversely I might opt out of using a vehicle during a certain segment of gameplay and using my knowledge of the level design I could grab a sniper-rifle and get myself to a really good vantage point and take out most of my opposition from a safe distance before proceeding through that secetion of the level, with noticeably less opposition in my way once I take most of them out the smart way.
To me, that's where Halo's strengths lie, but I think a lot of people who grew up with the game have forgotten that, and the people who try playing it now after being used to most modern FPS games just don't get how you're supposed to approach this game. Half-Life, F.E.A.R., and a lot of other great modern shooters have that sort of mentality as well, but people get what they are supposed to do in those games. I think that people kind of associate Halo with the more movie-esque games from today and therefore judge it by the same mentality, even though that's clearly not the type of game that it is.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on December 05, 2012, 11:32:07 PM
And it also has awesome music (IMO).
The story is quite interesting as well.
Quote from: Foggle on December 05, 2012, 11:57:05 PM
The story is quite interesting as well.
Well, the story in the first game I enjoy for what it is. Its nothing that special and doesn't really break any new ground that other games hadn't done before it, but unlike the sequels this was designed to be a stand-alone story rather than part of a large series extended by novels and comics, so it works that way. The aliens feel more alien because they can't speak English (which always baffled me when they started talking in the 2nd game), and the game never gets obnoxiously up its own ass trying to treat itself like the most epic thing ever, which is something that annoyed me about Halo 3's story a lot. Its just a large vessel marines and a spartan soldier finding their way onto an ancient ring world that they know nothing about and getting entangled in a huge ordeal that puts the fate of the galaxy at state. The whole war between humans and the Covenant just provides a simple back-drop for the set-up and explains the enemies that you are fighting, and the reveal of the Flood in the first game is terrific for the time because it comes completely out of left-field, though The Library quickly makes you hate fighting the Flood even though they aren't that bad in the rest of the game.
My problem with the sequels is how up their own ass they get with the narrative, yet when you stop to think about nothing much is really explained in those games. You just get a ton of a characters thrown into the mix and lots of events unfolding around you yet no time is spent on character development or even exposition (which you think would be a good thing but every story needs at least a little exposition and Halo games just expect you to know everything). That brings me to the point I hate about the fan-base in when they try to defend the stories of the sequels by saying that a lot of stuff that isn't explained in those games are explained in the novels and comics, which I have no interest in reading, myself. So, in that regard, its stupid to expect that everyone has read the extended pieces of the story, and whether the story is great in the broader context of things or not, it doesn't change the fact that the games viewed alone have very lackluster stories based solely on what they give you. That's why I've never cared about the stories in Halo games past the first one, which itself I stated was nothing great but certainly interesting enough for what it was.
Quote from: Ensatsu-kenwhich always baffled me when they started talking in the 2nd game
You can never have enough Keith David. ;) Plus with the Covenant Civil War being such a large focus, it'd make sense to have them speak english, at least for the Arbiter level's.
Quote from: Ensatsu-kenMy problem with the sequels is how up their own ass they get with the narrative, yet when you stop to think about nothing much is really explained in those games. You just get a ton of a characters thrown into the mix and lots of events unfolding around you yet no time is spent on character development or even exposition (which you think would be a good thing but every story needs at least a little exposition and Halo games just expect you to know everything).
A lot of people that didn't read the "First Strike" Novel must've been
really confused why Sergant Johnson was suddenly A-OK despite being allegedly killed off in the first game. I don't think they even explained why he was still alive in the manual, which was really unfair to the casual players who didn't read/weren't aware of the novels.
FWIW, I did think the Covenant civil war was fairly interesting, moreso than the Master Chief/UNSC plotline.
For what its worth, I think that The Arbiter and the prophet of Truth were MUCH more interesting characters than any of the humans. With The Arbiter, you actually got a sense of character progression and development with the character itself, though that was pretty much dropped in the 3rd game as he just became more like the Chief's side-kick until towards the end of the game. As for Truth, I feel like he was actually a genuinely interesting concept for a villain, being viewed as a savior to the Covenant while pretty much manipulating them to his will, including The Arbiter. That said, any interesting parts of the plot brought up in Halo 2 were easily just treated as a second thought in Halo 3 in which it just focused mostly on the boring humans again.
A rather good video on what makes Doom special to this day. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyOF2RsO3ck) Worth a watch, even if his points have been gone over before dozens of times.
Watching it really did get me interested in playing Doom for myself though. Any game where you kill demons set to a heavy metal-inspired soundtrack has my attention.
Doom is great, and definitely worth playing (along with Doom 2, Final Doom, and Doom 64). But I feel that its level design doesn't hold up nearly as well that of Duke Nukem 3D, Blood, or Shadow Warrior, which are some of the most creative and timeless games of all time. You should pick up copies of those as well!
Ah sweet, I finally got to see John Romero's head and I loved that John Carpenter's The Thing clip. Anyway, this video
was a great love letter to Doom. Makes me want to see more videos on this game.
Quote from: Foggle on June 14, 2013, 05:32:37 AM
Doom is great, and definitely worth playing (along with Doom 2, Final Doom, and Doom 64). But I feel that its level design doesn't hold up nearly as well that of Duke Nukem 3D, Blood, or Shadow Warrior, which are some of the most creative and timeless games of all time. You should pick up copies of those as well!
I still need to get all of those games DN3D is like at the top of my list
DOOM 2 is really just that much better than the original. The original is still a great game, but it was totally outclassed by the direct follow ups.
Quote from: Foggle on June 14, 2013, 05:32:37 AM
Doom is great, and definitely worth playing (along with Doom 2, Final Doom, and Doom 64). But I feel that its level design doesn't hold up nearly as well that of Duke Nukem 3D, Blood, or Shadow Warrior, which are some of the most creative and timeless games of all time. You should pick up copies of those as well!
Downloaded Shadow Warrior earlier today (since it's free on Steam) and I kinda suck hard at it. Like, can't even beat the first level on the easiest difficulty hard. :sweat:
It's probably because I'm not used to using a mouse and keyboard yet, hopefully I'll get better when I get used to the controls and such.
Old shooters are hard, so that's pretty normal. ;) Just be sure to quick save a lot and you'll do fine!
So, continuing the running question from the other "genre" threads: Just how good do you consider yourself to be at FPS games?
For me, I have to split it in-between old-school and modern style shooters, as well as single-player and multi-player.
Old-School FPS:
Single Player- I'm pretty average at these, for the most part. I've really only had the DOOM games to go on, as well as what I've played of old Duke Nukem games and other older shooters, so its not much to go on, but while I'm not great at these games, I do love playing them and don't find them to be too difficult for me to handle.
Multiplayer- I haven't had enough experience with old-school multiplayer to tell if I'm generally good at it or not, so I'm just going to assume that I suck at it for the time being.
Modern FPS:
Single Player- This is the one other genre of gaming where I consider myself to be slightly above average at it. With the movie-shooters, they are usually predictable and hand-holding enough to just be flat-out easy no matter what difficulty I play them on, unless it just goes the route of being outright cheap on its higher difficulty settings. As for the more strategic and hardcore experiences like the original F.E.A.R. and Halo games, I am pretty decent at learning enemy AI patterns and using my environment and weapons intelligently to strategize the best ways to take on certain situations. I have not played F.E.A.R. on Extreme difficulty yet, but at the risk of sounding overconfident, I'm pretty sure that I could handle it if I tried, even if I'd probably die a lot in the process. As for Halo, I can beat pretty much all of them except for Halo 2 on Legendary mode. I could probably beat Halo 2 on Legendary as well, but I'm not patient enough to put up with the frustrating cheapness of that game's difficulty. That said, I am not nearly masochistic enough to consider playing these these games on Mythic difficulty (otherwise known as the LASO challenge). The hindrances of Skulls in this game are nice when I use 1 or 2 at a time to increase the challenge, but turning them all on makes the game nearly impossible for me to beat, so kudos to whoever can beat these games with that level of handicap against them. Also, I utterly suck at speed runs of this game, and I'd probably get myself killed in Zero Shot and/or Pacifist runs as well. Other than Halo, I'm also pretty good at Half-Life and other good modern FPS games.
Multiplayer- With the EXCEPTION of Halo games, in which I think I'm just a bit above average at their multiplayer, I utterly suck at the multiplayer in FPS games. I'm especially garbage at stuff like Counter-Strike.
I'm pretty bad at old school FPS games because I'm bad at circle-strafing, but I'm pretty good at modern FPS games because aiming down the sights is pretty close to an instant kill. Multiplayer, I'm bad at both.
That said, I prefer the old style because the level design is frequently more interesting.
