Last year i would have tell you i am the biggest advocate for the fps genre. Today, i can tell you i have absolutely zero desire to play a FPS. I have to agree with the title of this article. I have become fatigued by the genre. If only something revolutionary was done... But no. We are fed rehashed stuff. Oh well. At least i feel good about not giving my money to Activision. And I dont know what commandobee is talking about. This year is the dawning of the demise of COD
i think this year is the peak for the COD series. next year will still probably outsell BF but many people are really getting tired of the same formula every year.
Well, if you're sick of Military Shooters, there's other genres, try an RPG or puzzle game... they are also out there in the market place you know. Once in a while I like to buy a Military Shooter, but my collection does consist of other genre titles as well, and i'm guess that's true for fellow gamers as well, GS. This might shock yeah, but not every game is a shooter.
im not sure what the first good military fps was, but certainly CounterStrike was groundbreaking. Considering COD games have borrowed the riot shield, flash & frag grenades, knife, flak jacket, search & destroy game mode, many of the weapons and recoil mechanic from this game, why dont Valve make a new counterstrike game and release it on consoles?. after all they did portal 2 and the original was a mod of half-life 2, counterstrike was a mod of half-life 1, so why not go back to this and bring some new innovation to the genre in the process, if anyone can, the developers at valve can in my opinion, cant expect the others to be original if they have fifa-esque yearly releases.
I agree that there are too many military shooters about but the thing is they will only continue making these games while people keep buying them and they do in their droves. It's ok to moan but things wont change until you stop buying these games.
Yeah, AI is one of the SP shooter genre's greatest weaknesses. Also doesn't help that developers have been stuck with the same old consoles for so long either. There's only so much you can do with those right? I mean, it's not like people actually develop games for PC's these days. And yeah, linear campaigns that don't require you to think is an issue as well. Developers go for Multiplayer first, and SP as an afterthought. The original Rainbow Six's & Ghost Recon's were the last time I remember seeing a campaign I had to stop and think over. That was when... 2003?
more involvement is the first thing that would be welcome. secondly less "waves of AI" and more "squads of people hunting down other squads of people" tactical stuff ya'know?
@anthonycg Can you imagine what it would be like if Stephen King was required to write his novels with a hundred customers looking over his shoulders saying, "Do this! Do that! Give me the FREEDOM to control the story!"? No author would put up with that. They'd all say, "Just write your OWN damn story!" What if Hollywood was required to release 10 versions of every film to ensure all audiences had choices between the way plot points occurred? Hollywood would be bankrupt, we'd have fewer distinct films, or creative directors would just quit and go somewhere else. If you want to argue that video games are somehow different in that realm, fine, but I think many of the same rules apply. It is the decision of the DEVELOPERS whether they will give us "choice" in a game's story and direction. And if they don't and you don't like it, play something else. There's always PLENTY of stuff available. Just replay Fallout or Mass Effect or some other "nonlinear" game. And if it really bugs players that much, they should be determined enough to make their OWN game. Cause that's the only way they actually GET any control over it anyway.
@anthonycg Freedom of choice WITHIN THE GAMES. I don't mean gamers shouldn't be allowed to choose what to BUY and what not to. That'd be dictatorial. What I'm actually complaining about--which apparently you didn't get--is that people are demanding they be allowed to choose a hundred different ways to play through a game; that they be given "choices." Not only is that impossible to give in the sense that people WANT it to be given--we only get an ILLUSION of choice that amounts to at best a FEW different LINEAR paths--but it's not fair to expect it from people who are actually CREATING the game. (TBC)
The military of each country in the world is full of brain-dead idiots who can't think for themselves. Here's a tip: stop taking orders you lapdogs! Military games are just government brainwashing, LMAO.
@cachinscythe People don't deserve the right to choose? Are you serious? The games are made FOR THE PEOPLE. If a game sucks then I don't buy it. If a game doesn't appeal to what I want then I don't buy it. I'm not going to waste $60 on a game just because the developer did his job. Because that's what it is - HIS JOB.
@Jedilink109 You want freedom of choice in a game? Here's the most surefire way to get it: learn to program one, get artists, and MAKE YOUR OWN. That way anytime you want to change it, you can just reprogram it. Anything less than that is just another version of "linear." IMO we should not treat choice in games like an expectation; we should treat it like a bonus. If the developers don't want to give it to us, we should be willing to put up with that, and if they do, we should say, "Thank you for going the extra 12 miles. I appreciate it."
@Jedilink109 "More games like Metro 2033, Bioshock, Crysis, and Zeno Clash. Something new, something interesting, something different, something that gives me power to make my own decisions and go my own ways." And your suggestion for something new would be....what? Asking for "something new" from developers is like asking for "something tastier" from chefs. How on earth will they have any idea how to make it tastier unless you provide some ideas or suggestions? And if you don't HAVE any, maybe you should question whether it's fair to complain about it. By the way, Bioshock gives about as much power to the player as a two lane road gives to drivers. Actually, a two lane road provides MORE choice, because going one way will actually take you somewhere different. Unlike Bioshock where you go through the same places making an arbitrary decision whether to let some little girls live and get a different ending based on whether you saved them more often or less often. Sorry fans, but I call it like I see it. "These developers forget that videogames are about US. The player!" Games are not all about "us" anymore than schools are all about the students. As I've said before to numerous people, the developers are the ones that actually work on these games, putting in longer, harder work hours than most consumers will EVER have to. Yet we have the gall to act like we are the ONLY ones that count here. (TBC)
I think that if they want to make FPS more realistic again they should bring the health bar back and stop making us kill ridiculous amounts of brainless soldiers. Look at COD1 in some of the levels you are only dealing with a handful of enemies at a time and the reason they were threatening is because in real life you can't take continuous bursts of machine gun fire and just walk it off. In that game it was hard to complete a level because getting shot with even a pistol round really caused a threat. Im not saying regenerating helath is bad. it worked well for the call of duty series in 2 and 4 but now it seems these games cling too much to that concept.
