It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
keeveek: haha, I tried to play Quake 2 split screen with my friend on PSX. This was a disaster :D
I tried to play Serious Sam, on PS2. Oops!
avatar
Kristian: TotalBiscuit certainly has some excellent points. But there are things I like with modern games. In particular I like games that tell their story ala Half-Life 2.
avatar
keeveek: HL2 tells a story? Sorry, but after leaving "for an adventure" the game was mostly driving, driving, swimming, more driving and shooting your way through on some stops.

I got bored after few hours of this and never again. But maybe I will go back to HL2 one day...
Thank you, the vehicle sections ruined the game for me.
I loved the first Half life. :)
When I think of Half-Life, I don't think about "telling a story" in any way, I think about the stark mood of "being alone" in strange environments, in fact HL is probably a good example of a formula that works best with no plot arc at all, maybe a bit of a story at the start to set it up, but then just environmental exploration and shooting. HL2, especially the episodes, tried to put too much story into the game and suffered for it
Players complain too much about games when they should spend more time playing them. I also think players who look for "imagination" or "story" in military shooters are playing them on SP, and not with friends (how they're meant to be played), and that's why they get bored.

Also, I don't understand why players feel compelled to complain about games which don't appeal to them. If you don't like broccoli, do you go around complaining about why everyone else likes broccoli, or that they eat it.

And seriously, these internet celebrities are the worst offenders of this kind of stuff because they don't have anything else going on; making shit storms out of shit nuggets, just the worst kind of people.
avatar
227: ...but the comparison between them and the newer ones is reminiscent of when people try to compare jRPGs and western RPGs. The similarities—a first-person view and guns—are superficial and they're often trying to achieve completely different things, so obviously there will be significant differences between the two. That's not really going backwards so much as stepping to the side, though, more an "apples and oranges" situation than an actual regression. Maybe we should start calling modern shooters "first-person stories" to avoid the comparison.
Thanks, now I don't have to say it.

Secondly, this guy conveniently forgets to mention a butt load of FPS games which came in "modern times" and are not milsims or military shooters; I would know since I've played them. It seems what he's complaining about is why his favourite type of product is not more popular; how juvenile.

Moreover, players who complain about the "lack of imagination" of certain military games are out of touch with actual modern warfare- these games have accurately portrayed it thus far, and the reason these games look similar is because their subject matter has remained unchanged.

Also, why shouldn't some games be free from fantasy elements? We don't need mutants, aliens or robots in every FPS- the ones which have them are enough.

Regardless, games are not perfect (not that I'd want them to be), but I like it when developers work hard on their game to provide a great playing experience. The only things I would like in some military shooters are advanced and challenging AI and better maps.
Of course not. The man is blinded by nostalgia. Once upon a time his tastes were catered to, that time was the 90's, now companies are targeting another demographic with different tastes. He just needs to accept that those games are not made for him.
I tried to play Doom once. I hated the controls and wasn't super fond of anything else, so I stopped. Doom 3 was better.

Oh, and regenerating health is a better game mechanic then health packs.
Post edited July 11, 2013 by BadDecissions
low rated
avatar
DaCostaBR: Of course not. The man is blinded by nostalgia. Once upon a time his tastes were catered to, that time was the 90's, now companies are targeting another demographic with different tastes. He just needs to accept that those games are not made for him.
Actually, if anything what is happening is that the original Xbox generation have grown up and are beginning to realize that the games that are being sold to them are pure shit. They liked them when they were younger, but once one reaches adulthood the appeal of "hyper-spastic cut-scene-infected Press-X-To-Win Buy-9.99$-DLC-To-Reload-Gun US military racist Muslim/Russian-killing simulator broshooters" starts to wear off.

If anything it's the casuals who should be afraid, because people listen to TB and he influences opinions. Who is going to openly stand up and defend the modern military shooter style of game? No-one, they like and play them in secret, thus they are doomed.
avatar
BadDecissions: I tried to play Doom once. I hated the controls and wasn't super fond of anything else, so I stopped. Doom 3 was better.

Oh, and regenerating health is a better game mechanic then health packs.
Moron.
Post edited July 11, 2013 by Crosmando
He's right for most FPS games. I mean for those cases if they can be considered games, I mean just stand there and let the AI handle all the shooting for you.
I don't think the regen health mechanic is bad per se, as long as harder modes of the game provide sufficient challenge or enjoyable gameplay, it doesn't matter to me if someone else likes to play an easy game with regen health.

What's moronic is expecting people to play games in exactly your style.
Well, it would be better if we could just have a solid separation and re-definition of the genres.

MMS (Modern Military Shooter) - Call of Duty, Battlefield, Modern Warfare, Medal of Honor, Far Cry, etc.

