|Posted by Shambler on 2005/11/05 04:29:58|
|Okay, so the last two years have seen some pretty phat current generation FPS games released. Most of the big names and a couple of smaller ones have dropped something impressive on us gamers.
The above 5 I reckon are the biggest contenders, and all have similar aspects: Impressive technology, story-driven, sci-fi or near future, some horror elements, some military-esque gameplay, often some vehicles and other interaction.
So what do people think - can we vote on one particular winner? Are they showing a general raising of the bar in general? Is there a wide spectrum of quality there or just a general good range of sci-fi FPSes to feast on?
everyone can like whatever game, who cares what's more popular (it's Sims2! anyway)
I Vote For...
HL2 and Far Cry were excellent. Doom 3 was decent enough I suppose. Haven't played FEAR or Q4 yet.
None of the three games I have played really REALLY pushed boundaries, though the each introduces one or two nice features. In HL2 it was the gravity gun, in Far Cry it was huge expansive environments and vehicles in a standard story based FPS, and in Doom 3 it was dynamic 'unified my ass why the fuck do the shadows cast by objects lit with the flashlight not look quite right?' lighting.
Q4 and FEAR don't look like they do anything new at all, but I haven't played them. I guess FEAR has that slow motion combat thing going on. That looks really shit. Uhm, they also have the whole Japanese horror film ripoff thing going on (seriously, just look at the fucking girl in it, then watch Ring if you haven't already). Hmm.
Far Cry - This was out 1st, and so it got all my gasps and spooging about the graphics, it does everything hl2, d3 etc can do plus more, in fact I would say it was the most graphicly stunning game out so far fps wise. Gameplay was fun with a mix of stealth and balls to the wall action. vehicles were fun but could ahve been implemented better. And I wanted to ride in a helicopter :)
Doom 3 - less graphical Oos and Arr's as FC stole them, but general spooge at the artwork and polish of the game. Gameplay was fun but I was expecting more. I didnt mind changing weapon to the torch all the time (omg controversial!) and it wasnt scarey, just very tense, closet monsters were cheap.
HL2 - Functional graphics engine put to very good use to create some stunning levels, best use of physics in any game so far, and best implementation of physics into an engine also, everything just feels so right. Brilliant gameplay too with evolving choices and new toys all the way (boat, car, squads, pods, turrets, gravgun, more...) Was annoyed that valve removed the more daring enemies and weapons (tentacle, alien weaponry, experimental weaponry etc)
FEAR - Just finished this a few days ago. Graphics are hard to describe, the levels are all quite dull and boring and VERY boxy, and yet the game still runs slower than D3, but when combat erupts and EVERYTHING gets blown up / shattered /set on fire / scorched it truly is a sight to behold, absolutely stunning. Remeber the dude with the shotgun in the hospital in the film hard boiled? When he shoots down the corridor and all hell erupts? :) This game has scenes like that all the way through, utterly fantastic. Also this game gets my coveted "holy shit the enemies are CLEVER" award. They are truly impressive and do everything you would expect and more. They blind fire over the top of desks, throw grenades everywhere to flush u out, hide behind the big armoured dudes, dive through windows, kick objects over for cover, everything = 0wn.
Q4 - Haven't played as theres no pissing demo yet. RAVEN WTF!
above post was me...
It's not necessary. Just a bit of fun, in the spirit of chatting about FPS games, eh.
I Vote Far Cry
D3 was lame, Q4 probably more of the same, not really interested in FEAR, HL2 meh...
Far Cry represents an ACTUAL advancement of FPS. What an awesome game. Those monkey things in dark indoor environments were about as scary as D3 ever got to be for me too.
Now if they'd only release STALKER
From Those 4
i've only played 2. have yet to get a copy of fear or q4.
between farcry and d3 though, i'd have to go with d3. ffs, evil ugly demonic monsters? how can you go wrong? ;)
seriously though, it not that FC isn't good looking or isn't fun to play or whatever, but that that's just not the type of gameplay, theme and enemies i like.
also, mapping for FC is annoying because you don't build anything in the editor, just put together prefab meshes... I know that's supposed to be the way of the future etc etc, but it's not fun for me, and i don't like having to fire up a 3d app all the time just to make a new room.
yes the maps in d3 were boring, and lighting (or lack thereof) meant a lot of the times you couldn't really see the monster models, but once you get them in maps with proper lighting, they look totally awesome.
FC And Q4
The combination of Far Cry's maps, objectives and AI offer a fresh and innovative singleplayer experience. Far Cry is a showcase of excellent design and new ideas.
Quake 4 crushes all competition in the multiplayer arena. Speed and simplicity make this the premiere title for serious DM players.
Out of them all, I would say...