I mostly agree about the level design, though I still say that the level design in the original Halo (minus The Library) and especially in Halo: Reach is terrific, and pretty much the best in the modern FPS genre in terms of that style of gameplay.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 15, 2013, 09:41:33 PM
I mostly agree about the level design, though I still say that the level design in the original Halo (minus The Library) and especially in Halo: Reach is terrific, and pretty much the best in the modern FPS genre in terms of that style of gameplay.
I would agree. The wide open maps with different weapon types and cover add a lot to strategy.
I am currently trying to beat Duke Nukem 3D. The without warning of enemies spawning because they were too stupid to gave the alien's teleportation a sound effect, the unexpected obstacles (mostly the explosions) and trying to figure out how to advance through some parts of levels are the only things that have really given me any real trouble in the game. Besides that, it's been a piece of cake. But then again I've been abusing user clips. Doom 1 and 2 are much more enemy heavy which makes the combat harder than DK3D for me but still not cheap since I KNOW WHEN THEY ARE COMING! As for modern games, Halo on normal is easy, 2 is a joke on that difficulty. I am not that good on the higher difficulties in Halo but they are a lot of fun. I remember pretty much walking through Half-Life. I started playing Crysis and Blood Dragon around the start of this month. They are similar games (Blood Dragon being the better evolution of the original Far Cry) and I've been pretty good at them both even though my aim sucks.
I'd say I'm decent-to-terrible at modern FPS'. I had trouble beating Halo 2 on its default difficulty, but I can play Republic Commando and Borderlands just fine, and I'd probably be better at Halo and RC if I played them today. I don't play modern movie shooters, so I can't judge my skills on those.
I've only played two old-school FPS' so far (Shadow Warrior and Doom). I'm pretty terrible at Shadow Warrior, but I've been pretty decent at Doom so far. I do tend to get lost in both games though.
I want Republic Commando
So the BioShock Infinite DLC is going to take place in Rapture. I'm... no longer excited for it.
I mean, it's Rapture before the fall, so it'll be very different from the first two games, but it's still fucking Rapture. I'm tired of Rapture. Columbia was about 500000000 times more interesting.
Then again, maybe if it's still functioning like a real city, I might enjoy it more than I think. I hope they find a way to work in skylines, at least. Loved those.
EDIT: Never mind, I just watched the trailer (http://www.gamespot.com/features/bioshock-infinite-dlc-returns-to-rapture-6412186/) (don't read the actual article unless you've beaten Infinite). It's a 1950's period piece detective story taking place in still-functioning Rapture. Now that's fucking awesome!
...I still hope they find a way to work in skylines, though.
Quote from: Foggle on July 30, 2013, 11:23:09 AM
It's a 1950's period piece detective story taking place in still-functioning Rapture.
This is what the original rumor was for BioShock 2's plot. I wonder if there's anything to that?
At the cost of pissing off almost every gamer out there, I am going to be straight-up honest with my opinion, here: I just don't find Columbia to be that interesting. You take away the sky-coaster things and the fact that the world takes place in the sky....and its just not that interesting of a world. It just feels too gimmick-heavy to me, like the developers were getting up their own ass with how "artistic" they could be. Really, BioShock: Infinite as a whole just didn't impress me that much (I still haven't even bothered to finish it, yet, which is very telling of how much it has failed to grab me). The gameplay is standard-fare, but lacks the depth of games like F.E.A.R. or Halo in terms of combat mechanics and AI, as well as the intricate level-design of old-school shooters like DOOM. The atmosphere is there, but most of the time it fails at keeping me immersed in the "world" that its trying to create, unlike how Rapture did.
As for the elements that everyone praises about the story and themes and whatnot....I think that's just the perfect example of how my outlook on stories in games is REALLY just way too distant from most people, these days. People praise the themes tackling racism, corruption, cults, and other mature subject matter. That stuff is all certainly there....but its just delivered in such an amateurish way, IMO. I mean that there is no subtlety or sense of real direction to any of these messages. The game just makes them so plainly obvious and downright creates entire scenes around them, rather than cleverly weaving them into the sub-text of the game (to be fair, though, its not nearly as bad as BioShock 2 was, in this regard). I think the first game was surprisingly enough already much better at tackling mature themes in a more subtle and convincing way. It also never forced the story on you as much, so more of these themes were stuff that you discovered by looking more into and reading more into the subtexts of the voice-recorded messages as you connected them together. Case-in-point; that whole deal with the hooker who was having an affair with Andrew Ryan. It was a side-story that you had to go out of your way to find out about by visiting optional rooms. And even then, it didn't blatantly just give any details away. All the information was cleverly ingrained into the way the characters spoke and in what kinds of details you payed attention to. In BSI, I just find that more often than not, everything is way too plainly spelled out for you. The characters do all have rich back-stories behind them, of course, but the same was already true of the first BioShock.
So, in other words, I just find Rapture to be about 5000000000 more interesting than Colombia. Personally, I think that Columbia is a little bit more shallow than what people make it out to be.
Then again, everyone should keep in mind that I'm pretty much a crack-pot when it comes to my opinions on modern games in general. I promise that I'm not deliberately just trying to stand out by making my opinion different from the mass majority, and I REALLY wanted to love BSI given how much I was looking forward to it before it came out....but my problem with this game is the same problem that I've found myself having with most modern games in general, and I have to be honest: I just think that a lot of these games are way more flash than substance, to put it bluntly. If you remove the really pretty looking graphics from the game, I think some of its flaws might be just a little bit more apparent to some people at least. I'm not saying that the original BS was a perfect game, either, but I still find that Rapture was much better when it came to ambiance, atmosphere, and story. The mechanics in these games were always pretty mediocre, though, to be honest, so I can't hold that against BSI too much.
Oh wow, I thought you were huge into Infinite. I'm sort of surprised you haven't been all too impressed. What's strange is that I haven't really heard anyone talking about it recently when just months ago everyone was freaking out about it. For comparison's sake, I still hear people going on about The Last Of Us.
But to be fair, my dad enjoyed the first two games and he played through it and wasn't all too impressed with it. He shelved it after finishing it when he instantly replayed both BioShock games.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 30, 2013, 07:18:06 PM
Oh wow, I thought you were huge into Infinite. I'm sort of surprised you haven't been all too impressed. What's strange is that I haven't really heard anyone talking about it recently when just months ago everyone was freaking out about it. For comparison's sake, I still hear people going on about The Last Of Us.
I was never really huge into it. I did say it was great, at one point, but really I just find it to be a good, solid game. I probably came off too harsh-sounding in my post now that I re-read it, which I didn't mean to do. But, my point still stands in that I find the mechanics of the game to be merely only "OK" for the most part, and I find that the story and atmosphere of the game is pretty flat. I'm not impressed with the game in that regard. I still had fun with what I played of it, but not so much fun that I was all too compelled to keep playing it. For the sake of perspective, I jumped back into playing DMC3 over the past few weekends and have once again gotten hooked on that game despite having beaten it nearly 3 times already. That game is about 8 years old, now, and it has very dated graphics. The voice-acting ranges from acceptable to laughably bad, the game has tons of "flaws" that would bother most modern gamers too much to bother with it (but don't really bother me, for whatever reason), and the story doesn't even take itself seriously, let alone the fact that it doesn't even have a lick of depth to it and its characters. Yet, I find that game has so much substance to it for the few things it focuses on and does right. I keep coming back to it for more because its just so much damn fun. I suppose that's really what I'm personally not getting out of most modern games these days. I'm just not having very much fun with most of them, these days. I'm not saying that they are bad games, either. They are popular for a reason, but I honestly get pretty bored with most of these games when I try them. I suppose the best thing I can say is that....modern gaming just isn't my thing. Its meant for a different audience than me, which is fine, but that's just what I have come to realize is all.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 30, 2013, 07:18:06 PM
Oh wow, I thought you were huge into Infinite. I'm sort of surprised you haven't been all too impressed. What's strange is that I haven't really heard anyone talking about it recently when just months ago everyone was freaking out about it. For comparison's sake, I still hear people going on about The Last Of Us.
Most people tend to forget about overhyped AAA games as soon as the next one comes out. I guarantee that no one will be talking about TLoU anymore once GTA5 is out.
Which isn't to say that any of these games don't deserve their hype. I
love Infinite, and I'm sure the other two are just as good as everyone says.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 30, 2013, 07:04:06 PM
At the cost of pissing off almost every gamer out there, I am going to be straight-up honest with my opinion, here: I just don't find Columbia to be that interesting. You take away the sky-coaster things and the fact that the world takes place in the sky....and its just not that interesting of a world. It just feels too gimmick-heavy to me, like the developers were getting up their own ass with how "artistic" they could be.
Take away the steam pipes and the fact that it's submerged in water and Rapture is basically just a spaceship from any other dark science fiction game. Both game worlds are heavily based on gimmicks. That's why people like them.
