# [Rant] Why Don't All FPS Do This?



## Bambi (Feb 19, 2009)

Whether we're forced to back-track through recently completed levels, or whether we're additionally and constantly defaulted to battle repetive, unexciting, and predictable artificial intelligence(s), _we all know how terrible and boring some modern, First Person Shooter trends can be._

However in an attempt to diversify gameplay that would otherwise appear like an incomplete project, what would some of you like to do? We may have talked about the things that annoy us, but what about the things we'd like to see video games deal with next?

Imagine something with the graphical capabilities of the source engine, mixed in with something like what Bad Company or Red Faction had to offer concerning it's destructible environments. So, what would we all like to see change, or what would you create in order to make the FPS genre look like more than just some other tree in another forest? 

For example, how about the never ending conga-line of World War 2 shooters?

It's been my opinion that they've all suffered some sort of mediocracy because every developer keeps wanting to recreate only the moments when the allies are winning, and not when they're defeated or face a stalemate. Heck, what about something from the German side of things? Might not sound too politically correct, but wouldn't this open up the door for more campaigns inside the Low Countries, Poland, or even Greece?

I mean, if I kept my screenshots from the PC release of Medal of Honor: Allied Assault, up until the present day with our modern-WWII shooters, you would literally be able to see a graphical evolution of beach invasions as they've been presented to us in the past nine years. What would you guys do? Any thoughts? I would personally like to introduce more customization for FPS in multiplayer matches -- to really allow the players to define themselves would be a wish come true.


----------



## lilEmber (Feb 19, 2009)

Bad company looks better than source....

Forstbite Engine on the PC (BF1943) will be sweet.

I'd like to see better weapon models, more realism in the weapons; modifications from barrels to how many bullets, loading, and etc. 

I want to be able to place tracer rounds as the last two bullets in a mag to know it's near empty. 

I want to be able to swap out a barrel for a longer one or a different caliber one. 

I want to see all the internal working parts as well the weapon being destructible as well jamming/degrading over long periods of time with you having to do a minigame of field stripping and cleaning the weapons you use outside the game; not necessary, but will make it jam a lot less and keep it shiny, but not overly needed to be done.

And so very, very much more to do with weapons such as firing speeds, ranges, and accuracies.

With this exact level of detail I want on vehicles (land, air, and sea) as well.


----------



## makmakmob (Feb 19, 2009)

I agree with you here.

I always got the impression it was just blind patriotism (on everybody's part, not just the Americans) or maybe political correctness. That, or most FPS gamers want to feel like they're always winning. I mean, most of the 'gamers' I know are complete and utter losers with nothing else going for them.


----------



## Attaman (Feb 19, 2009)

We need more FPS's on the quality of Deus Ex.  Not more Halo- / WWII-clones in an attempt to milk the cash cow.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Feb 19, 2009)

I've always wanted to play an FPS set during the Revolutionary War, or better yet the French Revolution of 1789.  Use the physics engine to construct a barricade in the streets of Paris, then stand atop it while hordes of soldiers come try to blow your head off!  It'd be fun; like SimCity, only with guns and a need for tactical placement of your barricades.  And it'd be hella easy to get a multiplayer thing going for it.  Like CS, only your choices would be the militia and the revolutionaries.
And then someone makes a mod so you can use automatic weapons, and it gets hilarious.  Wouldn't that be neat?  At least it'd be different, anyhow.  I agree we need that.  As Yahtzee pointed out, the Medal of Honor series has been going on longer than the entire period of US involvement during the second world war.  Let's see something new.
But of course making an FPS set during a time when weapons took five minutes to reload would be a huge risk for the developer that decides to do it.  If they could pull it off, though....


----------



## Bambi (Feb 19, 2009)

M. Le Renard said:


> Let's see something new.
> But of course making an FPS set during a time when weapons took five minutes to reload would be a huge risk for the developer that decides to do it. If they could pull it off, though....


 
Shooting wouldn't have to be the only element -- and this is were I begin my dissent: Is it that necessary for shooters to bottle-up their content and not diversify?

