Well let me explain, I was reading Edge magazine (the one with Miyamoto on the cover) and one of the letters was complaining that they didn't review pro evolution soccer or Fifa soccer and Edges reply was we don't review certain types of game. However most of the reviews (I believe nearly half of them including the majority of the two page reviews) in that magazine were basically for First Person Shooting games and this got me thinking. Back in the 90s the Megadrive and SNES seem to have a glut of platform games, most of them not offering much of a difference between each other and thankfully they were mostly killed off in the Playstation / Saturn / N64 era when you did seem to have a nice mixture of games of nearly every genre. Today there seems to be a glut of FPS games, most looking and playing similar to every other. So if Edge didn't review FPS games do you think... 1 - Anyone would really miss them? 2 - Would Edge become more a small booklet due to the lack of content that the FPS seem to make. 3 - In the last 6 months how many games have you bought which have been FPS (include games which do have FPS elements in them, ie Metal Gear Solid 4). 4 - What was the last FPS game that made you think "That's new". 5 - Do you think that FPSs are the new platform games? For me looking at my PS3 collection, two of them are FPS games, although I got these free, so I didn't buy them (Orange Box, Metal Gear Solid 4 (which I still can't be arsed to play)). And portal was the last FPS game that I was really impressed with, although it's more a puzzle game then a true FPS...
Interesting theory. I suppose they are kinda the new platform games in a way, especially now you can jump etc. I'm probably a bit biased for this subject though as i love FPS's, i reckon about 70% of modern games i buy are of that category with the remaining 30% being 3rd person shooters and racing games. The last FPS i played which made me think 'That's new' would be Quantum Of Solace, the firing from cover option was a welcome addition that came in very handy on the harder difficulty settings when the enemies aiming all of a sudden became that of an S.A.S. marksman. I can't comment on Edge magazine as I don't really read any modern gaming magazines, I'm quite happy reading my old Sega mags .
I bought Gears of War and the cover system and stuff was new. I bought CoD4 and hadn't ever played a CoD game online before really. So it was new to me. But now the sequels have come and they are the same and I've lost alot of interest. That's why I still play old games like SNES and Genesis. It's not that I don't like FPS games, I do, but eventually that gets old.
I think TF2 is innovative, but then again, its the first class based FPS I've played. The IP and graphics are really unique though.
you want a real innovative FPS play shadowrun. It is class based and takes actual skill. TF2 is fucked up with the damage system, weapons do random amounts of damage. How the fuck can you be good when luck plays such a huge factor on if that shot killed someone?
I really can't remember the last FPS where I thought "that's new". I really enjoyed Quantum of Solace on 360, but I don't think I thought anything was new there. It was GoldenEye meets Rainbow 6: Vegas. The problem is, they are getting a bit stale. There's too many of them, and to all intents and purposes, they're pretty much the same. Some have vehicles, some don't. Some have mines, some don't. All have different guns. I can't get too enthusiastic about new guns, or new storylines which are usually fairly similar, anyway. I enjoy features that are new when they're new, like having to be stealthy, but really it is all the same and gets a bit boring. As for the Edge question, they'll never stop reviewing FPS games, and why would they? They're popular. Sure, they could cover more genres, but then that's their style - more hardcore adult gamer, I guess. I don't buy Edge anyway because it is too damned expensive. As for being "the new platformer", I don't know. It is the over-produced genre, certainly. The platformer was back in its day because of the limitations of the hardware (it was 2D), but then platformers varied quite a lot. Sure, in theory it was the same thing, and there was a limited amount you could do with it. The thing is, with a platformer you play it, complete it and that's it. With an FPS, you mostly get some kind of multiplayer option, so it has lastability. For that reason, I'd compare it more to fighting games like Street Fighter. There were WAAY too many of them, and they were VERY samey. Likewise, I couldn't understand how people got excited about the new game with new characters and new moves - you were just fighting each other, much like you're just running around with guns in FPS games.