I sort of fell out of modern gaming when I played Modern Warfare 2 and came across No Russian. When the focus is on shock value over gameplay (I mean, you don't do anything for 95% of the level except shoot people who don't shoot back) in an attempt to have 'meaning' then you lost what video games are about in the first place.
Instead of realizing that was a bad level that had no business being made, there are now people like David Cage who built whole games around that concept and get rewarded for it.
At some point modern gaming became 'badly-written C-tier action movie'. Why pay $60 for a bad movie when I can watch a good one for a fraction of the price?
I agree that movie games are generally stupid, but I think BioShock Infinite is an excellent movie game. It may be overt with its themes (you can thank the people who didn't understand the nuances of BS1's plot for this), but it has legitimately interesting writing and a very fun to explore world. Every room in the game is constructed in such a way as to appear as if it could actually be lived in. A lot of love went into the game's art and level design and I feel that it's unfair to say that Irrational was "up their own ass" when working on it. That's the kind of shit you say about Heavy Rain and Metal Gear Solid 2.
Quote from: Foggle on July 30, 2013, 08:06:11 PM
I agree that movie games are generally stupid, but I think BioShock Infinite is an excellent movie game. It may be overt with its themes (you can thank the people who didn't understand the nuances of BS1's plot for this), but it has legitimately interesting writing and a very fun to explore world. Every room in the game is constructed in such a way as to appear as if it could actually be lived in. A lot of love went into the game's art and level design and I feel that it's unfair to say that Irrational was "up their own ass" when working on it. That's the kind of shit you say about Heavy Rain and Metal Gear Solid 2.
To be fair, I didn't actually say that. I don't really have any issue with Infinite other than I don't really have a desire to play it, other than my dad's experience which didn't really wow him.
It actually takes a lot for me to get interested in an FPS these days since I got so burned out on them this past gen.
Is it as good as the first game?
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 30, 2013, 08:11:37 PM
Is it as good as the first game?
Far better, though I'm sure a lot of people will tell you differently. Playing both games back to back was like night and day for me. Story and atmosphere aside, I really just do not like the original BioShock anymore.
System Shock 2 blows any and all other Shock games out of the water, however.
Quote from: Foggle on July 30, 2013, 08:13:59 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 30, 2013, 08:10:48 PM
To be fair, I didn't actually say that.
I know. E-K did.
Oh. :sweat:
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 30, 2013, 08:11:37 PM
Is it as good as the first game?
I actually feel the second game has the better gameplay, but the first has better everything else. The second game gets kicked around a bit too much, but if you look at it as a side-story (it isn't really a sequel) then it's pretty good for what it is.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 30, 2013, 08:16:31 PM
I actually feel the second game has the better gameplay, but the first has better everything else. The second game gets kicked around a bit too much, but if you look at it as a side-story (it isn't really a sequel) then it's pretty good for what it is.
Think he was talking about Infinite. ;)
Quote from: Foggle on July 30, 2013, 08:18:23 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 30, 2013, 08:16:31 PM
I actually feel the second game has the better gameplay, but the first has better everything else. The second game gets kicked around a bit too much, but if you look at it as a side-story (it isn't really a sequel) then it's pretty good for what it is.
Think he was talking about Infinite. ;)
Yeah, but he sort of dismissed the second game totally, which isn't entirely fair.
It's not like it was DMC2 or something.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 30, 2013, 08:21:28 PM
Quote from: Foggle on July 30, 2013, 08:18:23 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 30, 2013, 08:16:31 PM
I actually feel the second game has the better gameplay, but the first has better everything else. The second game gets kicked around a bit too much, but if you look at it as a side-story (it isn't really a sequel) then it's pretty good for what it is.
Think he was talking about Infinite. ;)
Yeah, but he sort of dismissed the second game totally, which isn't entirely fair.
It's not like it was DMC2 or something.
Dismissed? I just haven't played 2 is all. Neglecting to name it isn't an insult. :P
Quote from: Foggle on July 30, 2013, 07:59:31 PM
Take away the steam pipes and the fact that it's submerged in water and Rapture is basically just a spaceship from any other dark science fiction game. Both game worlds are heavily based on gimmicks. That's why people like them.
No, not at all. It doesn't work that way, because there is more to Rapture than just being submerged underwater and having steam-pipes. Every aspect of the city has some sort of meaning to it. For instance, the science of the city is clearly divergent from "our world's" technology. What I mean is that you have machines and entire environments that are built from Andrew Ryan's philosophy and vision, and how he strive'd for the type of utopia that he wanted to achieve for those who truly pursued science. In that regard Rapture had a clear theme to it, and as a result everything about it followed that theme. Additionally, everything just felt like it "fit" in with Rapture. The guns felt like they belonged specifically to that world, as did the machines, as well as each and every single room in the game. The enemies also really just fit in with that type of environment, from the splicers to the Big Daddies and Little Sisters. In BSI, most of these elements feel like they could fit into any other game and not be out of place. The guns don't look unique or original, nor do most of the environments (once again, other than the fact that they take place in the sky). I mean, I know that the whole theme of the game is based off a pseudo-mix between both colonial America with a steam-punk, early 1900's America, but the end result feels like just that, a mix of those elements. It doesn't, however, convince me of it as a unique society in the way that Rapture did.
Anyways, that's all just my personal opinion, of course. If you're going to talk smack about Rapture, its only fair game that I can defend it and talk smack about Columbia. Its all in the fun of just discussing games. ;)
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 30, 2013, 08:26:02 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 30, 2013, 08:21:28 PM
Quote from: Foggle on July 30, 2013, 08:18:23 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 30, 2013, 08:16:31 PM
I actually feel the second game has the better gameplay, but the first has better everything else. The second game gets kicked around a bit too much, but if you look at it as a side-story (it isn't really a sequel) then it's pretty good for what it is.
Think he was talking about Infinite. ;)
Yeah, but he sort of dismissed the second game totally, which isn't entirely fair.
It's not like it was DMC2 or something.
Dismissed? I just haven't played 2 is all. Neglecting to name it isn't an insult. :P
Sorry, I shouldn't have jumped to conclusions. I just see 2 looked down on a lot these days and I'm kind of used to people ignoring it.
Quote from: Foggle on July 30, 2013, 08:06:11 PM
Every room in the game is constructed in such a way as to appear as if it could actually be lived in. A lot of love went into the game's art and level design and I feel that it's unfair to say that Irrational was "up their own ass" when working on it.
Sorry. Admittedly I was a bit too harsh in saying that and didn't really mean that. I do however think that they were trying a bit too hard to be artistic, though. They put so much effort into making the art and level design of Columbia feel "real," which I can acknowledge and respect, but the point I should have made was that it didn't really feel like its own thing to me. That was basically my issue with it.
I actually like Rapture outside of how colorless it is, it's just that we've already been there in two games and one DLC. However, the noir theme of the Infinite DLC has actually made me excited to visit it again. When I mentioned that Rapture was "boring", I wasn't really talking about its history; just how dark and gray/green it is. I vastly prefer the colorful, cartoony environment in Columbia, even if it has less meaning behind it. However, I don't think you can just say it's an amateurish mish-mash of shit either.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 30, 2013, 08:35:09 PM
Sorry. Admittedly I was a bit too harsh in saying that and didn't really mean that. I do however think that they were trying a bit too hard to be artistic, though. They put so much effort into making the art and level design of Columbia feel "real," which I can acknowledge and respect, but the point I should have made was that it didn't really feel like its own thing to me. That was basically my issue with it.
Yeah, I figured you meant something more like that. It's just that I've seen Infinite get a lot of unnecessary hate from people, which has started to annoy me, since I really do enjoy it a lot.
Quote from: Foggle on July 30, 2013, 08:41:11 PM
However, I don't think you can just say it's an amateurish mish-mash of shit either.
Well, I only said that the story's writing was amateurish, not the design of Columbia. And I never called any aspect of the game shit. Columbia does, however, feel like a mish-mash of elements inspired from American history rather than a full believable city, though. That's just the way I see it, for whatever reason. If its any consolation, I still think its a damn great looking game, and I agree that I like how colorful it all is.
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 30, 2013, 08:35:09 PM
Yeah, I figured you meant something more like that. It's just that I've seen Infinite get a lot of unnecessary hate from people, which has started to annoy me, since I really do enjoy it a lot.
That's honestly news to me. I thought I was the only person who had some negatives to say about the game (and I don't even hate it), as I've seen just about everyone else praise it out the wazoo. If anything the haters are probably in the minority, though, so you can easily just ignore them.
I can agree that the story writing and construction itself isn't handled nearly as well as in the first game (ending aside, which is great), but I love love love the dialogue in it. Also, I felt the adventure it took me on was very enjoyable. Except when I had to do that same boss fight three times.
As for the mish-mash of elements, well, there's a plot-related reason for it. :P
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on July 30, 2013, 08:49:31 PM
That's honestly news to me. I thought I was the only person who had some negatives to say about the game (and I don't even hate it), as I've seen just about everyone else praise it out the wazoo. If anything the haters are probably in the minority, though, so you can easily just ignore them.