Why not develop other elements of the game aswell? I mean, if developers approached the subject with an open-mind (concerning your ideas), I'm sure that they could turn out the results. For example, if a musket rifle takes about a minute to reload, develop the games melee combat as a means to balance or compliment that primary element.


----------



## Term_the_Schmuck (Feb 19, 2009)

M. Le Renard said:


> I've always wanted to play an FPS set during the Revolutionary War, or better yet the French Revolution of 1789.



They made a Civil War FPS.  It bombed.  Having to wait at least a minute to reload your musket for a single shot =/= fun.


----------



## Rifter (Feb 19, 2009)

People don't want to shoot their own grandfathers. That's about it, really.


----------



## Yakamaru (Feb 19, 2009)

There are alot of things i miss in FPS games.

Going to list up a few.

1. Completely destructable environments. This is what i really miss. For example, fire a rocket launcher at the ground, or a wall or something. If it were real life, that WOULD make a hole. Same thing with grenades, flashbangs and anything explosive. It WOULD leave a permanent mark.

2. Weapons should be customizable, very customizable. I've never really seen a game where for example your M4 Carbine or Desert Eagle could be  customized to the point where it looks like a new weapon. Or customize a rocket launcher with the ability to have several rockets installed on it, for that matter. 

3. Have been mentioned before, though. Accuracy of weapons. 
Take Call Of Duty, for example. The Crosshair is so damn BIG, it's hard to hit anything, even at point-blank range. Might as well just grab your knife and kill everyone with your knife instead. Even with any type of Sniper Rifle i had big problems hitting anything, even if the damn target stood still. Pisses me off..

4. Campaigns from all sides. Very many games have the campaigns only for one or a few of the sides in a conflict. 
I miss jumping into an Axis Panzer IV or VI Tank (BF1942), and shoot some English or Americans. Or a Japanese Zero, and bomb people to the Stoneage, for that matter. 

5. Vehicles. Some games got them, others don't. Some good, some bad. Some games that NEED vehicles, does not have them, and the ones that actually have vehicles, have too few types. Take Halo 2, for example. You have one type of recon vehicle, tank and flyer for each faction. Some heavy weaponry for the Covenant, though, but that's about it. I want to fly a Covenant Dropship, or a Human Dropship. Hell, even a spacecraft through space.

6. Weapon Types. Some games got a considerable amount of weapon  types, some doesn't. The Halo series had some really good, and powerful weapons, while some were EXTREMELY useless. The SMG and the Covenant Needler are two examples. (Use a whole fucking magazine on a Covenant with a shield in Easy mode? WTF?!)

Anyway, i got more i could list up, but that would just make this post even more boring. My 2 cents.


----------



## Dusty (Feb 19, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Bad company looks better than source....
> 
> Forstbite Engine on the PC (BF1943) will be sweet.
> 
> ...



The closest the real time decay and jamming your going to get is Farcry 2 (it actually does a really good job) does a little bit worse of vehicles.  You can turn your cross hair off on all the guns and be forced to use the Ironsights.  The weapons themselves are a tad unrealistic (a 3 round burst from and M16 doesn't kill a person thats completely un armored.)


----------



## Attaman (Feb 19, 2009)

Yakamaru said:


> There are alot of things i miss in FPS games.
> 
> Going to list up a few.
> 
> 1. Completely destructable environments. This is what i really miss. For example, fire a rocket launcher at the ground, or a wall or something. If it were real life, that WOULD make a hole. Same thing with grenades, flashbangs and anything explosive. It WOULD leave a permanent mark.


  So, sort of like the first Red Faction game but with even less "You can't boom this"?



> 2. Weapons should be customizable, very customizable. I've never really seen a game where for example your M4 Carbine or Desert Eagle could be  customized to the point where it looks like a new weapon. Or customize a rocket launcher with the ability to have several rockets installed on it, for that matter.


  Deus Ex.  Oh so very customizable weapons.



