Do you think there are too many FPS games these days? - Games

[QUOTE=ventnor;25420404]Staying in trenches and using gas, WWI would be boring - sort of.[/QUOTE] God damn it. WW1 was not just sitting in trenches waiting to get mortared. The early years were highly mobile and there was a lot of experimentation. The Eastern front was more like WW2 than when TV would have you think.

Too many FPS? No. Too many of the SAME FPS? Yes.

[QUOTE=OutOfExile2;25425459]Also OP RTS games are nowhere near forgotten. Halo Wars is just a console RTS made by some obscure company that slapped Halo onto it, while Halo Reach is a major release. People still play and make lots of RTS games on PC, it's just a fairly niche genre compared to FPS games.[/QUOTE] Emsemble was an obscure company? I thought the creators of Age of Empires would be a big deal. Looks like I was wrong.

Too many realistic Fps games. Not enough non-serious ones like TF2.

[QUOTE=Synelor;25419844]I hate modern war games. Like MW2, BC2, MoH and so on. Not that they are bad, but they are so dull and look and play the same. Developers need to be more creative.[/QUOTE] I agree. If only it had actually been tactical, then I'd have nothing against it, but the fact that 99% of the players do nothing but follow very simple orders, or rush in for the kill and die.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;25426061]Emsemble was an obscure company? I thought the creators of Age of Empires would be a big deal. Looks like I was wrong.[/QUOTE] I meant more of the fact that Bungie didn't make it. When people look at a Halo game and don't see Bungie they don't care about it as much as if it were to have that on it.

I want more racing games, like the new Hot Pursuit. Is that so hard?

Who cares? Don't buy them.

Most FPS' are similar and I usually get bored pretty soon, and besides Halo, I have probably put more hours into the vanilla oblivion than all the other fps' combined.

I don't think there's too many, just that there's too many almost exactly the same. Why don't people do anything new nowadays?

I'm okay with a bunch of FPS games but I don't want them generic pew pew. I would like wolfenstien (new one) kind of play with powers. Or Darkest of Days (but better). I just want more original games

I miss good ol' base building RTS games. Like Red alert 2 and Act of War.

A little.

[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;25426911]I miss good ol' base building RTS games. Like Red alert 2 and Act of War.[/QUOTE] Red Alert 2....i haven't heard that name in a long time. Those Tesla Tanks.... Damn, good times. but honestly, the only FPS's i enjoy are the Half-Life series, the Left 4 Dead series and Killing Floor. And S.T.A.L.K.E.R. but that's a RPS. Killing Floor is amazing stress relief, and while it's not anything tremendously groundbreaking, it's a nice change and the aussie accents are hilarious. Left 4 Dead is..well, it's a great zombie game. Half-Life is just amazing in my opinion and it sure as hell is original. I haven't seen anyone come up with such a story as Valve did for their hit. Team Fortress Classic was nice for a while just because of that massive mindless carnage, but Team Fortress 2 was ruined to me by people thinking about hats, not the game itself. And now the store and various other items...it just killed it for me. So basically, there are very many good FPS's, just that people obviously try to cling on the bad ones and sweep the good ones under the mat to try prove their point.

I never really thought about it, but yeah, I guess there are a lot more FPS games these days. Maybe it's a bandwagon thing. Companies are realizing that some of the biggest titles like Half-Life 2, Halo, Call of Duty, Bioshock, Crysis, etc, are all FPS games and they assume everyone will buy an FPS game without question. What I have been thinking about is why we haven't had a truly awesome FPS game with a jetpack lately.

I think whats lacking is another big RPG, in the same style of Elder Scrolls or Might and Magic.. At least for me.