I rarely even see positive comments about it anymore. Everyone is always talking shit about how Infinite's gameplay is "worse than the original's", or how "Ken Levine is classist and racist". The majority still overwhelmingly love it, but the vocal minority is
very vocal. It's similar to how tons of people online will call RE4 shit, even though the vast majority does not feel that way.
Also, a lot of the people who say BioShock 1 is better than Infinite also used to be the same people who described BioShock 1 as awful, so they probably just hate anything that's popular. Speaking of which, I still think BS1 is a masterpiece in terms of design, even if I can't have much fun with it anymore.
How can the gameplay be worse than 1 when 2 improved every aspect of it? They would have to actively be trying to make the game play worse and ignoring their own improvements which is just plain silly.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on July 30, 2013, 09:03:38 PM
How can the gameplay be worse than 1 when 2 improved every aspect of it? They would have to actively be trying to make the game play worse and ignoring their own improvements which is just plain silly.
The complaints are pretty much just that you can only hold two weapons at once (never mind that you only ever really needed two guns at a time in the first game) and the lack of hacking (never mind the existence of the possession vigor and how the hacking got tedious after the fifteenth time you did it).
I do wish that the possession vigor was permanent on machines. The one benefit of hacking is that you didn't have to worry about a machine turning on you in the middle of an intense fight. That said, I think that BS2's hacking was fine, honestly. It was a really quick mini-game that made you have to earn the hack, but didn't really feel tedious since it went by so quick.
Having said that, BS2 and BSI are both mechanically better than the first game in terms of gameplay. I do still think that all 3 games are very "so-so" overall in terms of gameplay, though. The games appeal to me more for their atmosphere and stories, even though BS2's story is utter garbage, and I have some problems with BSI's story (it still has great characters, though). As for the 2-weapon limit, I really don't mind it, and it would be hypocritical of me to bash it when I don't mind the weapon limits in games like F.E.A.R. and Halo.
I know someone on another site who not only dislikes Infinite, but is basically parading around the opinion that it's the worst game ever made.
I haven't played it yet, but I feel justified in saying that's just ridiculous. :wth:
I actually enjoyed doing things like hacking in 2 where in 1 I just wasted money on it to get it over with. There are a lot of weird quirks like that between the two that prevent me from outright preferring one over the other.
2 was such a weird experience where I really didn't care about the story, but the improved gameplay and level design (along with the typical great atmosphere) made it really fun to play through.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 30, 2013, 09:22:17 PM
I know someone on another site who not only dislikes Infinite, but is basically parading around the opinion that it's the worst game ever made.
I haven't played it yet, but I feel justified in saying that's just ridiculous. :wth:
I can see someone not liking it, but that's a pretty ridiculous opinion.
Seriously, try it out. Not everyone will love it, but if you're like me, you just might.
Quote from: Foggle on July 30, 2013, 09:59:06 PM
Quote from: talonmalon333 on July 30, 2013, 09:22:17 PM
I know someone on another site who not only dislikes Infinite, but is basically parading around the opinion that it's the worst game ever made.
I haven't played it yet, but I feel justified in saying that's just ridiculous. :wth:
I can see someone not liking it, but that's a pretty ridiculous opinion.
Seriously, try it out. Not everyone will love it, but if you're like me, you just might.
I definitely will. I just want to play BioShock 2 first though. :thumbup:
It looks like I am on the verge of beating Halo 3 even though I've barely played the game over the last few days so I'll list my favorite FPSes so far from lastgen:
8. Prey
7. Far Cry Predator Instincts
6. Condemned 2
5. Crysis
4. The Darkness
3. Rainbow Six Vegas 2
2. Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon
1. Bulletstorm
There's a lot of FPSes I haven't played yet (any Bioshock or Borderlands, The Darkness 2) and some I haven't finished (Dishonored, Far Cry 2 (forget about me ever beating FC2. Nice multiplayer though, Far Cry 3 (only played co-op), Battlefield Bad Company 2, BF3 hardly counts nor does CoD..Black Ops, I think, Crysis 2)
Uh, let's see....
Last gen I liked Halo: Reach, BioShock, and F.E.A.R. 2 (which I still feel is pretty underrated), and I liked the HL2 episode expansions, and other than that I played a lot of average or underwhelming FPS games. That said, there are still a ton that I never played, so I'll have to play catch-up on those titles.
I also have games I need to catch up on (mainly Borderlands 2 and Halo 4), although I highly doubt I will since I lose interest in the games fairly quick now.
I did like Halo 3 (despite them floods) and Reach though.
Oh yeah, I played some of Halo 4.
Play Reach if you haven't tried it yet. It's MUCH better than Halo 3 and 4, IMO.
I have it but can't get it to work on my 360.
Quote from: gunswordfist on October 20, 2013, 08:00:10 PM
It looks like I am on the verge of beating Halo 3 even though I've barely played the game over the last few days so I'll list my favorite FPSes so far from lastgen:
8. Prey
7. Far Cry Predator Instincts
6. Condemned 2
5. Crysis
4. The Darkness
3. Rainbow Six Vegas 2
2. Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon
1. Bulletstorm
There's a lot of FPSes I haven't played yet (any Bioshock or Borderlands, The Darkness 2) and some I haven't finished (Dishonored, Far Cry 2 (forget about me ever beating FC2. Nice multiplayer though, Far Cry 3 (only played co-op), Battlefield Bad Company 2, BF3 hardly counts nor does CoD..Black Ops, I think, Crysis 2)
New "Every Last Gen FP I've beaten" list:
9. Prey
8. Far Cry Predator Instincts
7. Condemned 2
6. Crysis
5. Halo 3
4. The Darkness
3. Rainbow Six Vegas 2
2. Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon
1. Bulletstorm
This list reminds me that I need to replay The Darkness. Also, does Perfect Dark for 360 count?
Also, I actually bumped this thread for another reason but came across my list. The reason: Has anyone here played Syndicate? I watched footage of it years ago and it looks like Starbreeze's take on Deus Ex Human Revolution (how awesome does that sound?) I've heard nothing about it from fans, just kind of found its page on GameSpot, so I'm keeping my expectations low. This all reminds me that I really need to get The Chronicles Of Riddick: Assault On Dark Athena. Lastly, when I was just looking for Syndicate's name, I saw news about Starbreeze making a new scifi shooter that'll be co-op. I need to check out info on that asap.
Does anyone know how good the new Wolfenstein is?
Quote from: Rynnec on June 01, 2014, 12:51:10 AM
Does anyone know how good the new Wolfenstein is?
Micki! says it's amazing. I still need to play it myself, but it looks excellent to me.
I watch these YouTube Walkthrough videos from this guy called Seraphim17 (he did some really good guides for DMC1, DMC3, and Ninja Gaiden Sigma on their hardest difficulties), who does a lot of interesting guides for a variety of games, and seems to have similar tastes to mine since he's a guy who has a lot of old-school gameplay mentalities. He said the game was excellent, which is what piqued my interest in it.
Quote from: Rynnec on June 01, 2014, 12:51:10 AM
Does anyone know how good the new Wolfenstein is?
It's very good..!
Expect some corny reality-breaking moments, which effectively suit the games charm and style, and apart rfom a few awkward cutscenes, it's actually an incredibly solid game..! Shooting is great fun, and they handle the plot really well, and the german voice acting works extremely well, compared to the german-accent verisons from Wolf 2009 and RtCW..!
The game has no multiplayer, so get it for the singleplayer if that's what you really want, the singleplayer is a blast though, very fun and has great pacing..!
it's a little awkward at first having more "modern" weapons in a wolfenstein game, but the feel of nazi-germany never changes, if anything, it just got intensively emphasized because of how it changed events in the game-world due to the games plot, and stands out a LOT more than the other wolfenstein games, and their ideologies and power feel way more frightening because they're actually brought up for once, showing you why they're doing what they do, whereas in earlier games it was mostly just saying "nazi's wanna take over the world by doing these crazy things" which didn't really dig into the players moral core of wanting to fight for a reason, so it's nice to actually bring these things up now and give the nazi's some more personality..!
The game eventually goes pretty crazy later on, but by the time you've grown used to the sometimes odd changes you go through by naturally progressing, the over-the-top moments late really don't come as anything surprising... Looking back, it's really no different than how in Wolf3D you fight guards in a castle, and later hitler-looking phantoms, or how in RtCW you end up fighting a re-animated german warrior from the middle ages... so really, it's not actually crossing over any lines in this one either :P
So yeah, i recommend it, maybe wait for the summer sale on steam to get it though, i mean that seriously can't be too long i'm sure, unless you're just aching for a new FPS to play..!
