FPS's MOST important qualities.

[Couch Radish]

If you're making a game from a first person perspective, remember it doesn't always have to involve guns and shooting.

Take games like Thief, Hitman, Mirror's Edge, etc. Or even think of something that's never been used before.

 

[jak_of_bees]

For SP good AI, well written story and good pacing. Seriously I don't what to be running and gunning through explosions for 8 hours. I like games that let you stop and breath, games that give me a chance to think about my next actions. I guess that's why I was always a fan of the Rainbow Six series because I could plan my next move and not just sprint and shoot.

As for MP good level design and balance is crucial. Why does Black Ops fail in my opinion? 'Cause the maps are very mediocre. I also don't see how realism would make a game so great? Really if a game was realistic then one shot to the body and your pretty much useless to the team, reloads would take ages and accuracy would be well...a lot worse then what it is in the CoD games. So saying that give me down right bizarre over realism any day.

 

[BENZOOKA]

You're thinking in PC terms here... I was thinking along the lines of the consoles, where most shooters are stuck at 30FPS or below. It just doesn't flow as well as COD's (almost constant) 60FPS and to me it makes a huge difference in how the game flows and feels to play when the frame-rate is that bit higher.

Ah, pardon my simplemindedness (I also strayed a bit too much to competitive gaming in my points)...

That kind of a difference in FPS sounds like an enormous advantage for COD. Haven't got much experience on consoles, but I've been surprised on how effortfully some games run on them. In the same situation you'd decrease graphics settings on a PC for a smoother gameplay; which is more important than flashy graphics.

 

[BENZOOKA]

Double-post. How embarrassing.

Please ignore, or remove.

 

[BENZOOKA]

Triple-post... Now this is a first. Sorry.

The note of "server too busy to view thread" -announcement fooled me completely into posting again o_o

 

[Grond Strong]

For SP good AI, well written story and good pacing. Seriously I don't what to be running and gunning through explosions for 8 hours. I like games that let you stop and breath, games that give me a chance to think about my next actions. I guess that's why I was always a fan of the Rainbow Six series because I could plan my next move and not just sprint and shoot.

As for MP good level design and balance is crucial. Why does Black Ops fail in my opinion? 'Cause the maps are very mediocre. I also don't see how realism would make a game so great? Really if a game was realistic then one shot to the body and your pretty much useless to the team, reloads would take ages and accuracy would be well...a lot worse then what it is in the CoD games. So saying that give me down right bizarre over realism any day.

Realism has many faces. Dead-eye accuracy while being shot and ludicrous-speed reloading are not one of them. But we have way too much realism in our actual lives. (However small they may be for some of us.) So we escape to videogames to bring us out of reality as realistically as possible. The irony of it is amusing.

As for your liking of Rainbow Six... A videogame that only rewards one's emergence from a tough battle with hordes of enemies with more touch battles and more hordes of enemies will be out of my xbox faster than a Justin Beiber music video. I agree with you, moderation is key.

 

[Grond Strong]

You're thinking in PC terms here... I was thinking along the lines of the consoles, where most shooters are stuck at 30FPS or below. It just doesn't flow as well as COD's (almost constant) 60FPS and to me it makes a huge difference in how the game flows and feels to play when the frame-rate is that bit higher.

Ah, pardon my simplemindedness (I also strayed a bit too much to competitive gaming in my points)...

That kind of a difference in FPS sounds like an enormous advantage for COD. Haven't got much experience on consoles, but I've been surprised on how effortfully some games run on them. In the same situation you'd decrease graphics settings on a PC for a smoother gameplay; which is more important than flashy graphics.

Just another question for ya. I know you said you haven't gotten much experience on consols but I am from the opposite side of the equation and haven't really had the opportunity to play my favorite consol games on a PC. Do you play them on PC because you prefer them on PC or because a consol isn't readily available to you? Just curious.

 

[Continuity]

I recently had to come up with a videogame for school to "pitch" for a company that might be interested in publishing it. Naturally I chose the FPS genre because it happens to be my favorite. It also got me thinking. Why do I love FPS's so much? Or, more appropriately, what is the most important thing that I think "makes" an FPS an FPS. So I wanted to ask the community.

Guns, plain and simple, guns. An FPS lives and dies by its guns. That is, the ballistics, the recoil, the reloading, the visuals and sounds, the variety... everything about them... Guns.

Everything else in an FPS is ancillary to the gunplay.

Just another question for ya. I know you said you haven't gotten much experience on consols but I am from the opposite side of the equation and haven't really had the opportunity to play my favorite consol games on a PC. Do you play them on PC because you prefer them on PC or because a consol isn't readily available to you? Just curious.

you'll find that most PC FPS gamers aren't all that made up about console FPS games, the design ethic on the console, plus the limitations imposed by the controller really don't make for a great game on the PC, even if the port is done fairly well.
However as a side note, and as someone who owns two controllers I have to say that FPS is always much more pleasurable with M&K controls, except in the circumstances where the control port is so bad that you're actually better off with a controller... those are always unfortunate situations.

