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

Things I miss from FPS games.

Recommended Posts

1. Non linear level design. I miss having large levels with many different paths and areas. games used to reward players for exploring, with items and weapons, but now in modern fps games there is no reason to go anywhere other than the next checkpoint. speaking of...
2. Lack of checkpoints or saves. The feeling of beating a hard level without the help of checkpoints is geat, and rewarding.
3. Health that does not regenerate. regenerating health is lazy and makes a game way too easy. imagine if in Doom all you had to do when you were low on health is run to cover and wait 10 seconds for it to regenerate.
4. enemy variety. self explanatory.

(yes I know not all modern Fps games are like this, but this goes to the majority of them)

Share this post


Link to post

I completely agree to your first point, non-linear level design was the first thing that came into my mind.

The regenerating health is not necessarely a bad thing IMO. Classic pick-up medikits encourage exploration, regenerating health encourages a careful approach to combat with fallback and cover. I actually like health systems that combine both aspects: a health bar divided in 3 or 4 segments where every segment can regenerate health severally, but if you want to restore segments you previously lost, you have to pick up medkits. Pariah and some other games had a system like that.

Share this post


Link to post

Regenerating health would be acceptable only if your health is at least 80% or Higher , This would make more sense and give balance to the game .

Share this post


Link to post

The FPS genre today is so broad that there is a selection of non-linear shooters. Non-linear even in the different senses of the word.

Sure, games like Dishonored or Far Cry (2-4) are not First Person Shooters in the classic sense of the word, but they are close enough. SOMA and Alien Isolation may not be that either or non-linear in the sense that you are seeking, but they present a problem and let you choose how to solve it. The order of things doesn't necessarily matter. Wolfenstein TNO does more or less the same; utilizing linear sequences when needed and open areas when that makes sense. The Crysis series does the same thing.

Personally I think the variety and quality of games in general and "FPS" specifically are greatly increasing after a pretty dull decade (00s)

Share this post


Link to post

I miss the simplistic AI of enemies. No hiding behind cover, no dodgind fire, no bullshit. Just charging at you, guns blazing, until either you or him are down. It's funny how despite the simpler AI, older shooters were more chalenging than the newer ones, although that might have more to do with the map design than the actual behavior of the bad guys.

Share this post


Link to post

Based on these criteria it sounds like FO4 is a better FPS than most new FPS games. It hits most of these nicely. I find I like games that encourage a slower approach to killing things. Might just be I suck at most FPS games from any generation.

Share this post


Link to post

What could be better in some modern games (my point of view):

- non-linear level design, more freedom to the player
- less cinematic, story-driven elements
- better use of colors and different types of art style
- less obvious and intrusive tutorials
- more difficulty settings, including something that really challenge the player
- less relevance to over-used tropes and tiresome trends in general
- use of other structural languages, including some that are specific from games
- less self-importance (have you noticed how Doom doesn't take itself seriously?)
- better emphasis on gameplay elements, including replayability
- other types of soundtracks instead of incidental-orchestral music

Basically, more variety in general.
But the most important: don't treat the player as a dumb person. =P

Share this post


Link to post
Noiser said:

What I could find better in some modern games (my point of view):

- non-linear level design, more freedom to the player
- less cinematic, story-driven elements
- better use of colors and different types of art style
- less obvious and intrusive tutorials
- more difficulty settings, including something that really challenge the player
- less relevance to over-used tropes and tiresome trends in general
- use of other structural languages, including some that are specific from games
- less self-importance (have you noticed how Doom doesn't take itself seriously?)
- better emphasis on gameplay elements, including replayability
- other types of soundtracks instead of incidental-orchestral music

Basically, more variety in general.
But the most important: don't treat the player as a dumb person. =P

This is gold.
Well said!

Share this post


Link to post

To OP

Stalker is modernish and may have exactly what you want. And although this isn't what you had in mind, some survival games may fit most of your criteria. Sadly most survival games are early access titles with dodgy mechanics designed for online play.

Share this post


Link to post
DMGUYDZ64 said:

Regenerating health would be acceptable only if your health is at least 80% or Higher , This would make more sense and give balance to the game .

I wouldn't want regenerative health period unless there was a reason for it like the nanosuit in Crysis but only if there's a counter showing the health percentage and no annoying graphical bleeding effect covering the entire screen with no fucking idea how much health you have left.

Share this post


Link to post

I always thought Halo's approach to health was interesting. A rechargeable shield and then health, so that theoretically, you could survive the whole game on just one bar of health as long as you manage your shield and play things safe.

Also, an older yet still interesting example, in Dark Forces your armor negated any kind of energy weapon damage. Again, as long as you keep your shields up (Above 20 maybe, I forget exactly), you could survive long periods of time with very low health, as, unlike Doom, you wouldn't lose health and armor when you get shot. However, in order to keep players who know this on their toes, all melee enemy attacks ignore shields completely and sap your health directly.