With my extended time away from this genre due to burnout, I'm kind of getting the desire to start playing some of these games again. I really feel like revisiting F.E.A.R. in particular. I should probably go back to BSI and finally finish it off, but I honestly just got tired of that game. F.E.A.R. is a game with excellent mechanics and fun combat, so I think I'm more likely to just replay that instead.
I've been replaying it, and man, I forgot just how damn good the kills in this game feel.
One thing that surprises me is that the console version actually doesn't move at 60 FPS like I thought. I can clearly notice it after having played many recent games that do have that frame rate,and the funny thing is that I'm pretty sure that the XBOX360 could very much handle this game at 60 FPS, but I'm guessing that the reason it doesn't has to do with Day 1 Studio's port job.
People make it sound like 60 FPSs is still impossible so who knows.
Anyway, I've never played Fear or any Bioshock. I have some catching up to do with last gen shooters, including any Borderlands, Butcher Bay, Half-Life 2 and Deus Ex Human Revolution.
I should hit up Bulletstorm sometime. It's something that always seemed up my alley, but for whatever reason I never got around to it. I imagine that it would be dirt cheap if I bought it now.
It has to. I believe I had that as my no. 1 FPS from last gen. The adventure is good and has a nice length and there's a decent variety of weapons with cool secondary firing.
Holy Trinity of FPS games:
DOOM 2
Halo: Combat Evolved
F.E.A.R.
Yes or no?
I'd include Half-Life, but I used F.E.A.R. as the stand-in for it because it's better. This is fact.
Excluding counting both Dooms and ignoring everything I haven't played..such as Fear:
Halo
Doom 2
TimeSplitters 2
I'm pretty sure I'd take Perfect Dark's multiplayer over TS2's but I hate PD's campaign. TimeSplitter's decent as far as I know story mode is what gets it the spot along with its great multiplayer.
I love TS2 (personally I think it's better than GE and PD, myself), but it just barely missed out for me. That's just how strong of a game F.E.A.R is, IMO.
Also, do we not have a TPS thread? I could've sworn that we did.
Oh well, just to save myself some time, even though it doesn't fit in this thread:
Max Payne
Resident Evil 4
Vanquish
I'm not even going to ask yes or no. That is the Holy Trinity of TPS games. It's just fact. I do love Alan Wake, though. If it were a square I'd include that game as well.
Still need to play it. TS2 is my favorite game from that generation. I do still need to beat Halo on Legendary mode though. That mode me fall back in love with the game.
That reminds me that I need to do the same. I got all the way to the end of Two Betrayals on Legendary, but the I stopped and never got back to it. That said, I already got past the hardest parts of the game on Legendary, so I'm certain that I could clear the rest without too much trouble.
I assumed you already beat it. Like you, Legendary is what really got me into the game. I waited like 10 years to actually really play it though. :D
I just popped HCEA back in and finally resumed playing it on Legendary after a 2-year hiatus and immediately remembered why I stopped. The rocket-launcher wielding Flood are just so damn cheap. You can be playing expertly but these guys will just come out of nowhere and blast a rocket straight in your face, and since The a Flood come in swarms, it's nearly impossible to tell if one of them is carrying a rocket launcher, so you don't know which one to avoid or to attempt to take out first.
Anyways, I usually have a habit of killing every single enemy that I come across, but since I was near the end of the level I just made a mad-dash and after a few attempts I just got to the end while completely bypassing the last few fights (I just love that this game allows you to do that if you know how to skip them). The final major fight with the Covenant would have been insanely hard and far too long to endure, and I know because I've done it before on a Normal and Heroic modes. There are just so many enemies that it's not even funny.
What is funny is that I remember that in an interview with Bungie about Halo: Reach, they said that they could now use the power of the XBOX360 to do stuff that they could never do before, such as creating a scenario where you were surrounded by loads of enemies, including about 30 Elites. Yet I never noticed anything in the double-digits at all with the amount you ever encountered in the game in a single fight (except for maybe Firefight mode, and even then I think it was just barely 10 at a time). Yet this game literally has at least a dozen Elites in that single fight all spawned at once, and the game doesn't lag a bit. And that's in addition to all of the Grunts, Jackals, Hunters, Wraiths, AND even The FUCKING Flood included in that battle as well. So yeah, Bungie was full of shit with that statement, but in the plus side, it's insanely amazing that they were able to cram all of that shirt in on the original XBOX and not sacrifice the game's performance one bit.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 21, 2014, 11:40:07 PM
I just popped HCEA back in and finally resumed playing it on Legendary after a 2-year hiatus and immediately remembered why I stopped. The rocket-launcher wielding Flood are just so damn cheap. You can be playing expertly but these guys will just come out of nowhere and blast a rocket straight in your face, and since The a Flood come in swarms, it's nearly impossible to tell if one of them is carrying a rocket launcher, so you don't know which one to avoid or to attempt to take out first.
Now I remember why my friend and I never played through Legendary a second time.
Hmm, never really thought about enemy count in Halo 1. But then again, I've never gotten that far in Legendary.
But it's really only 2 levels where those are a problem (The Library being the other one). I don't recall encountering them on the last 2 levels, or if I did they were very few and far in between.
And those are a problem on any difficulty, anyways. Not just Legendary. The rest of the difficulty is awesome, especially fighting the Covenant.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 21, 2014, 04:14:47 PM
Holy Trinity of FPS games:
DOOM 2
Halo: Combat Evolved
F.E.A.R.
Yes or no?
I'd include Half-Life, but I used F.E.A.R. as the stand-in for it because it's better. This is fact.
I basically agree. Personally, I'd say that the Holy Trinity is Doom 2, Halo, and Half-Life, but the Underdog Trio is Jedi Outcast, Painkiller, and F.E.A.R; the former are important milestone games that deliver a perfectly-balanced and complete package, while the latter are less popular but represent the genre's best in terms of raw mechanics.
While I love Jedi Outcast, and even though it's technically an FPS, I don't really think of it as one. It's just so damn unique in that it switches to third person whenever you wield a Lightsaber, and to be honest, that's what I do for most of the game, so it feels more like an action/adventure game to me.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 22, 2014, 01:06:52 AM
While I love Jedi Outcast, and even though it's technically an FPS, I don't really think of it as one. It's just so damn unique in that it switches to third person whenever you wield a Lightsaber, and to be honest, that's what I do for most of the game, so it feels more like an action/adventure game to me.
I guess you're right. TimeSplitters 2 instead of that one, then. ;)
Also, your TPS list is inarguable.
Yeah, TS2 is such a fun game. I also remember liking what I played of Future Perfect, though I think I still prefer the multiplayer from 2, but I do want to replay both games at some point.
I need to try out everything on TS2's MP and also get Future Perfect. Basically so I can compare it to Perfect Dark. My current favorite multiplayer shooter.
I need to play RE4 and Vanquish. Mikami rocks. The Evil Within should deliver.
For now my list is:
Max Payne 1 (won't put 2 in, but it would be 2nd)
Everything Or Nothing
Psi-Ops
Future Perfect's single player campaign is excellent. There's just so much to do and it's really funny. Multiplayer is the same as always, so it's great, but the single player was such a great step up from the first two.
It's such a shame they went under.
I still recall 2 being the highlight of the series for single-player. The missions were so varied and the levels were really unique and imaginative (the Western was my favorite). Future Perfect was definitely funnier, though. I still need to replay both games (as for the first, it was food for its time, but I doubt that it has aged well).
Did anybody really play the singleplayer much in 1? I mainly played multiplayer with bots or other people.
It's a shame they couldn't just release an anthology with all the levels and modes from the first three games in one package. I'm sure that would sell really well.
Since people just didn't talk about TimeSplitters 1, I just assumed just about everything about it was mediocre and didn't think about it. :D
I love the design of the first Halo so much. One of the reasons that The Flood were more tolerable in this game (minus The Library) than in any other Halo game was because of all of the AI vs. AI fighting going on between them, and the other enemy types, it makes it really interesting in some battles since you can spectate from a safe distance and take out whichever side comes out on top while they are in a weakened state, or you can cleverly sneak your way past battles while your enemies duke it out. I donut think that I've played another FPS with enemy design as interesting as that, including th game's own sequels.
my dream fps would be a game with levels like halo ce's but no weapon limit and more enemy types. or a doom-like with as much action as doom 2, jumping and crosshair control. basically, duke with more violence.
Mine would be one with labyrinth design like DOOM II, but not in one Metroidvania-style world, I'd still want in in levels.
Weapons like DOOM, Perfect Dark, and Halo would be ideal.
oh yes, that's a perfect weapon combo. i hope doom 4 has that type of level design.
is starbreeze's syndicate any good?
foggle, was the game you posted a video for years ago along with eye and hard reset, project 2027?
Quote from: gunswordfist on December 27, 2014, 11:13:26 PM
foggle, was the game you posted a video for years ago along with eye and hard reset, project 2027?
