Top 5 Friday: Top 5 First Person Shooters
- Thread starter SmoshGames
- Start date
This episode was bad but could be improved.
The presenter could have been replaced by a robot with little difference. Put more of yourself in it tell a few jokes (the goldeneye bit at the end was good so you can do it) add a bit of personality: When you're competing for views with Yahtzee you have to do a little more than a simple list. Take a look at JonTron for inspiration he has top 10 lists but you don't watch to see what comes first you watch because you want to see more of him. I know it can take time to get into your stride and I want this series to be something I look forward to every week, not just something to remind me of a partnership with Smosh.
The presenter could have been replaced by a robot with little difference. Put more of yourself in it tell a few jokes (the goldeneye bit at the end was good so you can do it) add a bit of personality: When you're competing for views with Yahtzee you have to do a little more than a simple list. Take a look at JonTron for inspiration he has top 10 lists but you don't watch to see what comes first you watch because you want to see more of him. I know it can take time to get into your stride and I want this series to be something I look forward to every week, not just something to remind me of a partnership with Smosh.
Battlefield 3 was by far not the best FPS of all time, I would think Bad Company 2, or some of the older ones as Battlefield 3 really dint ad anything into the battlefield series so not really a favorite.
I would have swapped out Far Cry 3 for Starseige Tribes. It was the progenitor of all online only FPS games with classes and vehicles. I am also aware that Redline came out before hand with vehicles but SS Tribes was far more epic.
Sadly this wasn't informative, interesting or entertaining. My over-riding thought at the end was "..so what?". The show needs either a better presenter or the current one needs to improve significantly - it's not enough to just stand in front of a camera and say "I like these games because reasons."
A top-5 rundown of the most over-saturated genre in current gaming - what was the point? The topic/subject of the top-# needs to be much more original than that; way too boring and generic as it is. Pick a better subject and then either put some proper research into it or make it much more personal to the presenter; one or both of these things to properly back up the decisions for each entrant's inclusion and make it actually engaging.
Finally (this is a cheap shot but needs to be said), I am literally fed up of people misusing that word..
Edit: comment needs to be made of the usual standard of material on the Escapist, which I'm very happy with. I religiously check this site daily in order to catch the latest uploads - so many thanks to the staff for stealing so much of my time!
What I hadn't noticed initially was that these guys do existing content off in the youtubes. That explains why they're talking as if we were supposed to know who they are. As others have said: an introduction would've been nice. Sadly so far this series shrivels when compared to the old regulars' swinging cods. Perhaps it can do a (Thank God For) Jim, listen to the prevailing feedback and improve? Either that or it'll just get dropped as Susan mentioned in last week's thread.
A top-5 rundown of the most over-saturated genre in current gaming - what was the point? The topic/subject of the top-# needs to be much more original than that; way too boring and generic as it is. Pick a better subject and then either put some proper research into it or make it much more personal to the presenter; one or both of these things to properly back up the decisions for each entrant's inclusion and make it actually engaging.
Finally (this is a cheap shot but needs to be said), I am literally fed up of people misusing that word..
Edit: comment needs to be made of the usual standard of material on the Escapist, which I'm very happy with. I religiously check this site daily in order to catch the latest uploads - so many thanks to the staff for stealing so much of my time!
What I hadn't noticed initially was that these guys do existing content off in the youtubes. That explains why they're talking as if we were supposed to know who they are. As others have said: an introduction would've been nice. Sadly so far this series shrivels when compared to the old regulars' swinging cods. Perhaps it can do a (Thank God For) Jim, listen to the prevailing feedback and improve? Either that or it'll just get dropped as Susan mentioned in last week's thread.
Far Cry 3 and Battlefield 3 barely added to the genre (even being as good as they are), and they should be replaced with Doom and Team Fortress. Also Half Life one had much more impact on the genre, even if it's not as good as its sequel, and same goes for Battlefield 1942 and Battlefield 3.
#1 Doom - Responsible for the popularity of the genre (FPS used to be called "Doom Clones" back in the 90s)
#2 Quake - First big multiplayer community.
#3 Half Life - Realism and Storytelling.
#4 Team Fortress - Class based shooters where each class has a specific role.
#5 Battlefield 1942 - Huge maps and Vehicles.
Special mention goes to my favorite of all time Deus Ex, which didn't get into this list because it's more of an RPG than a shooter.
#1 Doom - Responsible for the popularity of the genre (FPS used to be called "Doom Clones" back in the 90s)
#2 Quake - First big multiplayer community.
#3 Half Life - Realism and Storytelling.
#4 Team Fortress - Class based shooters where each class has a specific role.
#5 Battlefield 1942 - Huge maps and Vehicles.
