Slashdot Mirror
Upcoming FPS Titles In 2006
IGN has a look at some of the many high-profile First-Person Shooter titles slated for this year. From the article: "At any rate, as we near the realm of photorealism some fifteen years later, brave and storied heroes like id Software, Epic Games, Valve, and DICE continue to evolve the genre with things like voice communication, fancy lighting, and flying limbs. So today we bring to you our list of the upcoming shooters of 2006 whether they make us giggle like little girls or not. Some of these are expansions, some of them are fever dreams of the future, and others simply games we know are gunning for 2006." Appropriate, then, that Gamespot just released another 'Greatest Game' article this week. Doom certainly deserves the spot they give it.
Actually, I think it should be "first blood!"
To be fair, it was another id game, Wolfenstein 3D, that in 1992 introduced gamers to the concept of the first-person shooter.
Except that it wasn't. Even if you don't count Maze War (and its successor, MIDI Maze) for some reason, you still have id's own Catacomb 3D.
Rob
Can we please, for the love of god, have a game like Quake 3? *Every* other FPS is exactly the same. You know what the difference is between Halo 2 and Half Life 2? The story. Oh sure, the storylines are great. I loved those games. But they are all the same in terms of gameplay. They just have different graphics. Quake 3 - particularly with the threewave mod, is totally unique. It's not like anything else out there.
In quake, the movement speed is so fast, it feels like being in the matrix movies. And everything is so well balanced. Case in point, everybody knows what a camper is, right? In every other FPS game, there is one super weapon, and everybody goes and gets that weapon and that's it, the game consists of marching around holding down the fire button. There was a map in Q3 called space ctf. You all played it. There are the platforms way up in the air with railguns on them. Newbs would go up there and sit on the railgun and fire at people. But it wasn't a problem in Q3. I used to love it when people went up there because that showed they were inexperienced. In quake, the shotgun does as much damage as the railgun, which does as much damage as the rocket launcher, which does as much damage as the grenade launcher, etc. The BFG was probably an unbalancing factor, but most servers took it out. So anyway, if you were a newb in quake and you picked up that railgun, I could kill you easily with the shotgun, I just had to get close to you. And with Quake's speed of movement, that wasn't a hard thing to do. See, that's called strategy. I don't see that kind of thing in other FPS games.
Other games are fun, don't get me wrong. They just aren't as good as Quake 3. Take a look at this website, it has videos of people playing Quake3. Have you ever seen Halo or Halflife or UT videos that cool?
So basically, game makers are just going to give us more of the same old same old. They are going to make versions of Halo and versions of Halflife with better graphics and different storylines. That's it. That's what we have to look forward to.
Only one game is really different.
FPS are so last century.
...
In some of the Gaming magazine polls, a large number of people have indicated that there are too many FPS and they all start to feel the same after a while.
Which is why Japanese games involving rolling things to satisfy your dad the King of the Stars, or dancing games, or other simulation games are starting to get more attention.
Now, if we only had a FPS which involved shooting stars as they flashed past on your HDTV, so that they would make musical sounds and flash like rainbows - now THAT would be interesting
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
ATI card by any chance? Using the 5.13 drivers? The ones which secretly detected F.E.A.R. and applied some outdated game-enhancement logic? You know, the logic that made F.E.A.R. single-player demo run like the shizzle on ATI cards, but makes the retail F.E.A.R. run like the fizzle?
I have a pretty good gaming system. I updated to the cat 5.13 drivers, and suddenly F.E.A.R. was getting 10fps. I tweaked everything, and nothing fixed it. I was teh dumb and actually played about 1/4 of the game like this. I renamed FEAR.exe to FEARme.exe and suddenly I got 45+fps.
I want my 1/4 FEAR back...!
Save the Music; Save the World at http://www.TuneTriever.com (Our latest Android game)
That everyone equates FPS to multiplayer, or at least most of them do? 3 our of the 4 games in tfa seem to be MP-only, and most of the comments are about MP games. As someone on a sucky internet connection who also sucks at MP games, I vastly prefer games with a decent singleplayer campaign, like halo, halflife $whatever, quake 1,2,4, even plotless games like painkiller or the serious sams.
I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
Based on this screenshot I'm really looking forward to Medal of Honor: Airborne.
No doubt we'll find out later that that's just from a cutscene and the in-game graphics will end up being the usual low-detail FPS garbage, though.
Registering accounts later than some other chrisb since 1997
From what we've heard, this game should be among the Nintendo Revolution's launch titles in 2006. If it's a solid shooter, combined with the Revolution's Direct Pointing Device technology, it'll blow away every FPS on every other console. The "Nunchuku" attachment in your left hand for W-A-S-D movement, and the main controller (with its trigger-oriented B button) for the mouse. Point and fire.
How about Metroid Prime: Hunters for the DS? Isn't that fairly high-profile, what with the unique control method and online play?
Gamertag: WyleType
I don't know what bots you dealt with in BF2's single-player mode, but they proved to be quite intelligent and accurate in the games I played.
As for miltiplayer, you can get bots on BF2 relatively easily, but it would be best served in a LAN environment or a system with all of those ridiculously large numbers of server ports open. (Something like 15 different port ranges? What the F*CK was EA thinking!?)
The single player is actually a type of 127.0.0.1 server with you connected in via the client. So, even a single-player game is a multiplayer game with you and bots. (When you start, note that it says "Connecting to server" even for a single-player game.) Once the server/game is running, anyone who attaches to the system via the Internet -> Connect-to-IP function can replace a bot in the game.
The main drawback to this is that you are restricted to the single-player, 16-player maps. There are hacks out there to activate 32-player maps, but I don't know how stable the game is after that. There are also stability problems even in the 16-player maps. I don't know if it's due to how bug-laden the out-of-the-box version was, or if it was because of instability caused by multiple players logged into the "single player" game. But I do know that my nephew and I were able to get this to work on multiple occasions.
But I fully agree with the overall sentiment. It's completely ridiculous to not include bots. There has been plenty of AI code written for many, many years to allow bots. So, the idea that AI needs to be re-thought to allow bots in every game is disingenuous. Sure, it might need to be integrated into the engine, but that doesn't mean that it has to be done completly from scratch.
Additionally, the idea that gamers only want to blow away other humans (virtually, Mr. Thompson, you moron!) is ludicrous and highly arrogant. Bullshit! If I have friends over and my Internet connection goes down or I just don't want to deal with the infantile complainers on the Net, it's always nice to know that I can fire up a multiplayer game and we can still blow away bots together! Sadly, this ability has been rapidly diminishing, and I for one am sick of it.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.