Hm... might have been. It was probably either that or Deus Ex: Human Revolution, since one is a mod for the first game, and both serve as prequels taking place in the same year.
i know it wasn't hr. that game is instantly recognizable (pika-pikachu!). it had to be 2027 then. i remember you posting a gameplay video with someone jumping and shooting with a rifle and firing grenades.
That doesn't really sound like 2027 to me then, since that game is kind of slow-paced and plays/looks exactly like the original Deus Ex. Maybe it was Prey 2? That was a cyberpunk game with a similar play style announced around the same time period.
haha...sorry. definitely not prey 2. i just have to find that video again.
i really have been liking duke nukem 3d's humanoid gun toting enemies (assault troopers/captains and the pigs) more than doom's. the assault troopers teleporting and jetpacking make them interesting. i haven't remet the lizard troopers yet so we'll see about that.
Just finished Duke Nukem 3D: The Megaton Edition for PS3. I know the series was made into a laughingstock thanks to Forever taking, well, forever to come out (and when it DID come out, not meeting expectations), but go back and play 3D. It holds up -extremely- well. In fact, I'd easily rank it over the original DOOM.
Quote from: Speedy on January 23, 2015, 10:39:16 AM
Just finished Duke Nukem 3D: The Megaton Edition for PS3. I know the series was made into a laughingstock thanks to Forever taking, well, forever to come out (and when it DID come out, not meeting expectations), but go back and play 3D. It holds up -extremely- well. In fact, I'd easily rank it over the original DOOM.
Yes, thank you!! I love Duke Nukem 3D! The second episode is fairly tedious, but the other three are just fantastic. Probably my second favorite 3D-but-actually-2D shooter after Blood. :)
Does the PS3 version come with the third party expansion packs? If so, definitely play Duke Caribbean - that one's a blast! Ignore the other two, though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YGu4zQgTvg
Quote from: Foggle on January 23, 2015, 10:54:33 AMDoes the PS3 version come with the third party expansion packs? If so, definitely play Duke Caribbean - that one's a blast! Ignore the other two, though.
Yes, Megaton includes Duke it Out in D.C., Nuclear Winter, and Duke Caribbean. Of the three, my favorite was easily Nuclear Winter. It's so nutty blasting away bad guys while cheerful Christmas music plays in the background. ;D
Duke Caribbean was fun too, though. I especially dug the '80s leisure suits and sunglasses on the bad guys.
Ah, I didn't really care for Nuclear Winter, but the Christmassy music definitely made it quite amusing. :) Duke It Out In DC is actually pretty good too, but some of the levels are so big that they just become confusing and tedious to play through. Don't think I'll ever touch that one again.
Quote from: Foggle on January 23, 2015, 12:43:28 PMDuke It Out In DC is actually pretty good too, but some of the levels are so big that they just become confusing and tedious to play through. Don't think I'll ever touch that one again.
Like "Smithsonian". Ugh.
Quote from: Speedy on January 23, 2015, 12:54:30 PM
Like "Smithsonian". Ugh.
Ugh, yeah. I'm pretty sure that one took me over 2 hours to beat... :cry:
Quote from: Speedy on January 23, 2015, 12:01:45 PM
Quote from: Foggle on January 23, 2015, 10:54:33 AMDoes the PS3 version come with the third party expansion packs? If so, definitely play Duke Caribbean - that one's a blast! Ignore the other two, though.
Yes, Megaton includes Duke it Out in D.C., Nuclear Winter, and Duke Caribbean. Of the three, my favorite was easily Nuclear Winter. It's so nutty blasting away bad guys while cheerful Christmas music plays in the background. ;D
Duke Caribbean was fun too, though. I especially dug the '80s leisure suits and sunglasses on the bad guys.
Oh, cool, it includes the DLC. I'll definitely put it on my wishlist.
I had Caribbean long ago and it was a lot of fun. I definitely need to play it again.
i was going to ask what's the difference atomic and megaton edition. i am still doing my 2nd playthrough of atomic, this time on come get some mode and i played the first two secret levels for the first time, including spin cycle about a week ago. i have been enjoying this game more after leaving disappointed during my initial run. the game is much better with more frequent enemy encounters.
i am on the 2nd episode. (mission 7) it seems more bearable this time around and i think this is the episode where my opinion of duke started to sour after the great first episode. i am liking exploring the space levels and have been dying less frequently from the traps, with me only getting about one cheap smash death (namely from a reaking keycard case). it's just mostly me loving being in space now. i also have developed a new love for the devastator (which i didn't like too much because i could blow myself up with it) and the shrinker, which works on a surprising amount of enemies
i will put it on my wishlist as well.
are the bond fpses such as nightfire any good?
Quote from: gunswordfist on February 04, 2015, 09:13:33 PM
are the bond fpses such as nightfire any good?
Nightfire was one of my favorite games as a kid! The multiplayer was actually even better than Goldeneye's IMO, and the single-player was pretty good too. Avoid the PC version, though; it's terrible.
Nightfire was great.
I can't remember if that was the game with the Q-Claw in multiplayer, but that was awesome. It was like a Spider-Man FPS.
can you zipline with it?
Quote from: gunswordfist on February 04, 2015, 11:38:46 PM
can you zipline with it?
Yes. You can also stick to any surface with it and it allows you to shoot from any surface. Firefights get nuts.
so neversoft spider-man meets goldeneye? i thought i was going to hear that this was going to be above average at best but that's amazing!
To be more descriptive, you don't swing with the Q-Claw. It's more like you shoot the claw, then it retracts and pulls you straight. The Difference is that you can do it to any surface and stick there like Spider-Man, shooting wherever you like.
whoa, that's exactly like how neversoft spidey's zipline move works that i was initially joking about. that's awesome.
did anyone else like n64 the world is not enough? i liked it more than goldeneye for a little while due to the great multiplayer and i played little to none of single player but it looked great and so were the gadgets.
I think I'll be skipping DOOM. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anrvBD4aTGY)
The combat is great. The lack of regenerating health is great. The guns look great. The enemy design looks great. The music and sound effects sound great. The presentation is great, even if its missing color.
The level design is not.
It's missing the exploration just like I feared it would. The entire level design seems to be: narrow corridor, open room for shooting, narrow corridor, lots of shooting in open room, rinse and repeat. No puzzles, no tricky traps, or environmental hazards, and no tenseness really hurt it. Of all the ingredients in a DOOM game, level design is my #1 cavil with what I've seen. DOOM is level design above all else, and it doesn't look like they've got that down.
I've heard that the maps are pretty big for each level and not super linear, but that was just from someone doing an early impression of the game, so maybe it doesn't reflect the whole thing. The quick look from Giant Bomb seems to support this notion so far, though. Are you just basing this off of one video or have a lot of people been complaining about it being super linear? The video you linked to just seems to represent one particular sequence from the game.
I don't know, I think it looks pretty bad-ass, myself. I don't expect it to be classic DOOM-levels of greatness, but it's easily the most appealing game to come out of the genre for me since Halo: Reach.
Every video I've seen hasn't focused on level design, so I can only make guesses. But it doesn't look very varied from what I've seen. As I said, everything else looks like classic DOOM. I just want the level design to be as involved as the other 3 were.
I've only heard, so I can't really claim anything, but apparently this game has colored keys and multi-tiered level maps and everything. If the game being a corridor-shooter to you is because much of it takes place in hallways and such, then yeah I can see your point, but to be fair the original DOOM also had a lot of corridor-heavy levels. They still weren't linear, though. So maybe this new game might not be either. I'm honestly not really sure, though.
Even if it did have more linear levels, though, I'd still take it over most shooters that we get today. As much as I love classic DOOM's level design, it wasn't the only thing that made it a great game for me. Combat and movement were a big factor as well, and this game definitely seems to have nailed those factors down.
Well, I'm still going to give it a try. I just won't be jumping in right away. I'm still a bit burned out on FPS games, but a good DOOM game will go a long way to make me forgetting all about my self-imposed exile.
All the reviews I've read have said that the game does, in fact, feature labyrinths and complicated level design, including colored key cards and platforming (with a double jump!). Micki! also described its design sensibilities as being "similar to Metroid."
So in other words, now Desensitized has nothing to complain about without actually playing the game for himself? :sly:
Quote from: Foggle on May 17, 2016, 08:48:08 PM
All the reviews I've read have said that the game does, in fact, feature labyrinths and complicated level design, including colored key cards and platforming (with a double jump!). Micki! also described its design sensibilities as being "similar to Metroid."
Sounds like everything I asked for.
So apparently the new Doom game features an easy-to-use level editor, even on consoles. It's like the Mario Maker of FPS.
why was I not informed :o
Say wha?!! News to me too.
I was wrong.
I haven't been more wrong about a game ever.
