Most innovative FPS

[alexdakid6]

Yes, but you can't innovate without stretching the boundaries a little.

Fair call, but as much as I love System Shock and Deus Ex I've never really been able to think of them as true shooters- more their own beautiful mutants of genres. Sure they are action games to an extent, but combat isn't the main focus of either. Both are about offering a variety of approaches rather than focusing on truly innovating action. If you play them today, you'll see the shooting and combat mechanics are actually quite simple- it's all the other things in the package that make them amazing and unique. You could just as much call them innovative role-playing games as you could call them shooters- but I guess that depends on your personal reflexivity.

 

[Grimm91]

Halo 1 was definitly revolutionary, it completely changed FPS`s forever

People say that and I don't know why. To me it was hard but not revolutionary in any way.

 

[Ravenholm27]

Halo in a sense was revolutionary it opened up the multiplayer aspect of FPSs to a new level but for me that's it and to be honest halo 2 and 3 weren't that great nothing really stood a head above other FPSs in those titles.

 

[Art Axiv]

Halo 1 was definitly revolutionary, it completely changed FPS`s forever

People say that and I don't know why. To me it was hard but not revolutionary in any way.

Me neither. It's a standard SHOOT EVERYONE ON YOUR WAY Fps. And yes, You always go the way where the enemies appear.

 

[alexdakid6]

Was done way before... Flashpoint? Codename -something- ? Any other more realistic FPS had it.

Operation Flashpoint came out the same year as Halo (2001) and was a military sim- gameplay was based on real training programs for US wargames projects. Less of a shooter, more of a first person strategy game (though firing at people with a big gun played an important part in its success). Codename Eagle sunk so far below the radar nobody would have noticed anyway dude.

 

[Arcyde]

Halo 1 was definitly revolutionary, it completely changed FPS`s forever

People say that and I don't know why. To me it was hard but not revolutionary in any way.

Me neither. It's a standard SHOOT EVERYONE ON YOUR WAY Fps. And yes, You always go the way where the enemies appear.

halo 1 pretty much started that

 

[Grimm91]

Halo 1 was definitly revolutionary, it completely changed FPS`s forever

People say that and I don't know why. To me it was hard but not revolutionary in any way.

Me neither. It's a standard SHOOT EVERYONE ON YOUR WAY Fps. And yes, You always go the way where the enemies appear.

Yes and even in Halo 2 the " Revolutionary duel wielding" had been done before. The Halo franchise just cannibalized ever shooter EVER MADE and made it into one.

 

[alexdakid6]

People say that and I don't know why. To me it was hard but not revolutionary in any way.

Three things: 1) Weapon design and balance (besides the damned pistol, everything allowed for a great deal of combat variety).

2) AI- not since Half-Life's marines had there been such an engaging computer control enemy to fight in the Covenant (especially Elites).

3)The regenerative health system.

 

[hippieshopper]

Halo 1 was definitly revolutionary, it completely changed FPS`s forever

People say that and I don't know why. To me it was hard but not revolutionary in any way.

Me neither. It's a standard SHOOT EVERYONE ON YOUR WAY Fps. And yes, You always go the way where the enemies appear.

halo 1 pretty much started that

I don't know about that. Anyone ever play Blood?

 

[Arcyde]

Halo 1 was definitly revolutionary, it completely changed FPS`s forever

People say that and I don't know why. To me it was hard but not revolutionary in any way.

Me neither. It's a standard SHOOT EVERYONE ON YOUR WAY Fps. And yes, You always go the way where the enemies appear.

halo 1 pretty much started that

I don't know about that. Anyone ever play Blood?

im not saying its the first to do it but it made that style popular

 

[alexdakid6]

Yes it was linear- but who gives a damn?
Linearity is easy to accept when combat is interesting and dynamic. Play it on legendary and you'll see what I mean- die as much as possible and you'll notice that battles never play out the same way twice. The AI is adaptive and interesting, and the weapon variety and balance complemented this.

And yeah, dual-wielding was done before (and better) in Soldier of Fortune II (for pc, not the rubbish Xbox port).

 

[xxnightlawxx]

DOOM
anyone cmon

 

[meatloaf231]

Yes, but you can't innovate without stretching the boundaries a little.