> 3. Have been mentioned before, though. Accuracy of weapons.
> Take Call Of Duty, for example. The Crosshair is so damn BIG, it's hard to hit anything, even at point-blank range. Might as well just grab your knife and kill everyone with your knife instead. Even with any type of Sniper Rifle i had big problems hitting anything, even if the damn target stood still. Pisses me off..


  The problem is less that they're inaccurate than there's only two possibilities:  "Hit only at close range", "Hit even at far range".  Movement - if it has any penalties - are all-or-none.



> 4. Campaigns from all sides. Very many games have the campaigns only for one or a few of the sides in a conflict.
> I miss jumping into an Axis Panzer IV or VI Tank (BF1942), and shoot some English or Americans. Or a Japanese Zero, and bomb people to the Stoneage, for that matter.


  Yes, need more BF1942-style WWII games (that is, if we ever need more WWII games).


----------



## lilEmber (Feb 19, 2009)

Dusty said:


> The closest the real time decay and jamming your going to get is Farcry 2 (it actually does a really good job) does a little bit worse of vehicles.  You can turn your cross hair off on all the guns and be forced to use the Ironsights.  The weapons themselves are a tad unrealistic (a 3 round burst from and M16 doesn't kill a person thats completely un armored.)



I own that game, it's pretty good you're right and it's correct when a 3-round burst doesn't kill a unarmored person, in real life it just passed through them with no stopping power, they do go down but get up (unrealistic) but they'd be alive.

Also guns really don't wear down that fast....


----------



## Dusty (Feb 19, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I own that game, it's pretty good you're right and it's correct when a 3-round burst doesn't kill a unarmored person, in real life it just passed through them with no stopping power, they do go down but get up (unrealistic) but they'd be alive.
> 
> Also guns really don't wear down that fast....




If they made it a realistic time scale you would never notice it jam unless you dunked it in mud   Also the AR-15 fires a 5.56 NATO round which is designed to tumble and shred flesh when it hits a target. -Army Nerdism


----------



## Digitalpotato (Feb 20, 2009)

I've always wanted to see an FPS in which you're a mage knight in an era of Colonial times (or Victorian England) and use flashy spell effects, enchanted weaponry, magical talismans instead of just taking out a gun and killing everything that moved. 

Or maybe an FPS that's actually attempting to be like those old first-person dungeon crawler games? With today's technology, you can EASILY do it without making the navigation feel annoying and dull. 

Or maybe an FPS where everything actually ISN'T depressing shades of brown and gray? Where the government actually ISN'T Evil and doesn't use environmental machines to amke the sun go supernova and chocolate rain from the sky? (Even if the graphical choice was a little fitting for Far Cry 2 since Southern AFrica does kind of look like that...and in Crysis 2 because they actually didn't hire colourblinde graphical designers) 

Or...wait...a multiplayer that's not so much a multi-player, but a CO-OP?! How often do you hear of anyone doing co-op in an FPS nowadays? Multiplayer is more or less just synonymous with "Cock-measuring", "Death Match" and "Capture-the-flag".


----------



## TehSean (Feb 20, 2009)

Design is Law.

The current Law is: WW2


----------



## Adrianfolf (Feb 20, 2009)

I hope you guys do realize that in order to get a lot of the effects you want would require more processing power than currently avaible right?


----------



## Teco (Feb 20, 2009)

ShadowRun 2, because shadowrun was that only game where I felt like I could be a hero of a sort. Most FPS i've played make players play the roles of just, ordinary soldiers you could say, with no hero among them except for that dude with 5:1 K/d.

I just rented FEAR 2 over last week and Im tempted to get it for PC for the multiplayer, because they made close combat melee attacks different and fun as hell. There is no better rush than slide tackling around a corner to take a sniper out, jump kick his buddy in the corner, peek into a hole in the wall to see a dude crouch walking to get to the otherside where you are at, back up and then sprint up and jump kick perfectly as he's coming out. 

Halo 2 and 3 kinda did this hero effect too, but it only usually happened with a power weapon or stickies... oh plasma grenades..<3 How I love taking out whole, clustered teams from across the map with you.