I'm with you on this. Shadowrun is a very under appreciated game. I thought the classes and the use of magic and tech they did was very innovative and a ton of fun. Sadly it seems it didn't sell very well. I remember people bitching about the lack of a single player game mode campaign. But I still think the multiplayer was great and that it could have been a great success. I'd have loved to have seen some DLC like map packs.
the people who play fighting games like playing them and finding the little things, combos, and then cancels to make new combos. same with FPSs, Nade points, wall shot angles, jumps. There is a reason mutiplayer FPS's have last ability. The competition. Playing and learning the intricate things that make the game what it is. learning everything, making it tick. There is a reason Street Fighter 2 is still played in tournaments, why Halo 1 still has a dedicated fanbase. And it's not just that. It's the mind games that get played against other human players. Outsmarting them, executing plays. Do we get tired of Football (soccer)? It's the same teams, every year, playing the same game, same stadiums, same rules. No. Because it has humans vs humans, no game is EVER the same. sure some are more eventful than others but my point stands.
1 - Sure, many people play them. 2 - Don't think so, Edge is much more than FPSs. 3 - Metroid Prime 3, Metal Gear Solid 4, Gears Of War 2, and some more. 4 - Mirror's Edge 5 - Yes I think that de main problem is that FPSs, almost always, are about the same things, some times you can see things like Bioshock, but it's still an exception among over musculated and sweaty marines.
MottZilla, you have a point - the last time I said "ooh, that's new" to an FPS was probably Shadowrun. Unfortunately, it was very limited by the lack of multiplayer and the lack of games online. Whenever I played there was some idiot lagging the game out. Quit out and try and find a new game... and you'd end up in the same game! :lol: Henners, yup I agree. The multi-player options are what give both FPS and fighter games their lastability. I just find them too samey. Don't get me wrong, I play some multiplayer FPS games a fair amount, and I play the single player ones, too. I just get bored with the genre.
I will leave you with the following words: If Goldeneye is still considered undisputed long-lasting king of console FPS, innovation is about 12 years behind.
GoldenEye is still a very good game, and I think for most of us it was the FPS that really wowed us. As playable as it still is, you do tend to notice (and mind) its flaws a bit more now. I think there are other games that have taken its place in the FPS popularity charts, for example Counter:Strike, Unreal Tournament and Halo, but it is still amongst the best and most innovative.
I love platformers, Unfortunatelly there arent enough nowadays. Last one I tried was Banjo kazooie nutz and boltz and It was pretty bad. I had like 0% interest in the game after a couple hours in.
I for one am absolutely tired of FPSs. God only knows how many came out back in 2007, and thankfully I worked at Gamestop at that time so I just checked them out, played through them over the weekend, brought it back. But due just the insane amount of FPSs that are being made anymore... I'm getting to a point where I can't sit through them. I get bored, horribly, because it is getting done to f'ing death. Hell, I find that I can't even enjoy Left4Dead and I'm having an insanely hard time getting into Fallout 3 for this very reason! Now to answer the questions: 1 - Anyone would really miss them? No. I would love for FPSs to go away for a couple of years. 2 - Would Edge become more a small booklet due to the lack of content that the FPS seem to make. I duno... I don't read Edge. 3 - In the last 6 months how many games have you bought which have been FPS (include games which do have FPS elements in them, ie Metal Gear Solid 4). 1. Fallout 3. 4 - What was the last FPS game that made you think "That's new". Portal 5 - Do you think that FPSs are the new platform games? I think they're horribly generic now and vastly overdone, so in the context of your argument, yes. Though I would much prefer a glut of 2D platformers over the FPS nonsense.
I'm still waiting for Capcom to release a new and decent Megaman, Sega to release a new and decent versions of Sonic and Alex Kidd. Also waiting for new versions of Tomba!, Gunstar Heroes, .... The problem is that they are not doing it. People were tired of waiting, and moved on.
