FPS perspective needs to be changed

[Blzer]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

If an FPS took away strafing, I would never, and I mean NEVER, buy it. It only makes sense, IMO, to turn with the right stick since that is what you are aiming with. No way in hell do I want to be aiming with one and also trying to turn with another. Even the Move/Wii control schemes turn with the same device they aim with.

GoldenEye on N64 was like that haha. I can't do it the other way. I can do it with 3PS games when I have to (GTA, Red Dead, Uncharted, etc), but when it's FPS I can't seem to do it. With 3PS games though, we regularly turn with the left analog stick.

I don't know, but it works for me. What's wrong with having options then? I can't play the game the other way, plain and simple. I've even gotten used to it, and I just can't do it. I can obviously play that way, but I can't strategically be successful. I found it disadvantageous.

[NINJAK2]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

I've been playing many FPS games throught the years. I just love this genre. But I think the perspective in PFS games needs to be changed.

In real life, when you look around - you don't see only what's in front of you. You can see a bit what's on the sides (even if it's blurry). You have more of a panoramic view (some people's is wider than others - but everyone has it). I think FPS games need to change the way things look.

I know some games added a red marker or something like that to show you where the person who's shooting at you is standing (or where the fire is coming from), and that's nice and helpful. Yet it doesn't make things real.


Thoughts? Ideas?

I agree. Something as simple as pushing in the left or right stick to have your character perform a quick head or eye swivel side to side could open up the viewpoint aspect of the FPS.

[Kramer5150]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

1. Real world physics, such as bullet drop, real weapon range. I mean the way it is now in the COD games you can snipe with shotguns and hand guns. There is no bullet drop over distance.

2. End kill streak perks.

3. End perks that make people run faster then normal or run longer then normal.

4. FPS needs to be more open world. However there should be a risk and award for your actions if you choose the wrong choice. Not saying that the level should automatically end, but let just say it should be much harder for you to reach your goal instead.

I'm not sure why you keep using COD as an example here.....but those 4 things you have issues with...Battlefield:Bad Company does,or doesn't do...your preference.

Bad Company doesn't rely on silly killstreaks,there is bullet drop,the use of a squad is more beneficial than going "lone wolf"....and you get wide open environments.

It sounds more to me like you have an issue with the COD series moreso than the fps genre....especially since there IS an alternative that would provide you want it sounds like you're looking for.

[youvalss]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

The FPS perspective won't ever be at it's very best with a single television.

Think about it... FPS games make great use of audio using 5.1/7.1 systems. If you can use multiple speakers for audio, why not multiple tvs for video? Or just have one really wide screen?

I think the closest thing to what I'm talking about is what alienware did a while ago:



The absolute best thing to do is have a 360 field like in a dome/planetarium/IMAX dome.

That's really cool!

[Matt Diesel]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

1. Real world physics, such as bullet drop, real weapon range. I mean the way it is now in the COD games you can snipe with shotguns and hand guns. There is no bullet drop over distance.

2. End kill streak perks.

3. End perks that make people run faster then normal or run longer then normal.

4. FPS needs to be more open world. However there should be a risk and award for your actions if you choose the wrong choice. Not saying that the level should automatically end, but let just say it should be much harder for you to reach your goal instead.

Maybe it is my military service biasness, but I would rather see more SIM and less arcade Hollywood FPS.

I remember back in the day in the early Rainbow 6 games back on the PC and Playstation One, before every mission you were given the blue prints of the area and you were able to plan your attack.

Hell even Operation Flashpoint and the Arma series gave you that choice. Way more risk and reward.

You mentioned Arma. Have you played Arma 2 recently? Although not perfect, its closer to what you are explaining than what you do not want.

[Gotmadskillzson]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

Yeah played Arma 2, that is what I was saying that I wish console FPS were more like PC FPS games. Sadly I don't think it will ever happen though.

Console gamers want more fast paced Hollywood style action.

Where as PC gamers are more sim oriented.

[Cusefan]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

Yeah played Arma 2, that is what I was saying that I wish console FPS were more like PC FPS games. Sadly I don't think it will ever happen though.

Console gamers want more fast paced Hollywood style action.

Where as PC gamers are more sim oriented.

That is just not true. While PC Gamers do have more of that niche crowd, There is 100x more people playing a COD game than a Sim FPS. Here is my personal feeling on the matter, If you want to play a Sim FPS, join the army or the Marines, its basically everything you are looking for, and it includes one thing a Sim FPS does not have: The fear of death.

That is why I laugh at the term "Sim FPS" its a joke really, there is simply no such thing because the fear of actually dying is not there. Sure you do not want to die because who wants to spend 15 minutes just getting to the fight but its hardly a motivation to really hold back.

Personally I think as far as the whole FPS experience goes(minus the story), Rainbow Six Vegas actually does a pretty good job. There are many little nuances each gun as that you would not see in many other FPSers.

[Hooe]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

I certainly can understand the appeal of a more realistic game, and I think there's a market for one on the console, though not necessarily a huge one.

That said, I kinda want the genre to go in the opposite direction. The more popular games all take themselves way too seriously right now, IMO. In the single-player campaigns in pretty much every shooter that's come out in the past half-decade, you're an effectively-faceless American / British / WWII Allied Forces soldier who is given orders, follows them, and shoots up terrorists cells while following a somewhat-contrived story about defending America / democracy / some other patriotic core value (I'm not knocking this by any means, but it's been played out). The multiplayer environments, while certainly nice to look at and well-designed in terms of flow of players around the map, aren't necessarily interesting in-and-of themselves; with the exception of Bad Company 2, the multiplayer environments are very static and can't be altered by the player to create any sort of strategic advantage.