Its not first person but you could also do this in Gears of War.

more games where you dont die several seconds after you spawn and if you have the most skill and wit you steamroll. Not "Spawn. Walk forward. random grenade. Spawn into a group of enemies, right in the middle, and for some strange reason they ALL see you spawn." I do not want, "Kill 2 for every one death" concept.

And on the topic of WW2, come on, why not glorify the historic war that stopped a world domination plot. Seems pretty epic to me and atleast they're covering all the parts of the war and not just one part over and over, but in my experience most people are pretty sick of WW2 games, my one friend wont even touch them. 

I laugh at who ever isnt looking at a quarter of the usernames out there and going. "Hey.... I think snipers are up there with pirates and ninjas!" And made a game focusing on sniping... an epic game, a copy and paste RTS where your only weapon is a sniper rifle and maybe a pistol if you're lucky.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Feb 20, 2009)

Why not glorify World War 2? Well I'll tell you why...

...because we're Sick and tired of seeing World War 2 games come out every year! It was fun the first few times, but after 20 times, then it just gets plain dull. We all know what happens...no one wants to play as the Axis, because they lose. Everyone wants to play as the Allies, because they win. The allies are ALWAYS portrayed as the heroes, never mind that Russian soldiers actually went and slaughtered Polish Civilians dressed as Germans to create sympathy for Russians. Oh but they aren't American or British, so they're automatically a "second power".

Oh, and the axis was composed ENTIRELY of nazi germans and Japanese people, never mind that Italians were also aligned with them, as were Bulgarians who I heard occupied Greece, and that Mussolini actually forced Yugoslavia to ally with Italy.


And those of us who're sick of World War 2 aren't touching those games like Call of Duty 5 because there's the hope that enough people will get bored and eventually they'll start looking over at the games like STALKER, Bioshock, and maybe MIrorr's Edge and notice that they're actually making money so they start trying to make drastically different things. Heck, just removing all the dirt and grit alone would interest me way more in the FPS genre, but I would prefer single player mode or a multiplayer mode that's co-op in Goldeneye 007 like missions. You know, what I hoped Team Boretress 2 would ahve been instead of Arathi Basin.


----------



## Yakamaru (Feb 20, 2009)

Digitalpotato said:


> Why not glorify World War 2? Well I'll tell you why...
> 
> ...because we're sick and tired of seeing World War 2 games come out every year! It was fun the first few times, but after 20 times, then it just gets plain dull. We all know what happens...No one wants to play as the Axis, because they lose. Everyone wants to play as the Allies, because they win.



I couldn't agree more. 

But i disagree with everyone wanting to be the Allies. I'm sick of looking at things from a "Good" perspective, and being the "good" guys. There is no such thing as a "good" or "bad" perspective. It's only a matter of conflicting views.

And yes, it's only a game, so yes, i WOULD play the Axis, even if they did lose the war. One of the reasons is to add variety to the gaming world. 

Making a game where you play solely as Axis would be nice.. In an alternate reality where the Axis powers won the war, would be something completely different, for example.

I've never really touched many Call Of Duty games, but i HAVE played alot of games where you are the good guys. Make a game where you are playing as the so-called "bad" guys for once. Would make it a different experience.


----------



## psion (Feb 20, 2009)

makmakmob said:


> That, or most FPS gamers want to feel like they're always winning. I mean, most of the 'gamers' I know are complete and utter losers with nothing else going for them.


This I agree with, in particularly after exposing myself to the chatter that plagues Battle.net and Gamespy's DoW servers.  Especially if you run into someone manipulating the odds for whatever reason.


Attaman said:


> We need more FPS's on the quality of Deus Ex.  Not more Halo- / WWII-clones in an attempt to milk the cash cow.


Oh yes, if FPS's would borrow more from RPGs like (the original) Deus Ex or System Shock 2/Bioshock did, I would be happy.  The ability to make a decision and to have it have an impact (either in storyline like Deus Ex or in character stats like in SS2/Bioshock) thrills me.
In particular I'd like the following:
- variable characters:  Okay, being a "Space Marine" (the Doom version) has gotten old, I'd like to decide if I want to be the stealthy infiltrator, the slow dude with the heavy gun, or something else.
- A story more riveting then Halo's "kill the bad aliens" or perhaps a story where you ARE the bad guy.
- Someone mentioned this before and I concur, how about a Co-op multiplayer like Left 4 Dead?


