No good Sci-fi shooters around?

[whyarecarrots]

This was something I was thinking recently, that there seems to be a lack of any recently released Science-fiction shooters at the moment. Ok, we have things like Halo and Gears of War and their ilk, but they're more slightly futuristic shooters with power armour and slightly more advanced versions of contemporary guns (with a few exceptions).

Since Time Splitters 3 (and Mass Effect-ish (but that is an RPG more than shooter, so doesn't really count as much)), there haven't been any shooters that I have seen that have a much cleaner sci-fi feel to them, having much more definitely futuristic design and more emphasis on laser weaponry and a more outlandish, less 'gritty' feel to them.

Ok, maybe this is me arguing over semantics a bit much, or maybe just me wanting a FPS set in the Mass Effect universe, but I can't help feeling that the 'gritty' and 'realistic' futuristic setting has put the slightly more stereotypically sci-fi setting into the shade, and I'm not too keen on that.

Anyway, are these merely the ramblings of an over-tired 6th former avoiding biology revision, or is there some truth in what I say? Discuss (feel free to take that as an essay title, just don't expect marks...)

 

[geldonyetich]

FPSRPGs are relatively rare beasts, and FPSRPGs with the depth of the Mass Effect Universe even moreso.

But it sounds like what you're really looking for is a non-grittified futuristic FPS. Hmm... tough call. Developers tend to really like the gritty feeling on top of their Sci-Fi because they feel raw Sci-Fi is "too clean" and lacking in character.

Perhaps the Metroid Prime series?

 

[whyarecarrots]

Oh, another caveat: has to be for PC (I;m assuming that invalidates the Metroid Prime series unless I emulate them....)

And I still haven;t actually played Mass Effect: I intend to get it after I;ve finished my exams in May (and hopefully it;ll be on Steam in the UK by then...), so with that and Mass Effect 2 that's two games of that type.

Also, I was wondering if there's any reason why there's become this need to 'grittify' all things futuristic. I suppose it could be a backlask against the overly.... errr (sorry, brain not working...), I suppose sententious and pacifistic nature of Star Trek, or the very cheesy sci-fi films and TV series of the 70s and 80s (Blakes Seven anyone...) but just becuase the game design is very clean doesn;t mean that it has to hark back to that era surely?

 

[Wicky_42]

Are you looking for something like a Elite Force sequel? Nice shiny beams and random colourful blobs - yay What about unreal 3? Or do you have a need for plot?

Yeah, lets face it, people don't seem to like making many games with sparkly guns. Halo did it well, but as the series went on the plasma got harder and faster, less like the colourful blobs of number 1. I'm not sure how much I would want to keep those slow moving blob weapons though - there's just something more visceral about shredding your target with a hail of machinegun fire (The Library in coop using only the Battle Rifle anyone?)

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

How about a super futuristic, clean, high technology shooter.

 

[Joeshie]

I don't get it; to me Mass Eff. had no depth, half the time was spent talking, half was stupid shooting, the story was too short, everything else was copy and paste and there were no non-story planetry bases.

PLEASE people, did I miss something? 'Cos I desperately WANT to love this game, I just can't.

Did you friggin read through all the extra stuff in your log? There was a ton of story and technical details in there.

 

[sirsolo]

What about Fallout 3?
Plenty of shooting, RPG elements, and it's based in post-apocalyptic Washington.
~Sirsolo

 

[gamebrain89]

I don't get it; to me Mass Eff. had no depth, half the time was spent talking, half was stupid shooting, the story was too short, everything else was copy and paste and there were no non-story planetry bases.

PLEASE people, did I miss something? 'Cos I desperately WANT to love this game, I just can't.

To each there own I guess. I rather enjoyed everything about Mass Effect, its one of my favorite games on the 360. I liked how detailed they made the universe, and the story was interesting to me. The combat, while it wasn't great, I had alot of fun with. And there were several smallish bases for some side quests. I think it just didn't hit your buttons the same way it did for me. Nothing wrong with that man.

 

[Avatar Roku]

I don't get it; to me Mass Eff. had no depth, half the time was spent talking, half was stupid shooting, the story was too short, everything else was copy and paste and there were no non-story planetry bases.

PLEASE people, did I miss something? 'Cos I desperately WANT to love this game, I just can't.

Fair enough, I'm the same way with games like Braid. Mass Effect had its problems, to be sure, but how can you say it had no depth? Did you read/listen to the codex? (oh, wait, this isn't the first time you and I have talked about this, is it? I'll stop now).

 

[vede]

You know, you just made me realize the huge lack of sci-fi shooters.

Well... erm... "stereotypical sci-fi" shooters, rather. You know, that seems to focus on little gadgets and stuff, and with space-ships and magical-seeming gadgets and gadgets. Gadgets. And stories that always hinge on people traveling through time or on alien planets or some-such.

Yeah, I'm totally fine with it, though. I'm more about non-stereotypical sci-fi. Like... STALKER. Yeah, STALKER rules.

 

[whyarecarrots]

I don't get it; to me Mass Eff. had no depth, half the time was spent talking, half was stupid shooting, the story was too short, everything else was copy and paste and there were no non-story planetry bases.

PLEASE people, did I miss something? 'Cos I desperately WANT to love this game, I just can't.

My reason for mentioing Mass Effect was not because of the game (which I haven't played), but because of the games visual design and feel, which seems to be quite rare in today's gaming market.

How about a super futuristic, clean, high technology shooter.

Which is the sort of thing that doesn't seem to really be being done with anywhere near the frequency of the 'gritty futuristic marine on alien planet in power armor'. And that's largely the point I'm trying to discuss: is there any reason for this? Or am I just seeing issues where there are none?

edited my first post to clear up my reference to the RPG thing; I was using that as a reason to partly disqualify mass effect from the discussion of shooters (as in games that are primarily based around the combat)

 

[Lt. Sera]

and Mass Effect-ish (RPG more than shooter)

Really? It felt more like a shooter with a decent storyline then a story with some shooting. But I agree, decent futuristic shooters are hard to find. Elite Force rocked, but I haven't seen much after that.

 

[whyarecarrots]

and Mass Effect-ish (RPG more than shooter)

Really? It felt more like a shooter with a decent storyline then a story with some shooting. But I agree, decent futuristic shooters are hard to find. Elite Force rocked, but I haven't seen much after that.

Ahh, just remembered Elite Force: I played that quite a long time ago and was unfortunately handicapped by my (then) fobia of insects... making any of the passages with the slug-like things (ie, a lot of the game) largely unplayable. Unfortuantely I got rid of that a while ago: I probably should try and find a copy somewhere.
Is the sequel any good?

 

[Aardvark]

Greatest Sci-Fi shooter ever

Blake Stone: Aliens of Gold.

 

[Lt. Sera]

Is the sequel any good?

It was ok, but the first was the best.

 

[whyarecarrots]

EDIT: @ organnis, have we discussed this before? I havn't been here long (only 3 days) so you must be mistaking me with another Optimus Prime, or person.

197 posts in 3 days....
Sir, I congratulate you, that has outdone even my ludicrous posting spree on Warseer of a few years ago (I think I was averaging out at about 20 posts a day at the worst point)

 

[NGW]

I'd say Dead Space, though that's more survival horror (sorta) than straight up shooter.