Boomer Shooters, Half-Life 1, and Halo: CE

[BigMetalhead]

This is a bit of a weird question, but I wasn't able to find a straightforward answer through googling. I'm also pretty new to "boomer shooters", so I'm very new to all the nuanced concepts in them. So, apologies in advance if this is a stupid question.

 

What exactly are the differences between Boomer Shooters (Doom, Quake, Duke Nukem, etc.) and the more modern shooters like Half-Life 1 and Halo: CE? A lot of oldschool players point to those two specifically that marked the "death" of the shooter genre as they knew it. Some people also mention that Half-Life 1 and Halo: CE are "much more linear" compared to boomer shooters, which is kinda ironic considering that the fans of those two series describe said games as the ones with the most open-ended levels in the series. So I'm not exactly sure what the differences are between the old and the new.

[Nevander]

34 minutes ago, BigMetalhead said:

What exactly are the differences between Boomer Shooters (Doom, Quake, Duke Nukem, etc.) and the more modern shooters like Half-Life 1 and Halo: CE?

The differences to me come down to gameplay styles and overall game design.

 

Boomer shooters are catagorized by open, non-linear level design. Keycards, color doors, minimal scripting, basic AI behaviors, simple boss fights, no regenerating health, carry all weapons at once, fast paced action, story largely unimportant, etc. You get the gist.

 

Modern shooters switched the formula up by changing to linear levels or "bubble" style levels. Other game mechanics changed too such as weapon carry limits (not Half Life though), regenerating health, scripted events, cinematic events, heavier on puzzles, heavier on story elements, etc.

[Rudolph]

We need a new category for games like Half-Life and Halo, because they are a different breed than the current batch of "modern" shooters and even though I am not a fan of Halo, I still feel like it is different from the post-Modern Warfare Call of Duty games.

 

The early 2000s first-person shooters, maybe?

Edited December 20, 2021 by Rudolph

[lokbustam257]

1 hour ago, BigMetalhead said:

What exactly are the differences between Boomer Shooters (Doom, Quake, Duke Nukem, etc.) and the more modern shooters like Half-Life 1 and Halo: CE?

It's mostly gameplay and stuff. In boomer shooter, the levels are mostly just: Find the keys to that door, and go to the exit without any objective marker. And boomer shooter also known for their fast gameplay, non regenerating health, no weapon limit, etc, unlike modern shooter which is usually have regenerating health, very linear level design, 2 weapons limit, too much cutscenes, etc.

[BigMetalhead]

Thanks for the answers, everyone. I can definitely see the differences now. Although, it's kinda crazy to think just how much scripted/cinematic events change the feel of the games.

[Midnight_00]

The design of the original Halo is a bit of an outlier among more modern shooters because it isn't that scripted and is fairly open ended. Unfortunately it does still periodically force you to stand around and wait until you're allowed to move on.

 

Also, I'm not sure I agree with puzzles being a characteristic feature of modern shooters either outside of Half Life. I certainly don't remember them being present in games like Halo, Medal of Honour or Call of Duty.

Edited December 20, 2021 by Midnight_00

[Alfonso]

Half Life and Halo are bad unlike boomer shooters.

That's the difference.

[cybdmn]

7 hours ago, BigMetalhead said:

What exactly are the differences between Boomer Shooters (Doom, Quake, Duke Nukem, etc.) and the more modern shooters like Half-Life 1 and Halo: CE?

 

The earlier shooters had an arcade like design, with stage after stage, some boss fights and a lot of creative freedom. While more modern shooters like HL had a more story driven approach, which mad it necessary to streamline the overall design to more linear maps.

 

Not that the studios didn't tried to make map design non-linear later, but these attempts failed in  the market. One of these is Medal of Honor: Airborne. While it certainly had some modern bullshit, like weapon upgrades, it's overall design worked pretty well in my opinion.  Basically every mission takes place in a small town, with a handful of mission objectives. The player is a paratrooper, jumping out of an airplane at the beginning of each mission, and can land everywhere on the map. With this approach, it is up to the player to decide the  order in which he want to accomplish the objectives. but as i said, unfortunately it wasn't very successful, so EA  abandoned this approach after MoH: Vanguard.