In other words console games dont really translate well to the PC (or at least to M&K controls), they are designed from the ground up to fit the console platform which usually just makes them seem a bit poor on the PC compared to PC exclusive titles.

 

[BENZOOKA]

Just another question for ya. I know you said you haven't gotten much experience on consols but I am from the opposite side of the equation and haven't really had the opportunity to play my favorite consol games on a PC. Do you play them on PC because you prefer them on PC or because a consol isn't readily available to you? Just curious.

I've never had a console, but I prefer PC because:
Better performance. Better graphics (which are customizable). Customization. Faster response. Overall in every way faster, more powerful and better. There's really not an area where consoles are better. And shooters are the epitome of that.

Mouse & keyboard are superior to controllers. Massively better, on shooters (and RTSs and any game that plays better with more than few controls). The only thing controllers are better suited for, are sports games. And even then I really prefer to play on a PC, with a controller (and you can always change the keymapping as well).

 

[josemlopes]

Balanced weapons. I want a pistol that shouldn't be thrown away as soon as I get an assualt rifle.

In Halo the plasma pistol can be one of the best weapons in close quarters, not many people use it though.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Lack of color, it just isn't next gen if you see anything but brown and gray.

 

[omega 616]

Variable light levels. Ever since Doom, that's more or less been a must.

the one thing above all else the entire genre must have is variable light levels? It can have to worst guns, worst maps and feel awful but as long as that light changes it's at least an ok game?

For me the biggest things are balance, take out things like noob tube and quick scoping. In COD you will never need a noobtube, you can't blow stuff down and your not going to be taking out a helicopter/harrier with one. Quick scoping is nothing more than aim assist abuse and gives a massive advantage over genuine players.

A little bit on maps, don't make a "waste land" map 'cos snipers dominate it, on the other hand don't make a tight maze 'cos corner campers will dominate it. I have only played MW2 and Black ops but I like the vast majority of both.

My own personal thing, get rid of hand guns and make shotties a secondary. Hand guns make you feel like a bad ass when you get a kill but running at a guy with a semi auto 9 mm and he has an AK47, you feel boned. When I have a shottie as a secondary I can equip it in close ranges and equip my AR for long range stuff. If people like being out classed in weapons, use the FAL and think of it like a handgun with a massive barrel.

last thing, let me customise everything I can! I want my own face paint, (gun) camo, I want to put stuff on the gun and choose were it is on the gun. If I want to run around like the flash or superman I should be allowed to ... of course I would stick out like a sore thumb But thats my choice.

 

[UrbanCohort]

For the Arcade shooter, definitely speed and slinging more lead than the opposition (or a shotgun in tight quarters)

For more "realistic" shooters...well, I have a bigger list than is entirely sane. They'll always be hampered a bit because any strategy involved goes out the window with the first quickscope kill.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Ah, pardon my simplemindedness (I also strayed a bit too much to competitive gaming in my points)...

That kind of a difference in FPS sounds like an enormous advantage for COD. Haven't got much experience on consoles, but I've been surprised on how effortfully some games run on them. In the same situation you'd decrease graphics settings on a PC for a smoother gameplay; which is more important than flashy graphics.

Yeah, exactly. And that's the funny thing.... as good as Crysis 2 looks on my 360, it's marred by choppy frame-rates and so in a way COD often looks better to my eyes due to its fluidity, if that makes any sense.

Now to see Crysis 2 in 60FPS or above.... that would make my day.

 

[pyrosaw]

Good controls, balanced guns, and at least one REALLY unbalanced gun for fun.

 

[Shock and Awe]

Fluidity. If you nail it down in every aspect the game becomes gold. Everything from using weapons, to switching equipment, transitioning between targets; everything depends on the mechanics being fluid and quick.

 

[MetallicaRulez0]

Responsive controls are first and foremost. It's the primary reason that CoD is so good. The controls are as fast and accurate as any game I've ever played. Bad Company 2, for comparison, felt like playing underwater. Everything you do has a 1 second delay.

Maps are another important note. I personally always compare a game's choice of maps to those of Halo 2, the best set of maps in any FPS in my opinion. Black Ops struggles in this department, and that's why it's a shitty game.

Balance is likely the most important factor for a multiplayer game. All of the weapons should have similar Damage-Per-Second and reload times. Grenades should be effective, but not God-Like (I'm looking at you, CoD4). Explosives should either not be in the game at all, or made less dangerous than realism would dictate.

 

[Grond Strong]

Variable light levels. Ever since Doom, that's more or less been a must.

the one thing above all else the entire genre must have is variable light levels? It can have to worst guns, worst maps and feel awful but as long as that light changes it's at least an ok game?

For me the biggest things are balance, take out things like noob tube and quick scoping. In COD you will never need a noobtube, you can't blow stuff down and your not going to be taking out a helicopter/harrier with one. Quick scoping is nothing more than aim assist abuse and gives a massive advantage over genuine players.

A little bit on maps, don't make a "waste land" map 'cos snipers dominate it, on the other hand don't make a tight maze 'cos corner campers will dominate it. I have only played MW2 and Black ops but I like the vast majority of both.