----------



## Digitalpotato (Feb 21, 2009)

Yakamaru said:


> I couldn't agree more.
> 
> But i disagree with everyone wanting to be the Allies. I'm sick of looking at things from a "Good" perspective, and being the "good" guys. There is no such thing as a "good" or "bad" perspective. It's only a matter of conflicting views.
> 
> ...




Or wait a sec...dare I say...


...an alternative universe in which you play as a person aligned with the axis but...

...reality's so bent, the Axis is actually composed of the GOOD GUYS?!?! *GASP* NAZIS BEING GOOD?! HERESY! 

...oh wait never mind that Italy was actually angry that they didn't get as much land, but who cares about Italians when you got NAZIS?!?!


----------



## Gar-Yulong (Feb 21, 2009)

I think we just need more FPSes in the vein of Painkiller and Quake and Doom and all those other lovely mindless First Person Shooters where you're given a selection of big guns, a lot of ammo, and a ton of dudes to kill and that's about it.


----------



## Kitoth (Feb 21, 2009)

Heh I want to add my own things about FPS that bug the hell out of me and some may have been said already of course like the initial post. but here is my list as it were.

1: enough with WWII, give me more modern era or futuristic type places. or hell how about really going back in time and giving us a revolutionary war one or even Medieval style one like Hexen was but maybe add some invention type weapons you know.

2: Some may hate them but for me they add a challenge to break from being a typical FPS who all know which is run and gunning.. Give me some more puzzles and not just ones involving hit a switch here and they go here hit another and etc. or hit a switch and run the hell through a door before it closes tpye thing. give me soemthing like hell defusing a bomb in a time limit, or something out of system shock series, stuff like that.

3: As far as i know there are only two game series I know of that have a female as the player you payer, the Perfect Dark games, and the No one Lives forever games. where are the modern and futuristic FPS where a female is the hero ?

4: Multiplayer maps.... Now don't get me wrong I know just about every Pc fps you can make your own maps and such but when it comes down to those dedicated servers where maps are generally the ones that came with the game please these companies need to stop given us so damn few. Some yeah give us a good number but most don't i mean so far highest i've seen if 20 maps from CoD: Modern Warfare with 20 maps. But most usually around 10 which can be dull especially if they are small ass maps.

5: since I brought CoD:Modern Warfare  up might as well talk about the unlocking of special  stuff in FPS.. Now the idea of shooting other so many times with a certain weapon can get dull it is a typical thing to see, but they need to get more creative on th single player side, like instead of locating 30 pieces of intel(CoD4) why not add a other things like don't use a certain weapon or power-up or items like grenades. Or how about like the 360 version of CoD 4 where if you shoot all Tv's airing the speech you unlock something.. Game like that add more replay value. One game that does it well at least for me was Painkiller i mean you had a nice mix of challenges to unlock teh cards, suhc as the level where you can must use only the Stake gun on enemies or the time limits of defeating a boss and so on. those give replay value.

Well for now thats what i got.


----------



## Gar-Yulong (Feb 21, 2009)

Kitoth said:


> Heh I want to add my own things about FPS that bug the hell out of me and some may have been said already of course like the initial post. but here is my list as it were.
> 
> 1: enough with WWII, give me more modern era or futuristic type places. or hell how about really going back in time and giving us a revolutionary war one or even Medieval style one like Hexen was but maybe add some invention type weapons you know.



This was said like a million times. :B Honestly it's probably because it's hard to come up with a good medieval shooter that wouldn't just be "Spell A, Spell B, Spell C".



Kitoth said:


> 2: Some may hate them but for me they add a challenge to break from being a typical FPS who all know which is run and gunning.. Give me some more puzzles and not just ones involving hit a switch here and they go here hit another and etc. or hit a switch and run the hell through a door before it closes tpye thing. give me soemthing like hell defusing a bomb in a time limit, or something out of system shock series, stuff like that.



