Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
geekmarine

What's the deal with modern

Recommended Posts

I'm sure this topic has come up many times before, but why is it that so often when companies want to make a "retro" FPS game, it always ends up being nothing but open arenas with endless waves of enemies? You know what I'm talking about - Serious Sam, Painkiller, and the like. I don't really get where the association between retro and endless monster arenas comes from. Yeah, in games like Doom, you could often find yourself in rooms with tons of enemies, whereas with most modern shooters, you never see more than, say, five in a room at a time, but it wasn't about arena-style combat. There was lots of exploration, never knowing what was going to be around the next corner, etc. In fact, that's a biggie right there - exploration, and most modern retro shooters completely ignore it. Why is that? I mean, when I go back and play Doom 3, for all its faults, I have to admit, at least it got the basic formula mostly right. Granted, there are far, far too many monster traps, but overall, it seems to at least somewhat get it - explore, fight, explore some more, find a key, etc. Heck, Dead Space almost feels more like a Doom-type game than games like Serious Sam and the like.

Share this post


Link to post

Serious Sam is no longer modern, and when it was, it wasn't trying to be retro.

I can't explain why Shadow Warrior went with that route, but when other FPS games try to be Doom clones, they get slated for being 'corridor shooters', which has somehow become a dirty word in the industry.

Share this post


Link to post

When Serious Sam first came out it wasn't trying to be Doom or the like. It was fairly amazing, I thought, because shit got crazy and it was pretty fun. It was the first game that I know of that sent an insane amount of enemies at you at once, that's why I liked it because I had never seen that before. Serious Sam BFE is another story tho :(.

Share this post


Link to post

Uggg I didn't like Painkiller. Just circle strafing in combat arenas. I guess open arenas is a good way to be open and use enemy AI and flank things, but it just turns into circle strafing.

I think the real issue is true 3D enemies take up too much graphic processing power. Maybe if enemies took up less processing power, like if they were less detailed there could be more on the screen. Like how GTA could have dozens of people on screen, but they all looked awful. Maybe its polygon count or whatever. Maybe its enemy AI that takes a lot of processing power.

I just went through Dead Space 1 for the first time. You had to tackle everything head on and slowly. Thankfully nothing attacked from behind or from the left. The blind spot.

Skyrim is a great FPS.

Share this post


Link to post

Screenshots, gameplay, developer commentary, and bribes to gaming review sites sell the game.

Share this post


Link to post

I liked both Doom 3 and Dead Space (Dead Space is Doom 3 done right, as far as I'm concerned), but can't say I'm seeing the exploration part. Both games are entirely linear and funnel you from point A to point B, the best you can hope is one directly adjacent room with a few supplies (and almost always, that room is a dead end). I don't think either game would work if you could actually explore, you kind of have to be on a set path for the traps and ambushes.

Perhaps you mean exploration as... not knowing what is beyond the next door, and actually being in an environment worth paying attention to and thinking about. Personally, I prefer to call that atmosphere, so there can be more distinction between that and exploration as in having a number of paths you can pick and/or free roaming.

Share this post


Link to post

Serious Sam and Painkiller have almost nothing in common.

The first Dead Space feels more like System Shock than Doom.

Share this post


Link to post

I guess the level editing is more complex and takes lots of time to use now.
I want the monster hordes back. What happened to moments like the decimating of 31 imps at once with the BFG in D2 MAP08?

Share this post


Link to post

Modern FPS are just dumbed down to such a degree that the average 12 year old can play it and see many, many explosions.

I blame the lack of education and Coca Cola for melting peoples brains. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Belial said:

Serious Sam and Painkiller have almost nothing in common.

The fuck? The only meaningful differences between the 2 are aesthetics and ss had more open level design in general. The basic gameplay however is 95% identical.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm almost certain there are more people on this community my age.

Surely there's got to be!


My point is, if more companies realise that 13 year-olds like "proper" games, like Doom, they should (in theory) adapt their games to that. unfortunately, that's not gonna happen anytime soon.
You wouldn't believe the number of idiotic comments sent my way by kids my age who oversaw me play Doom on my phone or who call Heretic Minecraft when they see me playing that on my phone.


Whatever happened to sense?

