Welcome to Tactical Gamer

User Tag List

Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    jex's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,580
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    The future of FPS's

    Spoken to some and read what others have made of Doom 3 (not a good write up in the Times over here - one of our better, more respected papers) and to be honest I've been put off it (even though I can get a *cough*copy*cough*). I got a *cough*copy*cough* of farcry and I'm glad I never bought it. I played the first few levels and gave up, bored. Now it seems as though Doom 3, whilst initially starts off good becomes mundane and predictable - totally linear with no re-playability to it.

    Is it me or are FPS's starting to lack in gameplay? When I played farcry I couldn't shake the feeling that I was playing a mismatch of previous FPS's bundled into this. Is my FPS love affair is coming to an end or are developers concentrating too much on graphics, and not enough on story/gameplay?
    Jex.


  2.  
  3. #2

    =Sarc='s Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,082
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: The future of FPS's

    I think Doom 3 is at least a try-out like Far Cry to see advancements in physics, graphics and animation. It's nice to see what can be done even if the story isn't amazing. I've never been intrigued with game stories. I always forget what's going on and am more concerned with game play. I think if we want a good story for multiplayer we should look for a role-playing game. It's a much better platform for playing out a story.

    Multiplayer is much more important in games these days. I consider a game to be excellent when it has a good implementation of multiplayer. GR and OFP have good co-op capability because of the simple scripting system for maps. It makes it easy for custom missions that helps keep co-op alive. Savage is a pretty good game for team play. I've never experienced full voice comm play but it's not bad without it. Plus, the commander can issue orders that the player can easily understand. Players have to work together in order to win and kills mean little and is reflected by awards at the end of the match. There is one award for most kills but there are several other awards such as most experience, damage to enemy structures, and best healer. JO has been really good multiplayer because I like the requirement of numbers in the zone to capture it. The experience breakdown also encourages defensive kills and other tasks that help the team out.

    Graphics does get a little old and hopefully developers will remember that a powerhouse graphics engine will not make up for bad game play, sound or any other aspect of a game. I would really like to see teamwork considered when developers design a game. They should implement features that encourage teamwork because it's what multiplayer gaming is all about. It's the reason team sports are so fun. We're there on the court playing with players we know. The same relationships can form with multiplayer gaming. One of the problems with current voice comm software is it's the only method of communicating quickly. It's not like real life where we can talk to those around us and use the radio for those far away. In games we're using the radio to talk to those two feet away. I would be really pleased if developers could implement a voice comm system where it knows when we want to talk to someone close by and want to radio someone far away.
    JO Guides & Tutorials
    Team Element - It's who you game with.

  4.  
  5. #3

    jex's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,580
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: The future of FPS's

    Sorry by story I meant having a good plot to enhance the actual play. I'm not talking about bogging down the player with lots of information to take in, but a decent story, followed by different parts.

    Look at HALO - complete and utter drivvel. How many levels were just exactly the same as the previous. To me this game really sucked and you started to freak out, thinking would you ever get passed the room which only alternates its reflection and you had to go through it 10 times in a row before going over the same bridge and then the same damn room again.

    To me no imagination went into that. Everything looked the same and I didn't feel like I was going anywhere. The same with farcry, everything had this samey feel about it with predictable parts to it. What I'd like to see is a lot more imagination going into games. Something to keep the player guessing rather than the continous go through door, blast monster. Go through door, blast monster.

    Some ingenuity would be nice. Surprise the player with something completely different. I don't really care what it is, but something original
    Jex.


  6.  

  7. #4

    =Sarc='s Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,082
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: The future of FPS's

    Quote Originally Posted by jex
    Look at HALO - complete and utter drivvel. How many levels were just exactly the same as the previous. To me this game really sucked and you started to freak out, thinking would you ever get passed the room which only alternates its reflection and you had to go through it 10 times in a row before going over the same bridge and then the same damn room again.
    That is exactly what I thought with Halo. It looks like somebody just found out about Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V. I heard all these good things about it being great but I guess it's amazing on the XBox where OFP doesn't exist.