It's usually because unless you do it right, those tend to cause irritating stop-and-go movement in the gameplay.

Also WHAT puzzles in System Shock? It was all "put item here, now put item here." The "puzzles" were in how you made your way through enemies.



Kitoth said:


> 3: As far as i know there are only two game series I know of that have a female as the player you payer, the Perfect Dark games, and the No one Lives forever games. where are the modern and futuristic FPS where a female is the hero ?



Unreal. Metroid Prime.



Kitoth said:


> 4: Multiplayer maps.... Now don't get me wrong I know just about every Pc fps you can make your own maps and such but when it comes down to those dedicated servers where maps are generally the ones that came with the game please these companies need to stop given us so damn few. Some yeah give us a good number but most don't i mean so far highest i've seen if 20 maps from CoD: Modern Warfare with 20 maps. But most usually around 10 which can be dull especially if they are small ass maps.



Well the problem here is that maps are time-consuming to make: They have to be made, then checked for bugs, then test-played to make sure they don't suck.



Kitoth said:


> 5: since I brought CoD:Modern Warfare  up might as well talk about the unlocking of special  stuff in FPS.. Now the idea of shooting other so many times with a certain weapon can get dull it is a typical thing to see, but they need to get more creative on th single player side, like instead of locating 30 pieces of intel(CoD4) why not add a other things like don't use a certain weapon or power-up or items like grenades. Or how about like the 360 version of CoD 4 where if you shoot all Tv's airing the speech you unlock something.. Game like that add more replay value. One game that does it well at least for me was Painkiller i mean you had a nice mix of challenges to unlock teh cards, suhc as the level where you can must use only the Stake gun on enemies or the time limits of defeating a boss and so on. those give replay value.



Achievements are a new thing. So you'll see more of that, by my prediction.

Not to be insulting, but you may want to brush up on your English.


----------



## Syranore (Feb 21, 2009)

One concept that i considered one day and found interesting was of a sort of RTS/FPS blend. This is entirely theoretical, considering the practicality of implementing it. Say you took a game like Halo, or the CoD series, where it is a war(constituting 2 defined sides, as opposed to shooters where it is simply you vs everything that moves), and added RTS elements to part of it. 

You'd have two types of players in-game. One would be the shooters, who would be in a squad-based shooter that would optimally mix the favorable aspects of tactical shooters such as Rainbow 6, and such like that where you have an aspect of control over NPC squadmates, while mixing in the qualities that make games like CoD, Halo, Unreal, ect., enjoyable. The other side would be the RTS portion of it, where one or more 'commanders' would be in charge of the things that make RTS games fun, such as ordering the army around, resource and expansion management, ect. As i said, this is entirely theoretical, as the amount of NPCs in the game would probably cause too much strain on most connections. 

Anyway, the players would ultimately constitute the shooter players, who serve as 'hero' type units, that may direct the troops that are assigned to him/her by the commander, who takes care of the actual campaign, as opposed to the tactical side of things. In the absence of enough heroes, the commander would simply give the troops orders, and they would accomplish the task to the best of their ability based on their AI programming.

The commanders would be the only static players in the game, as they are needed to direct the larger picture, and as in a real military, they would be able to remove the heroes/officers from command as needed to make room for different players to take their place(also, few shooter players would probably want to take part in a game for as long as the typical RTS game lasts). As i mentioned, they would control the RTS aspects of the game, including resource gathering/management, expansion and military production, ect. The success of a manager would be measured in a win/loss ratio for matches.

The heroes/officers would be in a squad-based combat situation that would hopefully combine the favorable aspects of the different types of aforementioned shooters. i believe that one of the best parts of certain shooters is the chaotic, frantic pace of them, so i'm not sure how well that would mix with tactical aspects, but i think it could be interesting. i'm not sure how far down this would work, but you could possibly have different ranks of heroes/officers that would have varying amounts of control of the army, which could be distributed between lower-ranking players. The success of officers would either be measured by win/loss ratio, or by kill/death ratio of their section of the army, although this does make the uncomfortable situation where the performance of lower-ranking officers determines the success of higher-ranking officers.