Special mention goes to my favorite of all time Deus Ex, which didn't get into this list because it's more of an RPG than a shooter.
I can't believe he said BF3 multiplayer was "extremely fast paced". It's one of the slowest MP shooters around in the market, mostly about positioning and tactics than twitch reflexes (which don't matter anyway thanks of the godawful hit registration and suppression).
OK, I gave it another chance after last week, and it's even more boring.
This guy has the most boring monotonous delivery I've heard in a very long time. Also what was he doing with his hands, they were all over the place
The content was no better than last week either.
As for the list, putting HL2 at number 1 is fine, not sure if I'd agree with any of the others though.
I know it's been said before in this thread, but come back Lisa Foiles, all is forgiven!
This guy has the most boring monotonous delivery I've heard in a very long time. Also what was he doing with his hands, they were all over the place
The content was no better than last week either.As for the list, putting HL2 at number 1 is fine, not sure if I'd agree with any of the others though.
I know it's been said before in this thread, but come back Lisa Foiles, all is forgiven!
far cry3, really? the game was fun and all but it really dropped off in quality after the first half, by then you have all the upgrades and have done all the interesting mission, the only thing you don't have at that point is the wingsuit, and i didn't really like that.
captcha: hello sweetie, river what are you doing here?
captcha: hello sweetie, river what are you doing here?
Have to agree with everyone talking about how bad this video was. I haven't seen the other ones so maybe this one is just particularly bad, but come on. You've got a description that says the five fps games that define the genre and this is the list you come up with and how you present it? Talking about defining a genre, to me anyway, says influential games. Or at least recent games which define current trends. But since they jump from Quake to Battlefield 3 They're either trying to do both at once or neither and it just doesn't work. And even the games that probably should be there are poorly discussed.
Quake: It has a dark atmosphere and you can gib enemies with grenade launchers? Seriously? That's why it deserves a mention? It isn't worth mentioning that it was the first true 3D fps using polygons and textures to do it's graphics while finally allowing the camera to look in all directions?
Battlefield 3: Ignoring the comments about graphics for a second, he at least gets to talking about the destructible environments, and while they're not new to the series at all, they are at least a valid reason to mention the game since they open up new gameplay possibilities. I wouldn't put the game on a top 5 list myself, but if you've got to have a modern military shooter on here then at least it's got something different going on to justify it being there.
Far Cry 3: It's big and immersive? If we're going to talk about influential, genre defining games, why not dial it back to games like Far Cry which created this style of FPS?
Counter-Strike: yeah, I'd probably put it on the list since it basically invented the more realistic military style FPS, and the reasons for it being there are mostly good, but again, it begs the question of whether the episode is trying to live up to the description or is just some half assed list of his favourite FPS titles. Also, no mention of it originally being a Half-Life mod that exploded into the most played online game? Early esports leagues that popped up around it? I also wouldn't call older versions of CS the most balanced FPS out there since there's a tremendous slippery slope you encounter if one team loses more than one or two rounds in a row and gets far less money. CS:GO at least somewhat fixed this with the round rewards for winning and losing teams being sufficiently close together to keep the losing team from being crippled the next round.
Half-Life 2: Yes, it should absolutely be there, but why does he spend half the time talking about the source engine and other games made using it with only a passing mention of the gravity gun and absolutely no mention of how it was used to manipulate the physics engine both in puzzle solving and as a weapon. And why is there no mention of the dozens of FPS titles that tried to copy HL and HL2's single player styles of story telling, physics manipulation, and in the case of the Doom 3 expansion, outright adding a gravity gun. These were seminal titles which had a massive impact on the directions a lot of games went after them, not just Valve games also built on the source engine.
All in all, is it a bad list? I guess not, though it's a bit schizophrenic and can't seem to decide if it's an influential list or a favourites list. But the explanations for picking these titles are terrible. Important points are glossed over in favour of the sort of half assed, poorly explained praise I expect to see on an internet message board. The original Half-Life had one of the best single player campaigns ever? Please elaborate. Oh wait, that's all you're going to say about it? This level of discussion is pathetic and not worth a weekly web series. If you can't offer some detailed insight into why you pick these titles then you waste your time making these videos and everyone elses watching them.
Hopefully they actually read these comments so they can at least try and learn from them. If not, I look forward to them being dropped from the Escapist because right now they're wasting bandwidth.
Quake: It has a dark atmosphere and you can gib enemies with grenade launchers? Seriously? That's why it deserves a mention? It isn't worth mentioning that it was the first true 3D fps using polygons and textures to do it's graphics while finally allowing the camera to look in all directions?