FPS (First Person Shooter), or Traditional FPS - Doom, Quake, Hexen, Heretic, Duke Nukem 3D, Shadow Warrior, Blood, etc.

And never shall the streams be crossed.

Though the new Rise of the Triad reboot gives me hope the "True FPS" might be making a comeback.
What would Darkness II go under? That is hardly an MMS, and it's too slow and linear paced to be a Traditional FPS.
Post edited July 11, 2013 by CthuluIsSpy
avatar
Crosmando: Well, it would be better if we could just have a solid separation and re-definition of the genres.

MMS (Modern Military Shooter) - Call of Duty, Battlefield, Modern Warfare, Medal of Honor, Far Cry, etc.

FPS (First Person Shooter), or Traditional FPS - Doom, Quake, Hexen, Heretic, Duke Nukem 3D, Shadow Warrior, Blood, etc.

And never shall the streams be crossed.

Though the new Rise of the Triad reboot gives me hope the "True FPS" might be making a comeback.
So you apparently separated games without fantasy elements and those which have them, and you included FC in the former category. Have you even played FC?

Moreover, you realize that such a distinction already exists, in a way, and there are enough games for people who like different styles. That's why this complaining comes off as a juvenile attempt to force everyone to like what one personally likes, which is just unnecessary.

Not to mention, I think drawing severe boundaries between games is also unnecessary, and personally I wouldn't want it because I like it when games mix genres or have unexpected elements in them.
Post edited July 11, 2013 by cmdr_flashheart
avatar
jepsen1977: Ah nostalgia - you gotta love this shit! Everything was always so much better back in the "old days" when men were men, and consoles were used to wipe your ass with. So he mentions 3 good shooters from those days and then says that shows how the FPS have devolved into pure horseshit - but the simple fact is that I can easily name 3 great modern FPS that are fantastic: Far Cry 3/FC3 Blooddragon, Crysis 1 and Borderlands and maybe even throw Bioshock into there aswell and FEAR series.
And lets not forget the Doom clones back in the day that were terrible plus lets not forget how frustrating it could be to not be able to find that damn keycard anywhere in the level and be stuck for fucking days trying to hunt that fucking thing down in a maze-like level design. Old FPS where not better and 3Drealm created DN3d for the very same reasons that Infinity Ward creates MW-games and that's for profit.
Yes, FPS have changed over the years but it's not all for the worse. Regen health is not better or worse than big floating boxes called med-packs - it just creates different gameplay.
I'm happy that we got games like Half Life 1/2 NOLF 2, Deus Ex, Medal of Honor, Call of Duty 1 etc. and not just Doom 8 and Duke Nukem 3D 11 and Blood 7.
Trends change in the gaming industry and fast-paced FPS went out of style and that sucks but don't kid yourself into thinking that everything was so much better 20 years ago because it was not.
avatar
Crosmando: Pure bullshit. Health regen creates worse gameplay. Finding items provided incentives to explore the larger maps and find secrets. While health regen just incentivized staying behind a wall and waiting.
But finding secrets and exploring is NOT better gameplay - it's just different. You like that kind of FPS and that's great, then go play Stalker, Serious Sam or Painkiller They all cater to your wants when it comes to games. Vote with your wallet and buy the games you like but don't attack people that have a different taste than you when you can't even support your opinion with anything else than insults. There are bad games today just like there was bad games 20 years ago. If you are old enough you should know this because those of us who played games back then mostly remember all the shit we got back then just like we remember the shit we get now. Times change and trends change and so does the games that are being made. But that's how it's always been.
avatar
Crosmando: Pure bullshit. Health regen creates worse gameplay. Finding items provided incentives to explore the larger maps and find secrets. While health regen just incentivized staying behind a wall and waiting.
avatar
jepsen1977: But finding secrets and exploring is NOT better gameplay - it's just different. You like that kind of FPS and that's great, then go play Stalker, Serious Sam or Painkiller They all cater to your wants when it comes to games. Vote with your wallet and buy the games you like but don't attack people that have a different taste than you when you can't even support your opinion with anything else than insults. There are bad games today just like there was bad games 20 years ago. If you are old enough you should know this because those of us who played games back then mostly remember all the shit we got back then just like we remember the shit we get now. Times change and trends change and so does the games that are being made. But that's how it's always been.
One would hope it'd be that simple, but it isn't. We're seeing variety being neglected in shooters, so y'can't just play the ones with elements that appeal to you because they're not being made. After that you can only imagine how those elements could have been implemented with the kind of resources that the popular ones get.
avatar
BadDecissions: I tried to play Doom once. I hated the controls and wasn't super fond of anything else, so I stopped. Doom 3 was better.

Oh, and regenerating health is a better game mechanic then health packs.
avatar
Crosmando: Moron.
I am starting to wonder now - are you actually incapable of engaging with somone who have other opinions than yourself without insulting them?