Which, at least to the single-player end, would at least partially explain why I have been looking forward to Duke Nukem Forever for so long. The Duke Nukem series has always primarily been about A) fun factor and B) being way over-the-top and tongue-in-cheek; I think that's a bit more up my alley, personally. They offer something that the other games don't in that they put the player into the role of a well-defined, if shallow, character that quite frankly is fun to play as and perfectly suited for the world designed around him. The Duke games offer some potential strategy as well, given the assortment of toys available (steroids, jetpacks, hologram decoys, tripbombs, pipe bombs, etc.)

Not quite sure if any future shooters plan on creating more interesting multiplayer environments, though they should. For example, while not the same genre, in Twisted Metal 4, one of the levels had a huge magnetized crane in it, which could be controlled by the player to pick up other cars and drop them into an incinerator for massive damage. The controls for this crane were in the center of the map, so it was hard to hold for any period of time, but if you could, you could rack up a few kills fast. It added an extra element of strategy to that map and frankly helped make battles on that particular map more interesting. Stuff like that is what I'd like to see more of from a multiplayer perspective.

[DaveDQ]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

1. Real world physics, such as bullet drop, real weapon range. I mean the way it is now in the COD games you can snipe with shotguns and hand guns. There is no bullet drop over distance.

2. End kill streak perks.

3. End perks that make people run faster then normal or run longer then normal.

4. FPS needs to be more open world. However there should be a risk and award for your actions if you choose the wrong choice. Not saying that the level should automatically end, but let just say it should be much harder for you to reach your goal instead.

Maybe it is my military service biasness, but I would rather see more SIM and less arcade Hollywood FPS.

I remember back in the day in the early Rainbow 6 games back on the PC and Playstation One, before every mission you were given the blue prints of the area and you were able to plan your attack.

Hell even Operation Flashpoint and the Arma series gave you that choice. Way more risk and reward.

Lets say if one of the missions was just for intel gathering. If you were able to get in and out without tripping alarms, then the following mission should be way easier because you would have the advantage on the enemy and they wouldn't be expecting you to know what you know.

So for example during your intel gathering mission, you discovered the blue prints for a building and found out there was a under ground tunnel that lead into a building or crawl space hatch on the roof. So therefore you could use that instead of going through the front or back doors.

But if you set off the alarm, the mission should be 3 times harder then normal because the place would be on high alert because they know you in the area.

Same thing with your load out. You should be able to choose what you want to carry and what your team mates carry. And what ever you choose, then you just have live with it. Therefore if you gave everybody sniper rifles when your mission takes place inside of a building, then hey that is your fault and you will just have to deal with it.

Same thing with the insertion and extraction. You should be able to choose. Whether you do a HALO insertion, or Blackhawk insertion or by car.

So in a way you can say I want more micro managing and total control as a real life team leader would have. And you should be able to pick your team yourself out of a pool of canidates. With each person having their pros and cons of what they bring to the table.

These are really interesting points. Your comments about failing a level got me to thinking. Suppose you did have a mission where you were to infiltrate and acquire specific information but you failed. Rather than starting over, or from previously saved checkpoint, why not factor in a new scheme or approach? Sort of a , "We had our chance but blew it. Time to anticipate another way of acquiring that info."

As we see it now, FPS games are made up of point A to point B mentality, and in many ways we can't get to point B until we kill an allotted amount of enemies. GRAW and Rainbow 6 really frustrated me with this. That and how silly the entire campaign was in that you'd get to the desired location and something always happened to where there was a hiccup so all of the mission wasn't complete. It really showed how shallow their thinking was. It was as if missions were extended by other missions.

[Gotmadskillzson]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

Yeah Wing Commander 4 was like that. IF you failed a mission, life went on. It just meant you had to do 2 or 3 extra missions to aquire the information you wanted OR it meant the next mission was just harder to do OR it just changed the outcome of the game.

That game had about 6 different endings. Sometimes all your crew survived, sometime half of your crew died. How hard or easy the game was depended on the choices you made and how good you were at managing your priorities.

Sometimes thinking outside the box lead to an easier path of doing things, it even allowed you to skip 4 or 5 missions because you required what you needed in one mission as a whole, instead of 5 missions in bit pieces of information.

[mgoblue]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

One thing I hated about MW2 (I think it was MW2) was you'd have to reach certain points for enemies to stop coming. At hard rooms to kill you pretty much had to stupidly run across the room to get to the point that would stop the infinite spawns, meaning you couldn't hold a spot until it was really clear and then go.

I believe they fixed this in the single player since, but that ended up pissing me off quite good that hour I was playing lol. It was like I was being more methodical with my movements and they forced me to be run and gun like they wanted.

[Blzer]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

One thing I hated about MW2 (I think it was MW2) was you'd have to reach certain points for enemies to stop coming. At hard rooms to kill you pretty much had to stupidly run across the room to get to the point that would stop the infinite spawns, meaning you couldn't hold a spot until it was really clear and then go.

I believe they fixed this in the single player since, but that ended up pissing me off quite good that hour I was playing lol. It was like I was being more methodical with my movements and they forced me to be run and gun like they wanted.

I thought this was something that was actually fixed in MW2.

[mgoblue]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

I thought this was something that was actually fixed in MW2.

Gotcha...then it was MW thanks!

[Gotmadskillzson]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

Not really fixed because in Black Ops you have the infinite enemy respawn as well until you reach a certain spot in the area.

[Blzer]

Re: FPS perspective needs to be changed

Not really fixed because in Black Ops you have the infinite enemy respawn as well until you reach a certain spot in the area.

Different developing companies. Modern Warfare 2 was developed by Infinity Ward, and Black Ops was developed by Treyarch.