It’s no secret that video game campaigns have become shorter over the years. Defeating an RPG on the SNES could take more than one hundred hours. But there are no rose coloured glasses here, a large amount of this content was padding. The fact that a game’s length was long was due to padding jaded both gamers and developers towards making a game long for the sake of being long.
Popularized by Doom in 1993 and still making video game haters gnash their teeth today, first-person shooter games are the best thing to happen to gamers since pizza rolls. So here are 15 underrated first-person shooter games you may have missed.
Although the late 2000s Turok wasn't my favorite, I would love a new entry. Open world survival with shotguns and dinosaurs. Not sure how we'd get the fusion cannon, but that would be pretty sweet too.
Lol
All of these games are pretty much universally praised. Outside of Timeshift I literally own all of these.
XIII, The Darkness 2, Far Cry: Blood Dragon, Timesplitters: future perfect, Bulletstorm are awesome games
Windows Central: "Titanfall 1 is being sunset, taken off storefronts by EA. While the servers remain live for now, one has to wonder just how much time it has left. I look back and pay tribute to the last "twitch"-styled shooter I ever truly loved."
Sales for the original Titanfall are being discontinued.
It will be pulled from subscription services on March 1, 2022.
Physical media. Unfortunately the way games are going these days game servers will eventually be shut down and you can stare at the menu and wish you could play the game again.
This is why reading is so important. Nothing to do with digital or physical media. The game, which is online only, is being delisted because of DDOS and other hacker attacks. The case got so bad that only six players in the world log on. For PC. Rather than fix it, they continued to sell the game, broken as it is, and only now just decided to call it quits. But please, go on thinking what you will.
I'm aware of the DDOS attacks and that this case is not typical. This game would eventually have it's servers shutdown regardless of the current situation so that is a moot point. My comment was in a general sense and that there are instances in which games can be preserved physically when official support ends.
Let's recap your first sentence. I said, "the way GAMES are going these days" indicating a broader stroke than just this game. I agree, reading IS important. I was simply stating the obvious downsides of the digital marketplaces and online only trends in games these days. I could even make the argument that the online only offering which has allowed hacker manipulation has impacted the preservation of this great game. My comment is valid in the general sense and thank you for your permission to continue to think what I will.
This one apparently is. Selling like hotcakes
The way I look at it is if you take a multiplayer game you are the one responsible for getting enjoyment out of matches which later on will become repetitive because you've of played them so many times in the space of a few hours. However with a single player game it's up to the developers to craft a single player experience that you will enjoy, since you won't be replying the ENTIRE single player game in a few hours like how you could play dozens of multiplayer matches in most likely the same time frame then it's up to the developers to give you the best experience you can.
I mean obviously with multiplayer the developer has to do the work aswell, they have to create the maps, the structure, balance it etc but at the end of the day you replaying it over and over is what is making you feel like you've gotten your moneys worth while with single player games it's mostly up to the developer to craft an experience for you which you'll play through....then you have collectibles, and maybe side quests or other smaller things to keep you going.
I think I would get more enjoyment from something like Assassins Creed 4 doing EVERYTHING (Main missions, side missions, collectibles, exploring, upgrades, hunting etc) then doing the same old repetitive modes over and over and over again, which you would find in any online game. If you were given only the online of AC4 would you feel satisfied enough...of course not.
You could play death match dozens and dozens of time in the space of a few hours but if you were playing AC4 for example you'd be not even half way through the main story, by the time you've fully finished a game like that a person who plays only multiplayer games would of been long gone off it and onto the next multiplayer type game. (By the way I'm just using AC4 as an example)
It's hard to explain in my opinion but hopefully you'll see my point.
i have never played any multiplayer in my life
i love Single player only
so for me it's a no
Why is it okay for a game to be SP only but not MP only? If a developer wants to focus on just making 1 part of the game the best it can be (e.g. SP, MP) why is that only an issue for MP?
I have spent 800 hours playing Battlefield Bad Company 2 multiplayer. That is roughly 100 times longer than most single player games.
You tell me if MP only is worth $60!
In the end however, it is all relative. To some its worth it, others want both and some want just SP.