    I don't really care about plot so much when playing a SP game. If it's got lots of action and gore, I'll be fine. Games just don't do it for me when I want a good story. I'll go read a book or watch a movie. Although, Doom 3 does progress the story in interesting ways. The PDA is an integral part of learning what kind of research was done at the station. It has audio logs and video recordings to help explain the weirdness going on. Then there's the guy that speaks to you through the radio. He gives orders and tells you to move faster to get something done. There's also this one point where somebody communicates to you through a video panel. His face actually shows up on a couple of screens. It actually progresses the story in a different way. I don't know if it's been done like this before but it sure hasn't been done very often.

    Thief 3 progresses the story in an interesting way too. As a thief, you sneak around reading books and notes to find out more about what's going on or even some side plot. There's also hiding in shadows to listen in on conversations. There are pre-rendered videos but every game has that and it is an effective method of conveying information. It forces the player to watch so they don't miss out on something big.

    I think some games will be crappy at revealing the plot but there will be some games out there that have a really good way of telling a story. For me, I don't care too much about the story unless it's absolutely horrible. I play a lot of action games so that's what I look for in a game. I guess we all have to find a game that suits us.
    JO Guides & Tutorials
    Team Element - It's who you game with.

  8.  
  9. #5


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    926
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: The future of FPS's

    hmmm..

    Good questions and observations.

    As far as single player FPShooters go, the storyline really does make a difference to me. Farcry wasn't too bad once you got a handle on how the AI reacts, and the story gets progressively better (until the end).

    I've read diff reviews of doom3, and they all start to point to repetitive level designs. Though nowhere near as bad as Halo (I uninstalled that POS after 4-5 bridge/room combinations), doom does soud like more of a proof of concept graphics demonstration.

    I also like the idea of designing multiplayer teams that encourage teamwork. I'm curious as to how that would be designed into a FPS as a requirement, rather than an option? for example, in JO, there are many diff. soldier classes to choose from, and a well-rounded team will do better. There's nothing in the game design that FORCES that cohesiveness though. If there were something that was too restrictive in designing teamwork be playable for the public masses?

    I'm sure there's some creative people out there that can strike that balance, just not sure I've seen it yet.


    --kinda off topic, but did anything ever come of soldner? This is one of the games I saw as fostering teamwork pretty well, seems to have fallen off the edge of the earth. Is this totally becasue of the poor portal design, or was the game too restrictive as well?

  10.  
  11. #6

    jex's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,580
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: The future of FPS's

    Soldner? LOL I read a review of the game and I think they had to review after they patched it, which they said is something they don't normally do. They then went on to say it was a POS software. Soldner was basically OFP but with worse graphical terrains (imo) and weird looking vehicles (I actually prefer the OFP ones, they look rugged and 'there' whereas Soldner vehicles look plastic and just wrong).

    It's a pity really as it could have had huge potential but as soon as I got hold of the demo I was actually wondering what took them so long to code? A few crappy buildings, a mundane, boring terrain, comedy cross-hairs and and clunky interface. I think they spent too much time adding the 50,000 different ways you can make your character look (and most of the choices= look sh*t).

    Whatever they did they killed the game as far as I'm concerned. The OFP style game really does it for me because you have everything there for you. You have the vehicles, the large maps, the weapons, etc. The only thing properly lacking is decent buildings. Once they can implement detailed buildings into these games (please ofp2 please) then we really will be spoiled for choice. Couple all that with a kickass MED, a fully modelable source code and decent AI, and you're onto a winner I reckon. With all of that you should be able to make just about any scenario you like. OFP has it already, it just needs bringing up to speed on it's graphics and buildings and maybe better AI.

    OFP2 has been pushed back to spring 2006 though. Still rather a finished product that works than something like Joint Ops that doesn't. It's still a damn long time to wait though
    Jex.


  12.  

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Back to top