QUOTH IS THE BESTEST!!!!
Long live Kell/Necros... Kelcros...
is q4 anywhere near qw in speed / brutality / skill reward?
untill they fix gay movement
HL2 sucks cause it has seriously boring combat
fear sucks cause its slow and looks ass
D3 sucks for cramped maps and rediculous dmg feedback
Area51 is so pathetic its a shame to call it a shooter
Pariah is really bad and retarded I couldnt play it
Q4 is ok except crap sound and mostly boring monsters
SW commando is the best action this year with the innovative squad combat gameplay
BIA is not bad too (addon sucks tho, avoid it)
Call of Duty 2 should be good too, if its atleast ad fun as the first one was.
what else I dont know
WoW is the best game hands down
Who Cares Which Game Is The Better ?
Different people will give so many different reasons to find a game either good or bad, that the answer is not objective, so when you say a game is good/bad: it's only your personnal taste... though... :P... there are standards in FPS that needs to be there ingame to make it good... doh !
In anyway, in my "short" life, I only played Doom, Doom2, Ultimate Doom, Final Doom, Doom3, Q1, Q2, Q3, HL, HL2, and Medal Of Honor ("In Front Line", and "Rising sun")... and each time I found all these games enjoyable... they all have good and bad points, cause nothing can be perfect in all domains...
For example, and IMHO, Doom3 is the most immersive game ever due to its ambiance, when its gameplay is not very good compared to others FPS.. HL2 have a very impressive gameplay, and visually it was awesome, when it is not so immersive.. Medal Of honor "In Front Line" first level on the beach reminds me a lot the Spielberg film about Soldier Ryan (I don't know the english title of the movie ;P..) and it is very immersive there, when the rest of the game is very (too much) linear.. Q2 sucks (I,didn't like it at all...), etc.. etc..
I guess other people will disagree with me on many points...
Far Cry gets my vote. It's the only one in the list which actually felt 'new' when I played it. There are a few dull moments in terms of level design, but considering what they had to work with ['tree's on an island'] I think they did pretty damn well in that respect. All the weapons felt meaty and the enemy AI was genuinely intelligent. The last level was kind of rediculous though.
HL2 felt like 70% FPS and 30% driving, which irked me as it made the overall experience feel disjointed. The AI was absolutely shite. Sometimes enemies would literally just come out of a building one by one, taking turns to stand perfectly still and fire at you. Rubbish.
Q4 -- sheer brilliance in the FPS bits, but again let down by the vehicles which were pretty damn poor and tbh felt like 'economic' level design. I'd have prefered the simple teleport trick for covering large distances.
D3 was a great change of pace but had large areas of tedium. Still, probably one of the most fun end bosses I've played in some time. Very few people get bosses right.
Fear is pants. Level design, combat and graphics are all just bland and monotonous. Everybody harps on about the AI, but it only works on a small scale. Nothing like as impressive as Far Cry.
what you said about fear's horror elements sounded almost exactly like what one of the developers said in an interview with both general jap-horror influences and the ring as main inspiration.
I honestly can't remember a whole lot about Far Cry at this point--at least not enough to comment with any degree of detail. I remember I liked it, and remember being impressed by the tropical island environments. I also remember absolutely hating the end of it--I *think* because it was ridiculously hard?
I thought HL2 was excellent, in part because they were able to try a few new things and pull them off reasonably well (e.g. vehicles, gravity gun). It looks gorgeous as well. The thing that probably impresses me the most is the cohesive feel of the game as a whole. For me, there were no seriously wrong notes in HL2. I even enjoyed replaying it, and I had no real desire to replay (for instance) Far Cry.
Q4...well...I'm obviously biased, but I think it kicks ass. If I would have been making the game all by myself (rather than just helping out) it probably would have lacked vehicles, and had water/liquids and bots. I'm looking forward to making more stuff for it...
D3 just didn't do it for me. I enjoyed the first few levels, but then got really put off by the combination of LOL-D3-is-dark and flashlight-switching and one monster closet after another. I finished it, but it kinda felt like a chore. I know a lot of people really enjoyed it, and I was surprised when I didn't, so maybe I just had sand in my vagina or something.