[Cruduxy Pegg]

None of those games qualify as modern. Halo CE is 2 decades old. We've come full circle since Doom Eternal and Halo Infinite are now the current single player FPS games.

[kwc]

2 hours ago, Alfonso said:

Half Life and Halo are bad unlike boomer shooters.

That's the difference.

Hey Alf.

[whybmonotacrab]

3 hours ago, Alfonso said:

Half Life and Halo are bad unlike boomer shooters.

That's the difference.

Wow. You're like, so cool and special for being contrarian. It definitely makes you smarter than the rest of the population.

 

Anyway, the main difference is pacing. Boomer shooters are fast paced and have very little down time. Gameplay is prioritised over narrative and it's primarily about feeding the player adrenaline. The industry moved away from arcadey speed for two reasons: Narrative and the rising popularity of consoles. Also, it's not even necessarily that Half-Life changed everything, because games like Ultima Underworld and System Shock were focused on slower narrative based experiences beforehand, Half-Life just made that experience accessible.

 

 It's important to note that neither style is objectively better. Like what you like. I've enjoyed post 2000s fps titles like FEAR, Stalker, the Half Life series, Metro, Bioshock, Prey, Titanfall 2, Destiny 2 etc just as much as Boomer shooters. It depends more on the merits of game itself than the genre it's a part of imo.

[ReaperAA]

As others have mentioned, the difference between boomer shooters and moderns shooters is mainly gameplay related. Boomer shooters "usually" have more non-linear level design (often involving item/key hunts), lack of regenerating health, allow carrying all weapons, simple AI, minimal storyline (if story is there, it is usually conveyed through environment/level desing as opposed to cutscenes), minimal or no scripted events, fast paced, less focus on realism etc.

 

And to be fair, while Half Life and Halo CE aren't true boomer shooters, they aren't exactly like modern (post CoD 2 era) shooters either. They seem more like in-between games.  For example, Half Life still allows to carry all weapons, has no health regeneration, is fast paced etc. And Halo CE has very open level design and barely has any scripted events.

 

3 hours ago, Alfonso said:

Half Life and Halo are bad unlike boomer shooters.

That's the difference.

 

No

[lokbustam257]

4 hours ago, Alfonso said:

Half Life and Halo are bad unlike boomer shooters.

That's the difference.

Oh boy here we go...

[RonnieJamesDiner]

A little bit of a digression but I'd like to just point out, again, that Halo: CE didn't actually have regenerating health - it had a regenerating shield (yes, I think it's an important distinction). 

 

This always felt like the perfect "in-between" to me, because it afforded the opportunity to be a bit reckless or sloppy, while still having to be mindful of that hard, finite health pool (and still made health pickups a valuable find). But, part of what made the mechanic so much fun was the fact that the Elites had this exact regenerating shield mechanic, as well.

 

So, while you can absolutely hide behind cover and let your shield regenerate mid-fight, you might just be letting that Elite do the same thing. The strengths and weaknesses of your shield could be applied defensively and offensively, but it also taught you how to engage with one of the games most common, and arguably most dangerous enemies. Oh, the Jackal's "charge" shot from their pistol seems to deplete my entire shield in a single blow? Cool, I can use this against those damn Elites! Ah, darn, I'm carrying the Assault Rifle and Sniper - let's drop the Sniper real quick for that Jackal's pistol, blast the Elite with a charge, waste him with the AR, pick the Sniper back up and be on my merry way. Aaaaand suddenly CE's "sandbox" style combat is feeling very fun, indeed.  

Edited December 20, 2021 by RonnieJamesDiner

[Kinsie]

11 hours ago, BigMetalhead said:

and the more modern shooters like Half-Life 1 and Halo: CE

Halo 1 is twenty years old. Half-Life 1 is 23.