Fair call, but as much as I love System Shock and Deus Ex I've never really been able to think of them as true shooters- more their own beautiful mutants of genres. Sure they are action games to an extent, but combat isn't the main focus of either. Both are about offering a variety of approaches rather than focusing on truly innovating action. If you play them today, you'll see the shooting and combat mechanics are actually quite simple- it's all the other things in the package that make them amazing and unique. You could just as much call them innovative role-playing games as you could call them shooters- but I guess that depends on your personal reflexivity.

Actually, the fact that they could be called RPGs orshooters is precisely why they are innovative. They didn't stick to the formula.

 

[Grimm91]

People say that and I don't know why. To me it was hard but not revolutionary in any way.

Three things: 1) Weapon design and balance (besides the damned pistol, everything allowed for a great deal of).

2) AI- not since Half-Life's marines had there been such an engaging computer control enemy to fight in the Covenant (especially Elites).

3)The regenerative health system.

Weapon design blew, and was very unbalanced. I can kill you with a shotgun from 30 feet away
and a sniper was God who rained unmerciful death. The regenerative health system has tainted the genre making the games far too easy. Lastly The Elites were not that smart or even fun to fight. They just kinda ran after you and grunted yelling "I'm going to kill you". Besides if they could not even comprehend that I was behind a wall lobbing grenades they were not very engaging.

 

[DirkGently]

Halo 1 was definitly revolutionary, it completely changed FPS`s forever

People say that and I don't know why. To me it was hard but not revolutionary in any way.

Me neither. It's a standard SHOOT EVERYONE ON YOUR WAY Fps. And yes, You always go the way where the enemies appear.

It also proved that FPS's could be done well on a console, started the whole "You can only carry two weapons" and "You don't need to select your melee weapon to thwack something, you just thwack it" thing. There's also the cool, mysterious storyline, sensible regenerating health system, and vehicle sections that are actually fun.

Personally, I'd suggest Marathon. First game to ever allow dual-wielding, have a story on par with something along the lines of House Of Leaves, very interesting literary references, and mysteries that were, well, mysterious.

And while yes, it's a "Here be enemies, kill they ass until you get to level exit, stopping only to get ammo, use a recharger, or solve a puzzle/complete an objective", that's what a lot of FPS are like.

 

[zen5887]

Doom and Wolfenstein. They were the first to get massive recognition and kick start interest in the genre.

This!

 

[hippieshopper]

Doom and Wolfenstein. They were the first to get massive recognition and kick start interest in the genre.

This!

True!

And even if Halo started the kill everything part, why do we celebrate that...it seems kinda "mediocre" to me.

 

[Ravenholm27]

Doom and Wolfenstein. They were the first to get massive recognition and kick start interest in the genre.

This!

only problem is that they were the first technical FPSs created though

 

[Syphonz]

People say that and I don't know why. To me it was hard but not revolutionary in any way.

Three things: 1) Weapon design and balance (besides the damned pistol, everything allowed for a great deal of combat variety).

2) AI- not since Half-Life's marines had there been such an engaging computer control enemy to fight in the Covenant (especially Elites).

3)The regenerative health system.

the regenerative health system wasn't 'revolutionary' it was in-fact ripped off from Jurassic Park: Trespasser. But I guess only someone that bought that underrated game (that tried too many new things) would know that.

EDIT: And can someone explain to me why a guy thinks Halo revolutionized 'kill everything in sight'? the first two FPS's ever made (Wolfenstien and Doom) were nothing BUT that. Not to mention every single FPS made from then until Rainbow Six games came along actually changed that.

 

[alexdakid6]

Actually, the fact that they could be called RPGs or shooters is precisely why they are innovative. They didn't stick to the formula.

Yes, but what school of thought does that innovation apply to? Is it an innovative RPG or an innovative FPS? Is it either?

When I think 'shooter' I think 'action-game' along side it. Neither Deus Ex or System Shock we focused on innovating on action tropes, they amalgamated a first person viewpoint and hybrid (because shooting relied on stats) combat systems into the context of a roleplaying game.

A first person shooter is more than just the viewpoint or the number of guns it offers- the depth of combat mechanics (weapon balance, movement rules, etc.) are what make a straight shooter innovative. Deus Ex's and System Shock's shooting mechanics are even simpler than 'rock-paper-siscors'ideas- in DX all you do is aim and shoot with different weapons fitting in to traditional FPS conventions (melee, rocket launchers, pistols, shotguns, sniper rifles)
No alternate firing modes, and the damage boxes are simple. Headshot means instant death.
Innovative FPS mechanics from an action standpoint? Nope. In the wider context of the game it's just one of the pieces that make it interesting, but it isn't necessarily great by itself.