Recently, I went to visit my friend and we watched a bunch of videos on the new DOOM. This was the one we watched first: WATCH (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHlvQcozDAA)
We then watched some player videos including unlockable Classic DOOM levels feature the old levels with the only change being new models replacing the sprites. This is DOOM. This is the shooter I've been waiting for since since the original Xbox closed up shop.
Hardcore shooting? Check. Varied enemy types? Check. No reloading? Check. Sprint forever? Check. A story mode that gives the finger to cinematic shooters? Check. Speed? Check. Dodgeable bullets? Check. Insane difficulty? Check. Key Cards? Check. Exploration? Check. Secrets? Check. Incredible level design? Check.
I haven't played it myself yet, but, well, watch the videos. This is probably going to be the GOTY.
Personally, this game looked awesome to me since day one, so I'm really glad to see people enjoying it.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on May 17, 2016, 06:28:30 PMI think I'll be skipping DOOM. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anrvBD4aTGY)
The combat is great. The lack of regenerating health is great. The guns look great. The enemy design looks great. The music and sound effects sound great. The presentation is great, even if its missing color.
The level design is not.
It's missing the exploration just like I feared it would. The entire level design seems to be: narrow corridor, open room for shooting, narrow corridor, lots of shooting in open room, rinse and repeat. No puzzles, no tricky traps, or environmental hazards, and no tenseness really hurt it. Of all the ingredients in a DOOM game, level design is my #1 cavil with what I've seen. DOOM is level design above all else, and it doesn't look like they've got that down.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on May 23, 2016, 09:18:00 PMI was wrong.
I haven't been more wrong about a game ever.
This is probably going to be the GOTY.
I'm never going to let you live this one down, buddy! :>
I'm perfectly willing to admit when I was wrong. I was wrong.
And why aren't more people talking about this? It's insane.
That's what I was wondering when it felt like I was the only one excited about this game and most other people looked skeptical.
Like I said, this is the most appealing FPS game (to me) that has come out since Halo: Reach, which was six years ago (showing you just how lame the genre has been lately).
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on May 23, 2016, 09:35:07 PM
And why aren't more people talking about this? It's insane.
People are hating on it for the very same reasons we're excited for it.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 23, 2016, 09:41:46 PM
Like I said, this is the most appealing FPS game (to me) that has come out since Halo: Reach, which was six years ago (showing you just how lame the genre has been lately).
I feel like there's usually only one good single-player FPS per year these days. The new Wolfenstein and Shadow Warrior games were amazing IMO.
To be fair, I haven't played either of those, so I can't comment on them. Is the X360 version of Wolfenstein worth playing, or do I need to play it on a current-gen console for the game to be any good?
I'll look into Shadow Warrior as well. I also forgot about Bullet Storm, which while it wasn't amazing, was still a pretty well-done and entertaining FPS that came out after Reach, so there are at least a few good titles, I suppose.
I'm honestly not sure how the last gen versions of TNO and TOB are. I did play the games on my aging PC, which meant that they looked kind of crappy and ran at about 25-40fps, and still had a blast, so I would assume they're still great on the Xbox 360, but it definitely requires some research before a blind buy just in case it's another Shadow of Mordor.
Only thing I'm hoping with DOOM is that the music isn't just over the top metal. I want level themes like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qURei6svd90) again. Atmospheric, high tension, and action packed all at the same time.
Either I'll wait for it to come down on the next Steam sale, or consider it a console purchase. Don't think my lappy can run Doom properly (even though the FPS on Wolfenstein is pretty decent).
All the recent DOOM talk made me pick up the collection for the PS3 on PSN (not BFG) which includes most of the original games and episodes. It never fails to impress me how well designed these games are, though it would have been nice to have DOOM 64 in there as well. Still my favorite FPS series.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on May 27, 2016, 10:56:52 PM
All the recent DOOM talk made me pick up the collection for the PS3 on PSN (not BFG) which includes most of the original games and episodes. It never fails to impress me how well designed these games are, though it would have been nice to have DOOM 64 in there as well. Still my favorite FPS series.
I've been playing Wolfenstein 3D and DOOM I (and now II) side by side, and I'm having as much a great time as ever.
A few things, though.
The first three episodes of Wolfenstein (the main game) are as excellent as ever. They're basic by today's standards, but they are fun to run through. I like the variety, too. The first episode involves escaping from a prison, the second is infiltrating a lab of grotesque Nazi experiments, and the third is about crawling into Hitler's bunker and ending the war. They all play really well. But, I'm currently near the end of episode 4 and I just don't like it much. Too many narrow halls and obscure secrets (floor 5 is . . . wow, bad design) and annoying enemy placement. I now remember why every time I replay this game I usually stop after icing robo-Hitler.
DOOM is a classic. The three episodes of DOOM 1 feature great shooting and fantastic level design. Playing it back to back with Wolfenstein shows just how far id had come since then. But like episode 4 of Wolfenstein, I really don't like Thy Flesh Consumed. The level design is too obscure, again, and the enemy placement is usually unfair, bordering on sadistic. The bonus episode is such an obvious step down from DOOM 1 proper, that I can't imagine I'm the only one who feels this way.
DOOM II is still one of my favorite games. The secrets and shortcuts are masterful, the weapons are balanced even better, and the level design is incredibly clever. After beating DOOM, I decided to go straight to II and play only a level or two, and ended up playing 6. Really gotta say that I'm glad id went back to this style with the new game. It's still got some of the best level design ever in a shooter.
I hate the enemy placement in Wolfenstein 3D past Episode 1 in general, but Episodes 4-6 are especially bad. Constantly hiding enemies that can 1-2 shot you behind walls is such a terrible way to make your game harder. Spear of Destiny is fucking impossible. The Doom games have aged way better IMO.
I got to play a lot of DOOM 4 today. I think I annoyed everyone around me because I turned off the compass, objective indicator, and tutorials. It was so cool being able to be lost in a new shooter level in 2016. But yeah, it's as great as you've heard.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on June 19, 2016, 09:31:13 PMI turned off the ... objective indicator
I do this in any game I can! Always makes the experience so much better.
With DOOM 4, Shadow Warrior 2, and Halo SPV3, this is looking like a good year for fans of old-school FPS design. :joy:
I beat DOOM 4 a while back and I had a blast with it. It's probably the most intense shooter game ever. It doesn't feel like you're just shooting the demons but unleashing your rage against them and making them wish they were never born.
They got the anger across very well without having our hero say anything. Nobody messes with Doomguy.
The most impressive aspect is how much it feels like the classic DOOM games, only with a modern touch. Jumping, aiming (no iron-sights, thankfully), climbing, and even alt-fire options and hidden upgrades, add so much to the classic formula. The game encourages exploration at a level I haven't seen from a shooter in a long time.
I hope id eventually plans expansion pack levels. This is the type of game that could use them.
I was just playing a bunch of Blood Dragon earlier.
Amazing that this never got a sequel. Ubisoft sucks.
Yessir. Probably my 2nd favorite FPS from last gen. Like the only successful shooting Ubisoft hasn't given a sequel.
Gotta say, there's something about ramming a car with yours, jumping out as it crushes the passenger in the other car, blowing off the driver's head with a shotgun, and knifing the gunner, all in a swift motion.
And then giving the corpse the finger while you make an '80s action movie quip.
I don't like Far Cry at all, but Blood Dragon just understands shooters and their appeal so well. The soundtrack certainly helps.
The soundtrack is just perfect. Probably my 3rd favorite in the genre.
This is a great video that explains what makes DOOM's gameplay formula work so well: https://youtu.be/yuOObGjCA7Q
Good video. DOOM 4 manages the exact same trick which is probably why it is so popular.
I noticed that Blood Dragon had this when I finished up my 100% playthrough. There were the normal soldiers, grenadiers, the armored flamethrower users, the wandering animals, the blood dragons, and the undead scientists. They all behave much differently, but the fact that there are so few types means prioritizing before you attack and finding the right patterns.
All the best shooters seem to do this sort of thing.
Here's another video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uvbO3kLkgw) as to what DOOM 4 does that makes it so great.
The initial argument falls flat, thought. Of course, the PC gamer argument that it's the consoles fault is unabashedly silly when it took over a decade of console exclusive shooters before COD casualized the genre and made all the things these guys dislike about it. GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, Timesplitters 1-3, Red Faction 1 and 2, and Halo, were not slow games based on hiding. COD came out of nowhere with Modern Warfare and changed everything. It has as much to do with the aforementioned games as Silent Hill 2 has to do with Resident Evil 5.
But the rest of the video is really good. It does go over a lot of why DOOM 4 should be a standard (again) and why a lot of the lesser parts of modern FPS games really should ride off into the sunset.
I just hope DOOM 5 has a better soundtrack. It's probably the only part of the single player experience I'm just not a fan of.