Share this post


Link to post

I just played through Aliens: Colonial Marines and since we're on the topic of modern, I figured I'd rant for a second. Firstly, I don't understand why Aliens CM got trashed by so many people yet no other modern FPS did the same way ACM has, doesn't make sense. I'm assuming it's because of the Aliens title, but I haven't played any modern FPS that's much different than that game. It's all skillless, linear bullshit for suckers to purchase, and there's really no difference between any FPS titles. They're all mostly interactive movies. I don't purchase any FPS game, at least in the last few years, before "trying" it first, to insure that the developer deserves my money. And time and time again, I'm so fucking glad I try before I buy.

Share this post


Link to post

I haven't played Aliens: Colonial Marines, but there are three primary reasons it got so horribly slagged. One - it didn't look nearly as good as early trailers indicated. Not a huge deal, but those trailers claimed to show gameplay but it was clearly touched up. Two - from what I understand, it was buggy as shit. People have posted tons of videos online of horrible bugs that apparently crop up often enough to make the game unpleasant to play. Three - thanks to the AvP franchise, we have a series of Aliens shooters by which to compare Colonial Marines. The gameplay, from what I understand, didn't hold up. So it's a matter of, "Well if developers can get the gameplay so right in earlier games, why doesn't it hold up in a newer game with the same license?" Again, haven't played the game myself, so I don't know how well these arguments hold up, but those are the arguments I've heard for why it's terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Quast said:

The fuck? The only meaningful differences between the 2 are aesthetics and ss had more open level design in general. The basic gameplay however is 95% identical.


Exactly.

I would separate Serious Sam 3 from other "horde shooters" though. Each level had something characteristic about it and the game never made me bored.

Regarding the original question - "retro" seems to be just a word used to sell games. Like the OP said, people seem to think that "lots of monsters" = "retro", when in reality it's the exploration that's crucial. Games being advertised as "retro" usually have little to do with true classics of the genre.

Think of it this way: in Doom you have to press the exit switch. That's the objective and if you have to kill a number of demons when trying to fulfill it, so be it, but it's not necessary. On the other hand, Painkiller / Serious Sam won't let you progress unless you kill what has to be killed. This quickly gets boring.

The first time I played Painkiller (Black Edition) it was AWESOME, but having completed all PK / SS games I sadly realized that this first experience was everything the genre had to offer. All other games (save for SS3 perhaps) were just a repetition of PK:BE for me.

Share this post


Link to post
geekmarine said:

I haven't played Aliens: Colonial Marines, but there are three primary reasons it got so horribly slagged. One - it didn't look nearly as good as early trailers indicated. Not a huge deal, but those trailers claimed to show gameplay but it was clearly touched up. Two - from what I understand, it was buggy as shit. People have posted tons of videos online of horrible bugs that apparently crop up often enough to make the game unpleasant to play. Three - thanks to the AvP franchise, we have a series of Aliens shooters by which to compare Colonial Marines. The gameplay, from what I understand, didn't hold up. So it's a matter of, "Well if developers can get the gameplay so right in earlier games, why doesn't it hold up in a newer game with the same license?" Again, haven't played the game myself, so I don't know how well these arguments hold up, but those are the arguments I've heard for why it's terrible.


I see. I know they released a 2gig patch so maybe I missed all the bugs and such. Sort of insulted my intelligence whilst playing and thinking "the fuck, this is nothing new and not any different than any other FPS I've played recently gameplay-wise. It just happens to be an Aliens game."

Share this post


Link to post
Belial said:

The first Dead Space feels more like System Shock than Doom.

Like hell it does.

Share this post


Link to post

The first time I played Painkiller (Black Edition) it was AWESOME, but having completed all PK / SS games I sadly realized that this first experience was everything the genre had to offer. All other games (save for SS3 perhaps) were just a repetition of PK:BE for me.


Ha, that is so opposite of my own experience I just have to post about it. Right now I'm playing through Painkiller Black and enjoying it a lot, even though I've been highly critical of the game on these very forums. Ditto with Serious Sam, used to think it was tripe, then I really got into it.

Much like with Doom, for me the key was to really delve into the intricacies of the gameplay instead of expecting it to fit the mold of my preconceptions... and stop quicksaving. Not even on purpose for Painkiller, the game just happens to corrupt saves a lot so the recommended course of action is to not save. Turns out this made the experience so much more interesting.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×