Shooters Are Just Not What They Used To Be

CCC Says: "My gaming interests are very eclectic. I would probably have an easier time listing the types of games I don’t like rather than the ones I do (as it would be a much shorter list). Of course I have my staples: racing, platforming, etc. However, it’s no surprise that first-person-shooters are among one of my favorites. I know there are some gamers out there who absolutely despise these types of games, and for good reason. Some FPS gamers can sometimes be... what’s the word I’m looking for? Oh yeah, a complete and total douche. But aside from the stray dick weed you run into, shooters have always been a fun corner stone of our industry."

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
mochachino2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

My biggest problem with shooters is that they mostly all are what they used to be. Ever since COD4 there has been so little innovation, although Far Cry 3 was really fun. Good controls, lots of abilities, open environment, compelling story.

Battlefield Bad Company was going somewhere with highly destructible environments but that fell to the wayside of teh graphics.

They're all trying to be the next COD but the next COD will likely be nothing like COD.


agree! Bad company 2 was awesome, all that game needed was prone position. I wish Shooters would go back to the 90s like the New Wolfenstein seems to be going, which excites me immensly just for that fact.

k3x2181d ago

The problem with shooters, and some other games too, nowadays is that there's simply not enough variety and innovation. Back in the day people were not afraid to try new things, implement interesting features, design their games in a way that set them apart from all the others in the genre.

Now that we've seen some titles come and go, we kind of know what works, what sells and what doesn't. Considering the budget of some AAA games these days, it's no wonder that making them entirely different from what gamers are used to and risking the possibility of losing many millions of dollars is not a path a lot of publishers/dev studios will take. The games are all designed to succeed by using features known to have already worked in the past.

That's the reason we get flooded with tons of FPS games that play basically the same. Gamers won't admit that, they love their little COD/BF wars, but the truth of the matter is, the spectrum of variety when it comes to gameplay offered by FPS games nowadays is maybe 1/10 of what it used to be, say, 13 years ago. They're mostly semi-realistic when it comes to the setting, the gameplay is always a mixture of arcade and semi-realistic gameplay with very little health, regen, lots of one shot kills and spammy weapons and, of course, ranks, levels, perks and unlocks. What's important is that there's also very little room for improvement for skilled FPS players in these games; decent players are limited by the dull simplicity and randomness of the gameplay so as not to scare away players who don't do so well at the game.

I don't think it's a stagnation period and I don't think it's ever going to go away, at least when it comes to AAA games. The only hope are indie games or games from new studios who have to try and take the market by storm with something new and different as they won't be able to compete with the big guys due to very limited budgets.