Getting people into First Person Shooters.
- Thread starter Wackymon
- Start date
Portal is pretty much the best start I can think of. It's that mix of platformer gameplay with shooter controls so it's pretty much the best you can go to if you've been playing loads of Mario.
I don't think someone who has no interest in the genre would have any reason to forgive 20 year old graphics.Richard A. Kiernan said:
There was a time when I wouldn't play a single FPS, I disliked them so much, but I loved RPGs.
I played Borderlands co-op with a friend, now I love FPSs.
So Borderlands co-op is my recommendation.
I played Borderlands co-op with a friend, now I love FPSs.
So Borderlands co-op is my recommendation.
HL2 is easily the best choice. Especially prettified with the FakeFactory Mods. The game is still the epitome of the modern shooter, which is a bit sad actually. It has a wide spectrum of gameplay, varied level design, a strong narrative that ties everyting together and on easy it's not that difficult.
Recommending DOOM must be joke. The game looks like ass - and yes, contrary to the Escapist-meme, graphics matter. At least a bit. It's also run-and-gun only with no further gameplay mechanics, has a dead non-interactive world filled with only enemies (completely stupid ones at that) and generic level design (a.k.a. arbitrary sequence of hallways and rooms). How do you expect people who know more complex game design from ANGRY BIRDS to appreciate the genre of FPS if you deprive them of all the evolution it took? You wouldn't try to sell the idea of a car by making people drive the Model T.
I've been playing BLACK MESA lately and it is ultimately disappointing, if nostalgia-invoking.
Level design and gameplay from 1999 just don't cut it anymore. Been saying to a friend of mine that the dream of introducing a new generation of gamers to Half-Life didn't come true, because they will see a relatively modern looking game and judge it's lacking gameplay in comparison with contemporary games, where even third rate shooters are now doing everything HL revolutionized 13 years ago, and label it a hype.
The furthest back I'd go, for the value of being different, is NO ONE LIVES FOREVER. This is one of the very few shooters that didn't take itself serious. It had lots of ideas, lots of COLOR and was fun to play. So people who are reluctant to try shooters because they think of them as muddy brown, violent and written for 13-year-old boys, could be intrigued.
Of course, if a friend is a fan of a particular fiction genre, that could play a role as well. MAX PAYNE was a film-noir, FEAR had horror, DEUS EX: HR for the Sci-Fi fan, DARK MESSIAH for the fantasy inclined, RED DEAD REDEMPTION or CALL OF JUAREZ for the wild west...
Recommending DOOM must be joke. The game looks like ass - and yes, contrary to the Escapist-meme, graphics matter. At least a bit. It's also run-and-gun only with no further gameplay mechanics, has a dead non-interactive world filled with only enemies (completely stupid ones at that) and generic level design (a.k.a. arbitrary sequence of hallways and rooms). How do you expect people who know more complex game design from ANGRY BIRDS to appreciate the genre of FPS if you deprive them of all the evolution it took? You wouldn't try to sell the idea of a car by making people drive the Model T.
I've been playing BLACK MESA lately and it is ultimately disappointing, if nostalgia-invoking.
Level design and gameplay from 1999 just don't cut it anymore. Been saying to a friend of mine that the dream of introducing a new generation of gamers to Half-Life didn't come true, because they will see a relatively modern looking game and judge it's lacking gameplay in comparison with contemporary games, where even third rate shooters are now doing everything HL revolutionized 13 years ago, and label it a hype.
The furthest back I'd go, for the value of being different, is NO ONE LIVES FOREVER. This is one of the very few shooters that didn't take itself serious. It had lots of ideas, lots of COLOR and was fun to play. So people who are reluctant to try shooters because they think of them as muddy brown, violent and written for 13-year-old boys, could be intrigued.
Of course, if a friend is a fan of a particular fiction genre, that could play a role as well. MAX PAYNE was a film-noir, FEAR had horror, DEUS EX: HR for the Sci-Fi fan, DARK MESSIAH for the fantasy inclined, RED DEAD REDEMPTION or CALL OF JUAREZ for the wild west...
Just because they have learnt the control scheme doesn't mean they'll suddenly discover a love for the genre. It's like expecting someone to suddenly want to pursue a career as a race driver after they pass their driving test. There's more to enjoying a genre than simply understanding the controls. That's not the draw of it. That's not the appeal. That's why they're designated as different genres.DazZ. said:
Well if you want someone to get in to FPS games you would naturally want to give them a game that did a good job of showing off the appeal of FPS games while also being accessible. Showing them a game that's primarily about puzzle solving isn't really going to do that. Someone who has mastered the controls in Portal isn't going to start wanting to play Half Life or Halo because they know how to move in them.DazZ. said:
You also don't necessarily need Portal to teach someone the controls. Games like Halo can have really low difficulty settings, and if someone really needs it you can set up a multiplayer match with no opponents so they can have as long as they want to just get used to the controls without being under fire.
And having to pass a driving test to start a racing career isn't [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Hamilton] necessarily [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayrton_Senna] true. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginetta_Junior_Championship]
Clearly it's not a necessity or there wouldn't be anyone playing FPS games before Portal... It's just a handy way of teaching controls.Scrustle said:
Being pedantic over genres that control the same really isn't relevant to how to help someone into either genre.