@psycho75 Thank you, glad to share some similar tastes. :) I agree about calling those two series "shooters." Extraction yes, but it's an on-rail, arcade shooter, and Dead Space 1 and 2 are third-person, survival horror games. Uncharted is easily a platformer/adventure with shooting elements, and that's it.
This happens every so often. It happened with side scrollers in the 16-bit era. It happened with fighting games, Tony Hawk, music games. It'll happene with something else after military shooters too.
@tes4eva Yeah.. almost every beginning of hitman was linear.. completely forgot about it.. thanks :P
@Soothsayer42 hitman absolution doesnt look too bad, there looked like theres many options to me. im sure you can go anywere in that library and remember death of a showman blood moneys first mission? extremely linear, more so than than what we seen so far. the only things i didnt like is the way you can see ppl behind walls and that its not even out yet and theres 2 more also in development. that might be genra fatigue right there
Well...people want fps ...so companies are making fps military shooters...if the sales drop, the military shooter idea drops as well..
yes, yes there are. but it could be that im just more attracted to more fictional action-y games. dont get me wrong, cod and bf3 are fun to play, but they're all boring me with the same old GET IN DER AND KILL 'EM SOLDIER. Haha.
did the europeans buy gamespot? whats the deal? is this to give a sense of an intelligence factor? yeah i said it! spot eating cheese and crackers and try something else... i didnt capitalize on purpose.
@Bulzeeb3088 yes,i can agree more with this term FPA,my concept of a FPS is a run and gun game with frenetic shootouts, witch is a very simple gameplay for my taste,Bioshock and Metroid Prime(good examples)are totally different beasts...as far as official genre definition goes i even heard some professionals calling Dead Space and Uncharted shooters...well,they are not...anyways you got good taste for games;)
I tell you that multiplayer shooter are cancer for the world gaming right now. Why would I said that? It's simple: Their huge sales of bazillion copies bceause of the multiplayer aspect have make many developer seemingly forced a multiplayer content to their game. And not rarely some game also have gone through drastic change so multiplayer can fit with them (Patapon3). Other than forced multiplayer content, the cancer also spread into story department. There are some games that cut short their campaign so people can focus to their multiplayer. Even worse is, that some series have their unique story signature changed with your generic shooter story(Ace Combat Assault Horizon).
@psycho75 Just going from the first line of the wiki, "Bioshock is a first person shooter." It is a shooter at its core gameplay, but Bioshock managed to do the same thing Metroid Prime or Half Life 2 did: engross the player in a world where the game doesn't feel like a first person shooter, which is why those three are my favorite FPS games, but maybe those are better described as an FPA (first person adventure.) @20years So far in 2K Boston's (Irrational Games) history, Bioshock is the first series to have more than two entries with the onset of Bioshock Infinite. I'm not worried about a game series being milked so long as the developers make the game feel fresh, unlike the CoD series and its brethren. Bioshock 2 was okay I guess, but Infinite looks astounding since the series is being taken to new heights (literally.)
The idea and concept behind LA Noire will be the future of gaming, or any game that offers cinematic experience both by feel and by graphics..... Multiplayer will also dominate the gaming scene..... What I haven't seen is a hybrid combination of Need for Speed The Run and Driver Parallel Lines...
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 is rumored to be released next year. It looks like we can now expect a new CoD game yearly then right? Here is an idea. How about Madden combine with CoD? Then EA and Activision will be able to dominate the world. I'm being sarcastic of course but yes CoD is losing steam. It may not show in sales though. I work at a game store and most of the customers trading in CoD3 say it's too much like CoD2. Madden 12 this year is arguably one of the weaker additions in the series. With only a year of development between games these games can only improve so much. On a separate note: Activision killed the Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero franchises. Can we expect the CoD series to suffer from the same fate?
Speaking of gameplay changes... anyone seen the Hitman 5 gameplay?? Its done... hitman is now a linear game :(
this is one of the way how the illuminatis controlling our mind... they made us having bad impression and think that other country is evil even it is not like that in reality. in other means those illuminatis wanted us to start war for nothing.. besides that those games are so addictive.. they also want to ruin our health and life, for example playing cod online for long hours until we forget what is the importance and the beauty of life.. we can see these in any cod an bf series that we play... so why not we stop getting these kind of games and i believe they will stop creating it... this is only my opinion for the sake of humanity... thank you to all and God bless..
in gaming there needs to be a focus between single and multiplayer. the devs need just choose one. bf and cod should just focus on a good refined mp experience. homefront, crysis, bioshock, on sp. games would be alot better if there was only one focus and not multiple
Thank Craptivision, I don't mind the Battlefield series though but I hope they don't rush Bad Company 3 to beat out MW4. In addition, NO military shooters are not getting old, look at the sales...
Although many of the points made in this video are correct when it comes to single-player games it is ultimately very flawed when it comes to the Battlefield series in particular. To compare the tired game engine and small maps to BF3 multi-player is not accurate at all. But then again this community in particular seems to not be fond of shooters and GS are worst of all in this respect. First they kiss developer's asses then get angry because their mouths taste like ass. After all it wasn't until MW3 they actually marked the game down for being the same as it was for the past 5 years. Yet a game like BF3 that has not truly been released for 6 or so years gets very little praise for better graphics and larger maps.