Fear I'm currently about 2/3 of the way through and I'm REALLY enjoying it. It's an elegent game. There's nothing that hasn't been seen before, and when you boil it down it's nothing more than "kill guys in boxes connected by other boxes", but I'll be damned if they didn't nail the fun factor--at least for me. There's nothing all that aesthetically amazing in the environments, and there are a few warts (sparklies and visual glitches, tons of floating items, and various illogical gameplay elements), but the level layouts are very well done, with lots of level-over-level, interesting tactical areas, and many instances of revisiting areas in cool ways (i.e. seeing a balcony you can't reach, and then finding yourself on it looking down 20 minutes later). Most FPS games are a multi-course meal with pros and cons to each dish, and a couple dishes that are guaranteed to make you throw up in your mouth a little, depending on your personal tastes. Fear is like a single simple serving of something, excellently prepared, without all the side dishes.
and had water/liquids
you gotta be kidding me. q4 doesn't have liquids either? what's with the d3 engine not having liquids ffs.
there's so much tomfoolery involved to get an 'approximation' of liquid into the d3 engine atm. simply suckage. :\
I have to pick Doom3 and Quake4, I did enjoy Halflife2, but when I tried to play it again, I just couldn't bring myself to do it. I have played Doom3 through 4 times thus far, (and ROE 3 times), Quake4 I'm on my 3rd run through. Far Cry, well I couldn't be bothered finishing it, probably never even got a quarter of the way through it, uninstalled it and through it in the bin. F.E.A.R, well I haven't played it, and probably won't.
I can't pick between Doom3 and Quake4, and I can hear the 'fan boi' cries, but I like the simple brutal gameplay of the Q's and D's, and I always get so much enjoyment out of them, and id's games always seem to give me what I want, and I'm happy with that. So yeah, for me Doom3 and Quake4 both Rock, I only wish there were more of a custom mapping/moding scene for Doom3
I realise that it IS inspired by Japanese horror, and did read the interview myself. However, the girl is pretty much a direct rip of Sadako from Ring. Maybe if they had just tried to capture the feel of Japanese horror, rather than just take the scary girl directly from the most famous Japanese horror film and use her in their game.
Also, from what I saw in the vids, the combination of slo-mo EXTREME action and plagiarised horror elements didn't gel together to well. Of course, since I haven't bothered to play it, I don't know if that is the case.
let's face it, quake's handling of water is cartoony at best. And lava I won't even start mentioning. It would probably take a lot of gameplay tweaking to get those things work right.
Although yeah, stupid movies also have that "hero swims 500m under ice in full body armor with a minigun while fighting sharks".
I didn't read any interview but saw one on tv actually... haven't played the game either but at least there's no trying to hide the influences although by the sound of it it's so evident that there would be no point in hiding it.
Liquids are only cool for reflection/refraction
And For, You Know, Swimming In
But hey, what possible use could that be to a level designer.
they may have limited use to you, but i find it mildly irritating that iD didn't even have a working liquid system. i mean, you can't even properly swim, or have a breath meter. that's kind of sad for an engine that does everything else so well. hl2 and farcry both got nice water looks and movement physics. i dunno, i just feel d3 deserved to at least have it in there, even though the maps never use it.
that it is fairly prepostorous to not have LIQUIDS in your ENGINE
I'd even call that "pulling a stunt."
I mean wow, they are lacking something in Doom3 that was in Doom 1 - and I'm not talking about good monster design - yes, folks, its WATER, LAVA, AND SLIME!
I'd also add that I'm amazed that they didn't even add that for Q4.
Is it just me, or is every Doom3 engine game going to take place in a lame "futuristic-tech-alien-planet-with-no-water" setting? And if that's the case, then isn't that fucking stupid?
Maybe the Doom 3 engine does have potential, but though I'm no programmer I think id, in its efforts to keep ahead of everyone else, focused on too narrow a range of effects (bump mapping, real time lighting) and ended up actually *behind* everyone (ahem, FAR CRY), and yes that means engine too. Of course there's the issue of what's engine limitation and what's design choices, but it's a bit odd that the designers of Q4 and Prey seem to be making the same retarded "design choices" as id did with Doom3.
Even if they want to keep the same gameplay as they've always had, surely it doesn't interfere with their game to.. you know... be able to.. uhh... swim, you know, or maybe see more than 10 feet in any direction before you hit a wall, or be outside for more than 10 seconds, or knock tiny little tables over with say a rocket launcher...
Maybe one day, their outdoor areas could be more than just pretty hallways with sky instead of ceiling!!
No one's demanding that they add a gravity gun and make their game based on new gameplay gimmicks instead of tried and true Quakin' (they could even keep out vehicles if they want), but just that they make a game where you have more freedom of movement than in WOLFENSTEIN 3D (and in Doom3, aside from jumping, you really don't). Even the levels are mostly just horizontal hallways.
Oh wait, they did add a gravity gun didn't they. Gimmicks 1, physics, AI, liquids, outdoor areas, diversity 0.
Maybe I didn't need to word that so strongly, but whatever.
How about you say "setting I personaly dont like" instead, huh?
And you obviously didnt play or even read about q4
You must be logged in to post in this thread.
Website copyright © 2002-2020 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.