Battlefield 3: Ignoring the comments about graphics for a second, he at least gets to talking about the destructible environments, and while they're not new to the series at all, they are at least a valid reason to mention the game since they open up new gameplay possibilities. I wouldn't put the game on a top 5 list myself, but if you've got to have a modern military shooter on here then at least it's got something different going on to justify it being there.
Far Cry 3: It's big and immersive? If we're going to talk about influential, genre defining games, why not dial it back to games like Far Cry which created this style of FPS?
Counter-Strike: yeah, I'd probably put it on the list since it basically invented the more realistic military style FPS, and the reasons for it being there are mostly good, but again, it begs the question of whether the episode is trying to live up to the description or is just some half assed list of his favourite FPS titles. Also, no mention of it originally being a Half-Life mod that exploded into the most played online game? Early esports leagues that popped up around it? I also wouldn't call older versions of CS the most balanced FPS out there since there's a tremendous slippery slope you encounter if one team loses more than one or two rounds in a row and gets far less money. CS:GO at least somewhat fixed this with the round rewards for winning and losing teams being sufficiently close together to keep the losing team from being crippled the next round.
Half-Life 2: Yes, it should absolutely be there, but why does he spend half the time talking about the source engine and other games made using it with only a passing mention of the gravity gun and absolutely no mention of how it was used to manipulate the physics engine both in puzzle solving and as a weapon. And why is there no mention of the dozens of FPS titles that tried to copy HL and HL2's single player styles of story telling, physics manipulation, and in the case of the Doom 3 expansion, outright adding a gravity gun. These were seminal titles which had a massive impact on the directions a lot of games went after them, not just Valve games also built on the source engine.
All in all, is it a bad list? I guess not, though it's a bit schizophrenic and can't seem to decide if it's an influential list or a favourites list. But the explanations for picking these titles are terrible. Important points are glossed over in favour of the sort of half assed, poorly explained praise I expect to see on an internet message board. The original Half-Life had one of the best single player campaigns ever? Please elaborate. Oh wait, that's all you're going to say about it? This level of discussion is pathetic and not worth a weekly web series. If you can't offer some detailed insight into why you pick these titles then you waste your time making these videos and everyone elses watching them.
Hopefully they actually read these comments so they can at least try and learn from them. If not, I look forward to them being dropped from the Escapist because right now they're wasting bandwidth.
I knew I shouldn't have watched this. Somehow it's even worse than last week. Also while I don't really agree with those being the best fps games ever the choices isn't my problem, it's the justifications. Mostly it's just parroting marketing speech (destructible terrain, awesome "graphics", big terrains) and has no insight into what makes those things valuable to those games' experience.
Next week I will try harder to avoid this vacuous drivel.
Next week I will try harder to avoid this vacuous drivel.
Every time someone religiously tries to memefy some of Yahtzee's worst and most pointless attempts at humor, which probably took him about 5 seconds to come up with while he was taking a shit, I feel like stabbing a puppy. Granted, you may be 9 years old (at least I hope you are), but it still makes me mad. Stop this right now, and save a puppy.Valagetti said:
When talking about how good a game is, of course it's going to be subjective. I might have had a sort of blood burst when he mentioned Battlefield 3 and Far Cry 3, but it wasn't because I thought he was wrong, I just disagree really strongly about how good those games are.Grouchy Imp said:
Also, you can still learn from other people's subjective thoughts, they can bring up good points and give you a new look on things.
Battlefield 3: 'The Single-player wasn't that good - 4th best FPS'. Ok, wait a second. You judged Far Cry 3, Half-Life 2 and Quake (to an extent) by their single-player, yet you exclusively judged BF3 by it's multi-player. A game should always be judged by it's single-player (if it's a multi-player only title then that's an obvious exception). A game will always be more fun with friends, but that doesn't make the base game any better, and in BF3's case, the base game is so abysmally awful that it wasn't only one of the worst games of 2011, but one of the worst FPS's from a major publisher. Sure, I love the multi-player, it's pretty awesome, but you can't judge a whole game, especially a game with an advertised single-player and a fucking online pass, by it's multi-player. The difference between a crappy game and a great game is subjective to personal taste, but judging an entire £40 game on multi-player alone isn't a matter of opinion. If you think the multi-player balances out the single-player, then fine, but BF3's multi-player isn't that good to outweigh the shitty single-player. Games like Halo, Modern Warfare, Serious Sam, Painkiller, Doom, System Shock, and the excellent BioShock have had more impact on the genre than BF3 ever will, despite also being infinitely better. I hope you're not getting paid for this.
Meh... I still prefer the Top 5 style of Lisa Foiles, Ginx and Zoomin Games this one didn't really keep me interested. Where was TF2 BTW?