[Gez]

I'd say:

• Simple gameplay. You run, you gun. That's it. No minigames, physics puzzles, or vehicle/turret segments.
• Focus on exploration. Some levels can actually be quite mazelike. More modern games end to have signposting to tell you where you need to go, and more linearity.

[GratefulDeadInside]

"Boomer Shooters" are usually exemplified by fast gameplay, no weapon limit, large maps, and multitudes of secrets and hidden pathways. There's a much more "retro" approach to them. Modern shooters like the ones you mentioned are much slower with more complex gameplay, also with more linearity. 

[Marisa the Magician]

Looking at these qualifications makes me wonder whether or not Unreal would even be considered a "boomer shooter". Sure, it has large sprawling maps and weapon limits, but the combat tends to be more situational (is that the correct word? I can't remember) and the AI is anything but simple. And add to that the complete lack of keyhunts (or as CliffyB called them, "errand boy bullshit"), too.

 

I'd suppose it's part of a sort of "transitional" stage, then.

[Tetzlaff]

20 hours ago, Nevander said:

 

Boomer shooters

story largely unimportant, etc. 

I agree with your characterization except this point. Boomer shooters rely largely on visual storytelling, while the FPS games since Half-Life have a more cinematic approach via cutscenes and scripted events.
 

Boomer shooters are show, don‘t tell. Post HL FPS: lengthy blah blah cutscene dialogues.

Edited December 20, 2021 by Tetzlaff

[Alfonso]

8 hours ago, lokbustam257 said:

Oh boy here we go...

 

9 hours ago, ReaperAA said:

As others have mentioned, the difference between boomer shooters and moderns shooters is mainly gameplay related. Boomer shooters "usually" have more non-linear level design (often involving item/key hunts), lack of regenerating health, allow carrying all weapons, simple AI, minimal storyline (if story is there, it is usually conveyed through environment/level desing as opposed to cutscenes), minimal or no scripted events, fast paced, less focus on realism etc.

 

And to be fair, while Half Life and Halo CE aren't true boomer shooters, they aren't exactly like modern (post CoD 2 era) shooters either. They seem more like in-between games.  For example, Half Life still allows to carry all weapons, has no health regeneration, is fast paced etc. And Halo CE has very open level design and barely has any scripted events.

 

 

No

 

9 hours ago, whybmonotacrab said:

Wow. You're like, so cool and special for being contrarian. It definitely makes you smarter than the rest of the population.

 

Anyway, the main difference is pacing. Boomer shooters are fast paced and have very little down time. Gameplay is prioritised over narrative and it's primarily about feeding the player adrenaline. The industry moved away from arcadey speed for two reasons: Narrative and the rising popularity of consoles. Also, it's not even necessarily that Half-Life changed everything, because games like Ultima Underworld and System Shock were focused on slower narrative based experiences beforehand, Half-Life just made that experience accessible.

 

 It's important to note that neither style is objectively better. Like what you like. I've enjoyed post 2000s fps titles like FEAR, Stalker, the Half Life series, Metro, Bioshock, Prey, Titanfall 2, Destiny 2 etc just as much as Boomer shooters. It depends more on the merits of game itself than the genre it's a part of imo.

 

10 hours ago, kwc said:

Hey Alf.

Why are you defending this?

Neither open world or linear scripted crap can't compare with old school fps level design.

[holaareola]

1 hour ago, Alfonso said:

E1M6

Ah, she's a beaut. Always loved the way that one looks on the automap.

 

11 minutes ago, Marisa Kirisame said:

Looking at these qualifications makes me wonder whether or not Unreal would even be considered a "boomer shooter". Sure, it has large sprawling maps and weapon limits, but the combat tends to be more situational (is that the correct word? I can't remember) and the AI is anything but simple. And add to that the complete lack of keyhunts (or as CliffyB called them, "errand boy bullshit"), too.

 

I'd suppose it's part of a sort of "transitional" stage, then.

