I feel that the main problem with modern FPSs is that, frankly, they're boring. Boring enemies, boring combat, repetitive environments and bland color palettes. Cool guns sometimes, but not much imagination there either (yes Borderlands, I'm still looking at you). Sure, much of this comes from the popularity of the "realistic" shooter that everyone seems to clamor for these days but that's no excuse. Wasn't shooting stuff fun at one point?
So what happened? Much has been made about the "brown-ness" that has infected the genre recently and though that certainly hasn't made it any more interesting it's not the true problem. Nor is the species we currently are so interested in filling with lead. Other humans can still be interesting enemies believe it or not. Developers just seem to have forgot how to make them so.
The real problem with shooters is the combat. What should be the core of the entertainment value of the genre. It's just plain dull.
Playing through Battlefield 3's lackluster campaign recently, I ran into one (uno, ein, un, 1) encounter that was legitimately fun and didn't boil down to "shoot dudes, walk, shoot more dudes, walk, shoot more dudes, walk, etc." And it was a brief moment of legitimate tactical challenge in a sea of... blah, even on the highest difficulty.
It goes like this: You start on a rise overlooking a parking lot. Two enemies are patrolling around a few parked cars, two others are sitting against a car on the left side and four more are guarding a garage on the far back right that is the objective.
Eight on one. No endless waves of spawning enemies, no fancy cutscene interventions. Just you and eight bogies. They've got cover and numbers, you've got elevation and surprise. You can only take two or three hits before going down. They can take a few more. This my friends is a legitimate combat puzzle. It requires, or at least asks for, forethought and a degree of skill.
The solution is not important. What is important is that this section slows the game down and forces the player to think. How to best engage small groups of these enemies so that you don't get mobbed by eight angry Iranians with AKs, grenades and shotguns? This particular engagement solves that problem by pre-dividing the enemies into small teams but the point is there. Humans with AKs can be interesting enemies if deployed against the player correctly. 'Deployed' being the key word. Not sent at him in scores just asking to be gunned down.
I'd LOVE to see more games go in this direction.
Say what you like about Halo's story, graphics, AI, what-have-you, Bungie's combat designers nailed it. Mostly small to medium encounters featuring limited numbers of varied enemies that must be prioritized and engaged differently depending on the encounter. It keeps the player on his toes, it (can be) challenging and it begs for varied approaches. Things that many, if not all, shooters of this generation could benefit from.
So, for discussion purposes, how would you integrate such 'puzzles' into modern FPSs?
So what happened? Much has been made about the "brown-ness" that has infected the genre recently and though that certainly hasn't made it any more interesting it's not the true problem. Nor is the species we currently are so interested in filling with lead. Other humans can still be interesting enemies believe it or not. Developers just seem to have forgot how to make them so.
The real problem with shooters is the combat. What should be the core of the entertainment value of the genre. It's just plain dull.
Playing through Battlefield 3's lackluster campaign recently, I ran into one (uno, ein, un, 1) encounter that was legitimately fun and didn't boil down to "shoot dudes, walk, shoot more dudes, walk, shoot more dudes, walk, etc." And it was a brief moment of legitimate tactical challenge in a sea of... blah, even on the highest difficulty.
It goes like this: You start on a rise overlooking a parking lot. Two enemies are patrolling around a few parked cars, two others are sitting against a car on the left side and four more are guarding a garage on the far back right that is the objective.
Eight on one. No endless waves of spawning enemies, no fancy cutscene interventions. Just you and eight bogies. They've got cover and numbers, you've got elevation and surprise. You can only take two or three hits before going down. They can take a few more. This my friends is a legitimate combat puzzle. It requires, or at least asks for, forethought and a degree of skill.
The solution is not important. What is important is that this section slows the game down and forces the player to think. How to best engage small groups of these enemies so that you don't get mobbed by eight angry Iranians with AKs, grenades and shotguns? This particular engagement solves that problem by pre-dividing the enemies into small teams but the point is there. Humans with AKs can be interesting enemies if deployed against the player correctly. 'Deployed' being the key word. Not sent at him in scores just asking to be gunned down.
I'd LOVE to see more games go in this direction.
Say what you like about Halo's story, graphics, AI, what-have-you, Bungie's combat designers nailed it. Mostly small to medium encounters featuring limited numbers of varied enemies that must be prioritized and engaged differently depending on the encounter. It keeps the player on his toes, it (can be) challenging and it begs for varied approaches. Things that many, if not all, shooters of this generation could benefit from.
So, for discussion purposes, how would you integrate such 'puzzles' into modern FPSs?
(Can't wait for Absolution either I'm SO PUMPED)
