I Hate First Person Shooters
December 1st, 2004 @ 4:17 pm by dick
We all loved it when Wolfenstein 3D came out, followed by Doom 2, finally allowing us to shoot people in 3 dimentions. Such a revolution in gaming has been followed by, well, it hasn’t been followed by anything but the same. The recent “revolutionary” releases of Doom 3, Half Life 2 and Halo 2 have shown us that not a goddam thing has changed in recent gaming except for graphics.
To illustrate my point, here’s an anecdote: Bear and I borrowed Hordak’s Xbox for a couple days just to play the original Halo. I thought to myself, “Oh, cool, with 2 players cooperating, sitting right next to each other, this could lead to really good teamplay.” This image was quickly shattered as the height of teamplay became Bear yelling “GRENADE!”, me fumbling with tunnel vision to find where on the ground he threw it and, a couple seconds later, taking the full blast from under my feet.
This is the frustrating thing about first person shooters, yet it brings up a more fundamental issue about video games and games in general. All games are designed to simulate something and make it “easier” than before. Now, the sense of “easier” here means alot of things, including less expensive, less dangerous, less tiring, quicker or just possible in the first place.
Consider sports for a second. These are physical games that simulate combat to some degree. Boxing, wrestling, rugby and football are more direct in that effect but even badminton and swimming involve physical competition with a declared loser, and losing symbolizes death. Sports as competition invoke physical aspects of parties and declares winners, usually without any necissary harm to anyone involved. This, less dangerous, is one sense of “easier” stated above.
Back to video games, they simulate taking on challenges that no one is ever up to. Shooting guns, flying planes or slaying dragons are all less expensive, easier and, in the case of the dragons, only possible in the first place through video games. Mario and Luigi can jump forward and land a few steps behind. The dude from Grand Theft Auto can steal cars with the press of a button and the player at home really doesn’t get arrested. That’s not to say that everything in a video game is easier than anything in life. It’s that the parallels should be easier. Here’s a checklist for first person shooters and how they compare to real life.
- Shooting a gun = easier, less expensive, less dangerous
- Movement = quicker, easier, less tiring
- Being on a space station, fighting aliens = only possible through games
- The ability to glance down at your feet, taking in 180 degree peripheral vision = COMPLETELY NON-EXISTANT
This is exactly what’s wrong with first person shooters. Until this is seriously addressed, there will be no more “revolutionizing” of first person shooters, unless you’re the kind that counts graphical facelifts.
Posted in Uncategorized
|
| 
December 1st, 2004 @ 5:31 pm
Damn! Point, counter-point.
…I am forwarding your concerns and comments to Bungie.
DJW
March 29th, 2005 @ 10:40 pm
[...] 28th, 2005 @ 9:06 pm by dragon I was inspired to write this after reading dick’s gripe about 1st person shooters. Because I feel his pain, and no [...]
March 30th, 2005 @ 3:48 am
[...] 29th, 2005 @ 9:06 pm by dragon I was inspired to write this after reading dick’s gripe about 1st person shooters. Because I feel his pain, and no [...]
June 19th, 2005 @ 12:29 am
Dick, love the pic of the fighter with ‘boxed in head’. This is exactly how I feel about first person games, they’re awful and yet how many are there? Hundreds…frustrating! I have friends that are hardcore Ghost Recon gamers. Off to fight the war… don’t forget your head box…grrr. Whose’s behind me? Hold on give me 5 seconds to turn around…ahh! Boycott first person games!
August 1st, 2006 @ 3:32 pm
Thank God! YES. Someone else shares my hatred of this crummy genre. First Person Shooters Suck! If you’re going to go to the trouble of programming a game….then let me see my digital body. I hate the tunnel vision syndrome. The older Metroid games are among my favorites, but when the went to FPS, I quit buying. There’s nothing quite like getting blasted from behind and never seeing it coming.
June 8th, 2007 @ 3:50 am
I completely agree. I can’t stand FPS’ers. I honestly hate them. I only buy games where I can see my complete character head-to-toe on the screen.
June 25th, 2007 @ 3:10 pm
This is sad… you are all really sad… You bitch about tunnel vision, but its tried, and people tolerate it.
June 26th, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
What I find more sad… really sad… is that you bitch about people bitching. But bitching has been tried and people tolerate it.
Oh, schnap! Did I just start Protozoic’s first flame war?
June 26th, 2007 @ 10:23 pm
Dragon - I certainly hope so
July 2nd, 2007 @ 8:28 am
Morgan: Are you Morgan Webb from G4 Tech TV?
If so: Please choke on a dick.
If not: Please choke on a dick.
August 1st, 2007 @ 8:46 pm
I completely agree with you, Dick. But I have to add something to your list.