I'm okay with Doom's soundtrack, but it would've been better suited for a Quake game (speaking of which, I hope Champions is successful enough for Id to do another single-player Quake). Doom's music should be heavy and melodic rather than ambient and industrial, it's the main reason I haven't touched Doom 64 yet.
Found this gem from a YouTuber who's channel is quickly becoming one of my favorites: http://youtu.be/p_3LQhncl2c
Man, this really makes me want to replay F.E.A.R. when I next get a chance. It's still my favorite FPS of all time, personally.
F.E.A.R.'s combat mechanics and enemy AI have still yet to be topped 12 years later. It remains my favorite FPS after all this time as well.
I finally got to play a lot of Shadow Warrior (the remake) last weekend. Excellent game.
If DOOM 4 didn't prove it, this does. FPSes need to go back in this direction again.
The Shadow Warrior reboot/remake/prequel/whatever is a really amazing game. I don't even want to use guns most of the time because fighting with the sword is so fun. Great sense of humor, too.
Not getting on too well with Shadow Warrior 2, though. For some reason they decided to take the sequel in a co-op and loot-focused direction with spongy enemies and elements of procedural generation in the level design. The writing also took a considerable hit without the buddy comedy dynamic.
But yeah, I hope the new Shadow Warrior, Doom, and Wolfenstein games start an FPS renaissance or something. These games manage to be old-school without banking on nostalgia (e.g. Strafe, which looks like garbage IMO) - they're updated for the modern day while still retaining what made classic titles great. Even Titanfall 2 seemed to be leaning in this direction.
Strafe looks like one of those chintzy "retro" games that uses nostalgia to sell itself instead of gameplay. The gameplay looks nothing like what makes the best FPS games great.
What made the old games great were the exploration and enemy types which lead to surprising gameplay situations. Also, varied settings and guns help. All modern FPS games have the same enemy types, the same settings, the same guns, and the same lack of AI. We need more games going back to what made the older games like DOOM and Duke Nukem 3D so great without copying the art style and thinking that's what people want.
I just want the genre to go back to being awesome again.
I'd like to point out that modern FPS design isn't inherently bad. F.E.A.R., Half-Life, and Bungie-era Halo took the fundamentals of classic shooters and then melded them in with updated mechanics. It's when the later Call of Duty games started trying too hard to be interactive movies and almost all big-budget FPS'es followed suit that the genre really staggered, outside of occasional deviations like BioShock or Bulletstorm.
But yeah, it's genuinely great to see modern games that understand the fundamentals of what made classic games in the genre work while also updating them with modern mechanics that actually mix well with the classic elements.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 25, 2017, 04:03:03 PM
I'd like to point out that modern FPS design isn't inherently bad. F.E.A.R., Half-Life, and Bungie-era Halo took the fundamentals of classic shooters and then melded them in with updated mechanics.
Not to dismiss your point (because it is ostensibly correct), but the original F.E.A.R. is 12 years old, Half-Life 2: Episode 2 is a decade old, and Bungie-era Halo ended 7 years ago. They're not exactly modern anymore and much of what made them good was shed over the years since.
Thankfully as sales of COD drop, more companies appear to be moving away from it and in the DOOM direction of giving the player more than a hallway with moving targets to play with.
I should have better clarified, when I said modern shooters I wasn't really meaning to say current shooters. I meant modern in the sense of the shifting design philosophies between classic Id games like Wolfenstein 3D and DOOM to the more narrative and scripted focus of FPS design that started with Half-Life, despite being nearly 20 years old. Essentially, the genre followed in the direction of Half-Life ever since it came out.
That in and of itself is not a problem, since as I said, Half-Life, despite being the birth of the modern style of FPS (once again, I know it's old, but the genre did not significantly evolve past the formula that Half-Life set up since then) still had its roots in classic FPS design, but many future games ended up taking the wrong lessons from it and that's what caused so much bland content to come out of the genre for nearly two decades.
Obviously there are exceptions like TimeSplitters, Deus Ex, and various others, but my point being that the modern formula became streamlined into that of the "cinematic shooter" rather than the design philosophy that Half-Life originally set up.
Some of the better recent games in the genre seem to give players the cinematic aesthetic that they like while really taking the best elements of both pre and post Half-Life formula and FPS design to create a much more mechanically interesting game than your standard CoD clone.
I'm not sure if anyone has played Blake Stone: Aliens of Gold, but it's basically like a pulp sci-fi shooter in the Wolfenstein 3D engine. I just finished up all six episodes of the original game, and it definitely feels like the halfway point between Wolfenstein 3D and DOOM (which it is, since it came out one week before the original DOOM) and it's a lot of fun.
It's way better than Wolfenstein 3D, as the episodes actually get better as they go, and never rely on bad enemy placements for challenge. I recommend it if you like old shooters.
Another one I'm playing is Rise of the Triad which is just plain nutty. It's pretty tough and the levels are long. It's also really good.
I've played Blake Stone! Not extensively, but I like it. Gotta get around to finishing it sometime.
Wolf3D has three great episodes: 1, 3, and 5. Spear of Destiny is okay, but the last few levels are frustrating. Episodes 2, 4, and 6 are just terrible.
Rise of the Triad is awesome.
New game from the devs of Painkiller. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAbF4Hzxu2Q)
Painkiller is awesome, so I have high hopes for this.
HOLY SHIT, AND BULLETSTORM?!
How have I never played Blood: One Unit Whole Blood before?
Great weapons, excellent level and sound design, and plenty of cool enemy types and secrets. It's like everything great about DOOM and Duke Nukem 3D rolled into one game.
This game should be far better known than it is.
I should probably continue playing that.
Quote from: gunswordfist on December 16, 2017, 04:21:21 PM
I should restock on Leanbean here (https://www.villagevoice.com/2021/11/24/leanbean-review/) and probably continue playing that.
Which game is that, Rynnec? I loved Painkiller! I'd love to give another game from those devs a go.
Some FPS games I've been delving into since Blood (which is incredible):
Rise of the Triad: Fun, fast paced shooter, but the bosses are pretty aggravating cheese. Big levels and the shooting is fun. Not quite a classic, but very good.
Blake Stone: Both of these games are like the step between Wolfenstein and DOOM, and feel like it. The first game can get overly repetitive, but the second is shorter with tighter levels. Again, not quite classics, but definitely fun ones.
Shadow Warrior: Classic Complete: Enemies attack too quickly (almost hitscan) and the first few levels are plain, but it gets better and better as it goes. It's the weakest of the three top Build Engine games (Duke Nukem 3D and Blood are the other two) but not by that much. The slow start is the only thing that holds it back.
Star Wars Dark Forces 1 and 2: I am over this franchise, but I always wanted to play these so I did. The first game is DOOM-like and the second is more adventure-like, but they are both top notch shooters. Really shows the link between DOOM and where the genre would go by Half-Life.
Shogo: Fun mecha anime shooter. The only issues are the seemingly random damage output from the enemies and the weightless shooting. The level design and art style really works, though. But it's not one of Monolith's best.
Strife: Possibly the most overlooked FPS ever made. Part fantasy/science fiction RPG with upgrades and story progression as well as shooting that is as good as the best in the genre. If you haven't played this yet I give it my highest recommendation.
Quake: The Offering: id Software hits it out of the park again. Some of the best levels, weapons, and enemies ever in a shooter. It's definitely up there with the DOOM games, and it is a crime that it has never gotten a proper sequel (other games took the title but nothing in the game) even this many years later. But it's close to perfect. Play this game.
So it's been a fun time. The genre definitely has its share of classics. After 'm done with the Quake expansions I'll probably go back to DOOM for awhile. After that, who knows. There are no shortage of options.
Blood really is incredible. It might be my favorite FPS of all time. Make sure to also check out Heretic and Hexen if you haven't, as well as Jedi Outcast. :)
Found a great video on the history of the F.E.A.R. franchise: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgvzW0dXfOM&t=2136s
It does a great job of giving a retrospective on the production history of this franchise, explaining why the first was such a masterpiece and why this series at it's best left such a long-lasting legacy, as well as going over what the developers missed about the first one's success that lead to a decline in quality. It's a shame, because I still maintain that the original F.E.A.R. is a masterclass in horror action gaming. I genuinely would put it in the same league as titles like Resident Evil 4 and Bloodborne. However, the series just couldn't even come close to those same heights after that point, which is a real shame given how much potential it had, IMO.
F.E.A.R. with Extraction Point is probably still my favorite FPS of all time. The enemy AI and weapon feedback remain some of the best in the industry to this day, the latter only being outdone by the modern id titles (Doom 4, New Order, Rage 2), and the former... I can't think of anything, honestly. Playing it just feels right in a way few games do. I would give anything for Monolith to have another shot at the franchise, or a leaked copy of the early Project Origin build from the reveal footage.