I'd consider it one. It has the PDAs but other than that the whole game is emergent from the core gameplay systems -- levels, weapons, enemies, items. No gameplay variants created for one-off cinematic scenarios, vehicle sections or whatever. And no in-game cutscenes (or the admittedly superior HL style locked-in exposition dumps). For me this is the biggest design difference.

 

I agree with you @Tetzlaff, a kind of imitation of interactive cinema is the macro difference in sensibility.

[BigMetalhead]

14 hours ago, Pegg said:

None of those games qualify as modern. Halo CE is 2 decades old. We've come full circle since Doom Eternal and Halo Infinite are now the current single player FPS games.

That's absolutely true. Considering your post and the others' posts about it, calling Halo CE and Half Life 1 "modern" is pretty incorrect. And yeah, we really have come full circle lol.

[Murdoch]

EDIT: Forum had a senior moment. Ignore.

[Murdoch]

4 hours ago, Alfonso said:

Why are you defending this?

Neither open world or linear scripted crap can't compare with old school fps level design.

 

Different people like different things. Honestly, if you go around with this kind of attitude people will rightly get fed up with you. Someone liking something you don't like does not hurt you in any way. Get over yourself.

[Hawk of The Crystals]

Never mind; don't want to make an ass of myself.

[xdarkmasterx]

5 hours ago, Alfonso said:

 

 

 

Why are you defending this?

Neither open world or linear scripted crap can't compare with old school fps level design.

[IMAGE]

 

Tell me which level best corresponds to each diagram :3

 

THE EPIC boomer shooter:

 

Spoiler

 

 

Casual COD kiddie game:

 

Spoiler

 

[whybmonotacrab]

5 hours ago, Alfonso said:

 

 

 

Why are you defending this?

Neither open world or linear scripted crap can't compare with old school fps level design.

Neither of the games you were bashing are anything like this picture. Firstly, Half-Life doesn't have cutscenes. Outside of the tram ride at the start, you're in control for the entire journey. Secondly, it uses linearity well to keep up a consistent pace, and the firefights and puzzles themselves give a lot of options. Even still it's not as linear as the picture as there's branching paths and secrets. Thirdly, Halo's map design isn't like that at all, it has a lot of wide open spaces with vehicles. It's very much a combat sandbox because they give you enemies with insanely good AI and let you work out how best to take them. 

 

 It's very obvious that you don't know what you're talking about. That picture was made to talk about Call of Duty and Battlefield - which came after well after Halo and Half-Life and are nothing like them - and fps level design hasn't been like that in a decade.

[Sena]

Boomer shooter, as I understand it, is another way of saying retro styled FPS game, and anything pre-2000 is the generally agreed upon definition of retro game. So, Half Life falls under retro game, and so would any contemporary 'boomer shooter' that emulates its style, it just so happens that all of them (or at least all the ones popular enough for me to have heard of them) only seem interested in emulating the style of Doom/DN3D. And while I never actually played Halo, from my understanding, it popularised the 2 weapon limit, frequent cutscenes due to an emphasis on story, turret and vehicle sections, which are all things that are common features in modern shooter design. It's all just made up internet neologisms, not like there's a real definition for this stuff.

Edited December 21, 2021 by Sena

[Maggle]

I get more and more tired of this "boomer shooter vs modern shooter" argument every time it comes up, because every distinction made is often way too simplistic, way too biased, and ignores the changes made to game design over the years and why they were made. People just boil it all down to "boomer shooter is when the gun big and i move fast" and just leave it at that. I don't like the implication that there's only two types of shooter game either. Immersive sims were born around the same time the "boomer shooter" was, and those are nothing like boomer shooters or modern shooters at all. Go ahead, start a new game of Deus Ex and try to play it like it's doom, or even like halo. you will get smoked because it's a very different game from either of those, and games like that just get left out of these comparisons. There isn't just two types of FPS divided by the turn of the millennium, it's more complicated than that. 

[Rudolph]

@whybmonotacrab You are in control of the character during the tram ride: you just cannot leave the tram until you reach its destination.