What I can’t stand about FPS-games are the weapons. They’re always a close combat-weapon, a handgun, a shotgun, a machine gun, something explosive, or a combination between two or more of the mentioned. Shotgun + machine gun = Jackhammer something explosive + machine gun = grenade launcher there really are just 5 different weapons, no matter how you look at it
August 20th, 2007 @ 8:30 am
You’re right. I guess when it’s all point and click, you’re really left with only a few ways to do things.
Also, have you noticed how, no matter how advanced civilization gets, the shotgun or it’s equivalent is always the best all-around weapon? Make that a Jackhammer and you’ve got the best weapon of all time.
August 25th, 2007 @ 2:44 pm
its a video game its not real life. all you people just want to cast spells and make it to level 23 dungon master. i like the comments about getting shot in the back and not being able to see it. who can see behind them you fools?
September 26th, 2007 @ 7:26 am
You’re right, Dick. When you play an FPS-game, you’re really just struggling your way to a shotgun or a jackhammer, all other weapons are inferior. From there, the game is just a cake walk
other combinations of weapons that don’t really make a difference: scope + handgun (damage-wise) = long-ranged rifle close combat weapon + machine gun = chainsaw close combat weapon + shotgun = baseball bat/lead pipe/brass knuckles
Does anyone out there know of a weapon that does not go under any of my previous mentioned categories? I know many will think of such weapons as Turok’s cerebral drill, but that is really not much more than a fancy shotgun with a little better accuracy. And mind-control devices doesn’t really count as weapons to me, that is really just changing the playable character.
September 26th, 2007 @ 8:19 am
illkillu:
I’m guessing you’ll probably never read this given the month that’s elapsed since your post, but:
Who can see behind them?
Well, fools like me can see most of the way behind us when we turn our necks far enough. By contrast a first person shooter typically treats all characters as if they wore a neck brace perpetually keeping their head aligned straight ahead.
But more poignantly: Even when I can’t see behind me in real life I can often hear things behind me and tell that something is going on back there. It’s possible that some videogames go to that level of sonic detail, but unless you have surround sound in your home it’s unlikely you’ll notice the trouble they went to so their effort is wasted.
One of the reasons I like third person shooters is they give you at least a little awareness of what’s behind you (and your own body position!) even if it’s not supplied through the same channels as in real life.
I’m still waiting for the elusive second person shooter to come out though: That rare game where the protagonist is always viewed from their victim’s perspective.
September 26th, 2007 @ 10:58 am
I never liked them too much… but I did get addicted to Res.Evil 4 pretty badly.
September 26th, 2007 @ 12:40 pm
RE4 doesn’t quite fit the normal bill of the first person shooter. It’s actually third person and only gets to be slightly first person with that over-the-shoulder view that locks onto the enemy. While more automatic and less interactive, at least you avoid backing up off of a ledge while trying to shoot the zombies.
Some games are designed to be only slightly first person, especially the more tactical ones like Socom. You can see attempts by studios to break away from the problems I’ve outlined. Games like Socom and RE are good examples of this.
September 26th, 2007 @ 10:28 pm
Regarding the gun thing:
Isn’t there a “gravity gun” in some first person shooter. Thing that lets you pick up stuff around you and toss it or bludgeon enemies with it?
September 26th, 2007 @ 11:45 pm
Dick - Regarding RE4: Good to know I’m safe. I actually just beat it tonight. I unlocked the infinite rocket launcher.
September 27th, 2007 @ 4:35 am
Peter, Half Life 2 features a gravity gun. Some originality there, but to me it doesn’t qualify for a gun any more than a fork lift. I mean, anyone can pick up something and throw it at someone, why use a gun to do that? that’s just plain lazy
March 18th, 2008 @ 7:41 pm
ALL YOU GUYZ ARE MISSING THE GODDAMN POINT OF THE GAME world its supposed to be a book almost taking you far away from you are now (ahem) like world of warcraft all you do is run around and cast spellz and hit things (npc)(mobs)(otherplayers)with swords and stuff but it is still addicting becuz yiu travel and meet new ppl around the world and see new things and you get to be things you fantaseid about when you were 8 or 10 and it fills the empty ness that you missed in your younger ages when you would run around with a towel around your neck and a box on your head and casting and killing evil monsters what im tryin to say is that video games are meant to be enjoyed through and through and if you dont like then why the FUCK did you play it read the back of the game first before you play it instead of being a little dick ass and complaing about the game !
thank you and not meant to be mean ^^
March 19th, 2008 @ 3:38 pm
Eloquently put Chux.
Thanks to your words I now see the light: Why criticize any medium?
Or why even buy the any product in the first place if there’s some chance you might not love everything about it?