Anyway, just wanted to share what i thought would be an interesting thing to see in a shooter game. If anyone feels especially inclined to criticizing the idea, i ask that criticism be directed toward the actual gameplay, and not the practicality of implementing the idea, as i know that it is an unlikely thing to happen with today's current technology and internet speeds.


----------



## Gar-Yulong (Feb 21, 2009)

Syranore said:


> One concept that i considered one day and found interesting was of a sort of RTS/FPS blend. This is entirely theoretical, considering the practicality of implementing it. Say you took a game like Halo, or the CoD series, where it is a war(constituting 2 defined sides, as opposed to shooters where it is simply you vs everything that moves), and added RTS elements to part of it.
> 
> You'd have two types of players in-game. One would be the shooters, who would be in a squad-based shooter that would optimally mix the favorable aspects of tactical shooters such as Rainbow 6, and such like that where you have an aspect of control over NPC squadmates, while mixing in the qualities that make games like CoD, Halo, Unreal, ect., enjoyable. The other side would be the RTS portion of it, where one or more 'commanders' would be in charge of the things that make RTS games fun, such as ordering the army around, resource and expansion management, ect. As i said, this is entirely theoretical, as the amount of NPCs in the game would probably cause too much strain on most connections.
> 
> ...



So essentially the Natural Selection mod for Half-Life? :B

NS has a few differences from that, but that's essentially what it is.


----------



## Syranore (Feb 21, 2009)

Never played it, although i loved Half-Life


----------



## Dusty (Feb 21, 2009)

Gar-Yulong said:


> So essentially the Natural Selection mod for Half-Life? :B
> 
> NS has a few differences from that, but that's essentially what it is.



Or the Quake Three Mod Tremulous?

http://www.tremulous.net/


----------



## Kitoth (Feb 21, 2009)

Gar-Yulong said:


> This was said like a million times. :B Honestly it's probably because it's hard to come up with a good medieval shooter that wouldn't just be "Spell A, Spell B, Spell C".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well first of all I am a fast typer and the majority of what i type in Firefox is spell checked. you can't expect me or anyone else to make sure ever comma, period and question mark is there when you have a lot to type. No one on here is perfect and if you understood what i was saying then honestly does it make a difference what was not in a proper way?

Now as for your replies lets start with the first:

"This was said like a million times. :B Honestly it's probably because it's hard to come up with a good medieval shooter that wouldn't just be "Spell A, Spell B, Spell C"."

I did say some may have been said before like the first post, and there are plenty of ideas they can do without even using spells for a good medieval FPS, they just need to look into Mythology and even invention ideas that you can see what inventors tried to do back then but did not work in a Real Life way and modify them.

The 2nd reply about puzzles System shock 2 had optional ones but they were good ideas like the hacking, heck other games have good ideas that are not FPS like Splinter cell's hacking system, the way you have had to pick the correct i guess I'll call it IP address to hack it. there are some very good ideas where it can be a puzzle you have time to work on to ones that are time based and could kill you such as i said about the bomb defusing(Red Faction used it nicely) .

As for the 3rd reply.. You gave me Unreal which i forget, and Metroid Prime series, but with Metroid Prime it is a different style of game to me, you have moments of 3rd person and in many parts you did not have to go to a certain room or area or scan everything. I'd consider it more an Action RPG or Action adventure since you had to go back to areas several times just to advance. Most FPS at pretty much either the old school run and gun to get to an exit(Doom 1 and 2), or complete an objective(CoD 4, Doom 3).

4th reply is debatable because each company that makes an FPS with multiplayer maps can make good solid maps for use easily while others are time consuming. take for example Team Fortress 2, I have seen quite a few players make good solid maps in at most 2 days with no glitches, while in the case of lets go with Crysis if it had multiplayer like deathmatch and TDM. that engine and designs look like it would be hell to get a solid map made.