FPSs are becoming too linear and repetitive. Most of the other key genres have now reached a stage where every time you play, your experience will be at least slightly different than the last time you played it (e.g. RPGs, simulations, strategy, and some other games in other genres like the trackmania series and audiosurf). Also, they have started reusing the same mechanics across the board, with the major differences between the common shooter is probably a name and colour palette change. When you compare the top shooters of the past few years (CoD, Halo, etc) there are fewer differences between the different series compared to when you look at the top RPGs for example (Mass Effect 2, Fallout 3, Torchlight). Another thing worth noting is that indie game titles aren't usually FPS games. Think of all the top indie titles over the past decade: Cave Story, Gish, World of Goo, Darwinia, flOw, Mine Craft, Dwarf Fortress, and indie games are what provide the fresh new mechanics to genres. These indie games are usually successful because they are different. It's like evolution in some ways. You have your genre, and what is considered the standard things to have in these games, but then you have these small developers come along and make a few changes to the formula, add a few new things, maybe even take some stuff out, and they take risks. Why? Because they can; they don't have stock holders to please, or hundreds of thousands of fans hungering for WW2: the shooter: 9 or Space Marines 7. And when they take these risks, many of these games will be quickly forgotten, but some will shine, and then with this success they may be picked up by a larger company, and there interesting and new mechanic may be added to this standard. But to sum up: Do I think there are too many FPS games these days? yes Why? they are becoming too linear and uncreative. What should change? Maybe a few more indie FPSs, or maybe even the big companies need to start taking some risks, even if it costs you some whiny fans.

It's the same as always they're just more popular with people who would usually not play games.

There are no more point and click adventure games because technology has advanced past the point where they were popular, point and click is largely an archaic relic of the past. There are less third person platformers because the largest audience of gamers is getting older, and are no linger interested in furry animals jumping about running from mad scientists.

In terms of mechanics there's only so many times you can reinvent the wheel. Only a few have things that can make them stand out. The SMART system in Brink, the cover system in some newer fps's like Killzone 2, Destruction in Bad Company, hell, even physics and HL2. Could these games survive without them? Yes. Would they be as fun? No. What I'm trying to say is that the only reason we feel that there are many fps games is because many lack a spark. The games I mentioned have, to one extent or another, brought something new, whether you consider it a gimmick or not is a different story because you can argue either way for all of them. By having some new thing, they can separate themselves from the pack. The problem is that not many games do that anymore. Its safer to create a modern shooter in the style of CoD and make a quick buck. While some people complain (mainly facepunch,) most don't care, so game companies can continue to spew lackluster fps's out without much thought.

[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/videogamestate.jpg[/img] Maybe it isn't a question of there being too many, but a question of originality?

That image always bugged me because the only way Killzone 3 is similar is the fact that it uses the same gun as the other 2, which is an extremely common gun so it's understandable. I mean the game takes place in a freaking ice planet where you fight snow nazis can that really be compared to MW games?

Platformers blow, I was tempted to hit disagree when you started saying "Where are the good old 2D/3D platformer games on the consoles?" But I still agree there are too many shooters. We need more RPGs, RTSs, and pretty much everything else...

We need more innovative shooters. I'm tired of this camping garbage, TF2 is the only game I have found where it doesn't happen.

We need more physics-based shooters.

I want a WW1 RTS. Turtling and rushing to the extreme.

[QUOTE=16bit;25431237]I want a WW1 RTS. Turtling and rushing to the extreme.[/QUOTE] Toy Soldiers is the closest thing.

Developers make what the market demands.

I want a GT5 / Forza equivalent for the PC

Yeah. There was actually a game I was looking at in a magazine and I thought it looked pretty cool, then I read FPS and threw the magazine (it's XBox exclusive, not even PC). Pictures were misleading as most contained shots of the protagonist from a 3rd person perspective. [editline]16th October 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Victor Leferve;25428650][img_thumb]http://filesmelt.com/dl/videogamestate.jpg[/img_thumb] Maybe it isn't a question of there being too many, but a question of originality?[/QUOTE] Ridiculous. There's an old man I work with who is hardcore into these games, preorders them and most of our videogame discussion consists of the latest FPS craze, and I think it's cool that such an old dude can be into videogames, but sometimes I want him to shut the fuck up and discuss another genre for once. Christ, just a flash game would be a nice departure from his talk about slick graphics and weapon variety. [editline]16th October 2010[/editline] How can there be an almost 50/50 split in the poll? Are you people fucking blind?