My own personal thing, get rid of hand guns and make shotties a secondary. Hand guns make you feel like a bad ass when you get a kill but running at a guy with a semi auto 9 mm and he has an AK47, you feel boned. When I have a shottie as a secondary I can equip it in close ranges and equip my AR for long range stuff. If people like being out classed in weapons, use the FAL and think of it like a handgun with a massive barrel.

last thing, let me customise everything I can! I want my own face paint, (gun) camo, I want to put stuff on the gun and choose were it is on the gun. If I want to run around like the flash or superman I should be allowed to ... of course I would stick out like a sore thumb But thats my choice.

You seem to have read my own heart. I didn't want to outright say this because I thought I may get a lot of flak for it but I love CoD. I know, I know... everyone can now pour on the insults and hate. But my style of play matches CoD almost perfectly and it seems like you are coming from the same direction as me. I was incredibly disappointed when they took shotguns away from secondaries. I almost cried. Not only did they do that but they made the pistols (in my opinion), kinda lame.

I agreed with the second part of your paragraph as well. I think that the more choice a gamer has with his/her character, the better! I want my guy on CoD to look, think, and act like I would with the corresponding paint, guns, and tactics. I believe that nothing should be taken away from a player to favor another. Let me explain...

In MW2, quickscoping is rampant and I DESPISE it. Nothing aggravates me more. But do I think they should've banned it from Black Ops? No. Because let's just say, God forbid, that I LOVED to quickscope. Well guess what, due to all the quickscoping haters, the option is now gone. So I suppose I'm out of luck. But that's MY style of play! Who's to say that any style is more right or wrong than somebody else's? If you want to camp, (another thing I despise) then I think you should have the freedom to do it just as much as I have the right to run around with my tactical knife/bling/warlord/whatever. Whenever you take something away from a player, you are always going to favor another. So just leave ALL the options open to let players best find their niche. And once you do, rock it, but don't hate on other people who are different and possibly better than you. (I'm not saying YOU, it's just theoretical.)

I also wish that in a realistic shooter they'd have realistic gun attachments. Why can't I put a silencer, flamethrower, AND red dot sight on my gun? It's not like they get in the way of each other. (E.G. Flamethrower and grenade launcher.) If this WAS real war, heck, I'd trick my gun out as much as I possibly could.

 

[Grond Strong]

I like that a few of these suggestions are things all games should be doing anyway. Responsive controls? Without them, any game is broken and may as well end before it starts. A solid framerate? Anything that makes the game jerky to the human eye means that the game is messed up in some way (or else it means that your computer is shit, either way, no good). I think we can all accept that all games need those things, and that the FPS is no exception.

But for me? Just the overall package. I generally don't play multiplayer, but like the genre as a rule, but speed doesn't matter, outside of specific firefights maybe. I like to explore the world created, so anything that is immersive and unique is good. I mean, there is no "FPS" formula. Are we talking a modern combat CoD type series, a horror-themed series a la F.E.A.R. or maybe Condemned (sort of) or an elaborate FPSRPG like Fallout 3 or what? Make the experience fun in a lasting way and you've made a good FPS. I mean, look at the FPSes of old (like, the 90s). Most of them were downright bizarre, and creative as hell too. Dare to be different, I say.

I mean, the genre is rather diverse, wouldn't you say? Just come up with an interesting concept and/or a really inventive story and go with it. Besides, if you're going to complain about something technical, complain about the almost always broken AI that games seem to include. Really amazing AI is something I am still waiting for. These days, "functional" seems to do.

I suppose I'm talking about anytime your point of view is on eye level with the Main Character's and you have some sort of weapon poking out from the corner of your screen. I think I'm starting to realize just how diverse the genre is! I never knew that so many different issues existed. But with a lot of people, there are A LOT of different tastes and styles. Which is great! This is how new stuff is created with the mixture of everything good taken from different types of games. Sooner or later, someone will find the perfect formula. Or maybe not and we will continue to live in searching for the "perfect" FPS shooter.

 

[Grond Strong]

Responsive controls are first and foremost. It's the primary reason that CoD is so good. The controls are as fast and accurate as any game I've ever played. Bad Company 2, for comparison, felt like playing underwater. Everything you do has a 1 second delay.

Maps are another important note. I personally always compare a game's choice of maps to those of Halo 2, the best set of maps in any FPS in my opinion. Black Ops struggles in this department, and that's why it's a shitty game.

Balance is likely the most important factor for a multiplayer game. All of the weapons should have similar Damage-Per-Second and reload times. Grenades should be effective, but not God-Like (I'm looking at you, CoD4). Explosives should either not be in the game at all, or made less dangerous than realism would dictate.

Agreed with the controls... This seems to be a more popular response. I despise it when I finish playing a game that is really good about doing what I tell it to do and then switch to one where my character is slow about his actions. Takes a while for me to "get a feel" for it. I suppose if it matched the gameplay it would be OK. But when the action is fast and the controls are slow, we have a problem...

Big explosions are a bummer. But underdone or lame explosions are just as much so. (E.G. I shouldn't be able to hide behind an office chair to escape a grenade, but it shouldn't be able to penetrate a brick wall either...)