This system was changed to a more Doom like one for Dark Forces II, though. ANd I think the Halo franchise abandoned their health system immediately for the sequel and just used good old fashioned regen health. I guess health packs and armor is too hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Noiser said:

What could be better in some modern games (my point of view):

- non-linear level design, more freedom to the player
- less cinematic, story-driven elements
- better use of colors and different types of art style
- less obvious and intrusive tutorials
- more difficulty settings, including something that really challenge the player
- less relevance to over-used tropes and tiresome trends in general
- use of other structural languages, including some that are specific from games
- less self-importance (have you noticed how Doom doesn't take itself seriously?)
- better emphasis on gameplay elements, including replayability
- other types of soundtracks instead of incidental-orchestral music

Basically, more variety in general.
But the most important: don't treat the player as a dumb person. =P


This sums up my complaints as well.

Share this post


Link to post

These topics always frustrate me. You guys would find what you're looking for - or at least a very close approximation - if you stepped out of your gaming comfort zones, and stopped thinking of Call of Duty as the embodiment of a modern FPS.

Share this post


Link to post
DoomUK said:

These topics always frustrate me. You guys would find what you're looking for - or at least a very close approximation - if you stepped out of your gaming comfort zones, and stopped thinking of Call of Duty as the embodiment of a modern FPS.


Pretty much this.
On top of that you'd find plenty of new and different aspects to enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post

Metal Gear Solid 5 is non-linear and open world, and if you dig around in forum opinion discussions you will see most people complaining about it, and wishing it had more linear content.

My point is that it might not be lazy at all to make a game linear, since there is a very significant population who prefer that "guiding hand", and 360 degree freedom conveys a sense of the infinite and therefore paralysis because they don't feel compelled to choose one particular route/goal/direction over any other (actually I fit into this category when I play a Bethesda game).

Share this post


Link to post

MGS5 had kind of awkward pacing anyways, a lot of the areas in each map looked exactly the same and as a whole it's kind of meandery with hours between any story progression with super long missions as the game sort of fizzles out after the villain dies. Compare that to MGS3 which, although far more linear and shorter, felt far more polished and every bit of progress revealed new things to do and learn.

I guess the thing is, you can do nonlinearity and linearity both right and wrong, MGS3 was mostly linear but kept enough to do within that scope with enough variety to keep interest at all times. MSG5 tried to do an open world, but ended up spreading itself too thin and growing too samey, suffering because of it, overreaching to the point of losing the last act and leaving the remaining climax underwhelming.

Share this post


Link to post
Jaxxoon R said:

losing the last act and leaving the remaining climax underwhelming.


You missed one of the major aspects of the game, it seems!

Spoiler

Perhaps the biggest theme in the game is that of revenge, starting with the very first mission after you encounter Kaz and make a pact of vengeance. Then at the end of the first act, you get your vengeance by killing Skullface. After this the tone of the game becomes more bleak and devoid of hope, without a clear "goal" at hand for Mother Base. The story is trying to convey the feeling of how getting revenge does not make things better or help people sleep at night, but just gives a void of purpose and emotional darkness.

One of the few instances of really good art in gaming, imo

Share this post


Link to post
DoomUK said:

These topics always frustrate me.

Why would this topic frustrate you? People here just speak out how they enjoy something and wish to get more of it.

Share this post


Link to post

It's talked to death and such dream things go without saying in a classic FPS centered forum anyways.

Share this post


Link to post

Eh, still thought that the last mission was a shitty way to go out considering it's basically just forcing you to replay the intro without any abridging for some godawful reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Doomtodeath said:

3. Health that does not regenerate. regenerating health is lazy and makes a game way too easy. imagine if in Doom all you had to do when you were low on health is run to cover and wait 10 seconds for it to regenerate.


regenerating health is for balancing and allows all enemies to have fast projectiles, and hitscan.
If you play the first. normandy mission in Medal of Honor: Allied Assault, you'll know why health regen is a viable option. I actually wanted health regen for that section.

But like most game mechanics, it too can be used wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
HorrorMovieGuy said:

I miss the simplistic AI of enemies. No hiding behind cover, no dodgind fire, no bullshit. Just charging at you, guns blazing, until either you or him are down. It's funny how despite the simpler AI, older shooters were more chalenging than the newer ones, although that might have more to do with the map design than the actual behavior of the bad guys.


There was more variation with enemy types, not just 'goon with gun' like many modern titles. You'd have the fast but melee enemy, the slow but powerful projectile enemy, or something with special attacks/behavior e.g. reviving fallen friends, unavoidable attack unless in cover, homing projectiles etc. And most of these bestiaries worked very well together, creating formidable armies, even if the player is smarter and faster to react.

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×