Finally as for the 5th reply of course its new but its mostly implemented in multiplayer not single player. I mean aside from CoD 4 where getting certain number of intel till you get all 30 unlocks different things like enemies explode into tires when killed or graphical changes and yeah the cheats for collecting all 30. There is really not a game I can currently think of besides Painkiller where by doing something whether its use 1 weapon in a lvl or kill a boss in certain time frame and so on helps you by adding those cards to add more damage or health for tough levels... though now that I think of it my bad Bioshock and System Shock 2  are better sources for what I mean.


----------



## lilEmber (Feb 21, 2009)

Dusty said:


> If they made it a realistic time scale you would never notice it jam unless you dunked it in mud   Also the AR-15 fires a 5.56 NATO round which is designed to tumble and shred flesh when it hits a target. -Army Nerdism



Well honestly, no.

The round tumbling has to do with the weapon, and the only 5.56 chambered rifle I know that has tumbling rounds are the shorter and older versions of the SIG 552.

The AR-15/AR series rifles don't have a tumbling round issue unless you chop off the barrel.
The round goes through and through, designed to punch through armor a little and fly completely straight for long distance rather than stopping power (tumbling). Once it hits, depending on the muzzle velocity the round can shred, turn, etc; the shock wave can damage internal organs as well, but the round isn't designed to tumble, sometimes it just does; this occurs for any round from 5.7mm to 7.62, 5.56, and 6.8; even .50 caliber can tumble on contact with a person.

There was a documented case of a soldier shooting a sheep 15 times with a AR series 5.56 NATO chambered rifle, and it was not only still alive, but still standing. It died after they put it out of its misery with a head-shot.


So far I don't know a game that has gotten bullet physics correctly along with accuracies, ranges, and powers of every weapon.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Feb 21, 2009)

To the "Female FPS heroes" comments...don't forget Trespasser. http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/screenshots/5/199105/trespass_screen003.jpg 


and I know what would probably make a World war 2 interesting...make it all about occultish magic and demons or necromancy and golems. And don't make it ALL About Nazis, Japanese, Americans, British, or Russians. 

Put in the section of the war that went on over in Northern Africa. Or have it set from a Greek's point of view and s/he has to fight off Bulgarian and Italian soldiers. Or simply have it be a person who's IN the Axis and is destroying the occultish things they're using to win the war. OR actually *gasp* portraying the ALLIES as the bad guys?! 


And to the comment on "Spell A Spell B Spell C"...isn't that what guns already are? :B Gun A Gun B Gun C etc until "Melee weapon that's never used"?


----------



## Kitoth (Feb 22, 2009)

Digitalpotato said:


> To the "Female FPS heroes" comments...don't forget Trespasser. http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/screenshots/5/199105/trespass_screen003.jpg
> 
> 
> and I know what would probably make a World war 2 interesting...make it all about occultish magic and demons or necromancy and golems. And don't make it ALL About Nazis, Japanese, Americans, British, or Russians.
> ...



Heh true as far as the single player aspects of a FPS Melee weapons are rarely used as a major fighting weapon. Most have you start with one then usually get some kind of hand gun and the use of the Melee weapon then becomes for saving ammo vs weak opponents or to destroy obstacles and object like in the Half Life series for instance...

But there are a few FPS games where a Melee weapon is used more than weapons, like in the AVP series the Predator's most used weapon is its wrist blades, and one can say playing the Alien is all Melee based.. but aside from AVP I would say only other game i can say gets good use of a powerful Melee though late in the game is Deus Ex series.

As far as the Multiplayer aspect, the Melee weapons are mainly used for usually one of the following with or course some exceptions.

1: Out of ammo and can't pick up guns or ammo at the time.
2: Sneaking up upon an opponent who is maybe sniping.
3: Close combat situations where you enter a room as someone is exiting and depending on the game the one quick bash or knife kill is better than a bullet(Best example for me is when I'm playing CoD:Modern Warfare and I am running and suddenly another player pops out of the corner so I knife him since i set it to button 3 or 4 on my mouse).


----------

