How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
I've gone through it all earlier in the thread. Just look at some of the conventions that have become semi-standard since Halo's release (removal of health systems for some form of recharge, grenades and melee becoming a central part of gameplay, improvement (in some cases) of enemy AI, etc).
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
I've gone through it all earlier in the thread. Just look at some of the conventions that have become semi-standard since Halo's release (removal of health systems for some form of recharge, grenades and melee becoming a central part of gameplay, improvement (in some cases) of enemy AI, etc).
I agree about some of this. Suit energy recharging and being able to melee would be really nice. Although, the recharging shields would necessitate changes in gameplay.
I still found it really fun to play though. You've got to get into the feel of the game.
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
I've gone through it all earlier in the thread. Just look at some of the conventions that have become semi-standard since Halo's release (removal of health systems for some form of recharge, grenades and melee becoming a central part of gameplay, improvement (in some cases) of enemy AI, etc).
I agree about some of this. Suit energy recharging and being able to melee would be really nice. Although, the recharging shields would necessitate changes in gameplay.
I still found it really fun to play though. You've got to get into the feel of the game.
Yeah, it definitely would. One of the things I see in shooters with a recharging health system versus a non-recharging health system is that encounters can be much larger. In a game like Half-life 2, encounters tend to be relatively small scale, because you don't have enough health/energy nearby to fight more than a few enemies at once; the enemy's strategy revolves around a steady war of attrition on Gordon, with some exceptions. Then look at a shooter like Call of Duty 4 or Halo, which have recharging health; some encounters have 30+ enemies at once. I find that more interesting and exciting, but as always, YMMV.
By the way, if anyone hears about a mod that does something like this... WANT! Bonus points if it changes weapon accuracy and adds melee/grenade buttons. I can dream, can't I?
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
I've gone through it all earlier in the thread. Just look at some of the conventions that have become semi-standard since Halo's release (removal of health systems for some form of recharge, grenades and melee becoming a central part of gameplay, improvement (in some cases) of enemy AI, etc).
Not to mention a focus on combat rather than improbably coincidental environmental puzzles.
Szechuanosaurus on
0
Options
Gear GirlMore class than a state universityRegistered Userregular
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
I've gone through it all earlier in the thread. Just look at some of the conventions that have become semi-standard since Halo's release (removal of health systems for some form of recharge, grenades and melee becoming a central part of gameplay, improvement (in some cases) of enemy AI, etc).
Not to mention a focus on combat rather than improbably coincidental environmental puzzles.
im wondering what he would consider a FPS in the last 4 years that doesnt feel stale and antiquated.
Gears of War
Rainbow Six: Vegas
I'm just mentioning these because of the cover system, aside from that I don't really know if theres much else you can do to improve on the actual core game play. The concept is pretty simple, you point your gun and shoot.
Oh and if you consider multiplayer only : Team Fortress 2, it's take on teamwork has more than rejuvenated FPS gameplay.
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
I've gone through it all earlier in the thread. Just look at some of the conventions that have become semi-standard since Halo's release (removal of health systems for some form of recharge, grenades and melee becoming a central part of gameplay, improvement (in some cases) of enemy AI, etc).
I agree about some of this. Suit energy recharging and being able to melee would be really nice. Although, the recharging shields would necessitate changes in gameplay.
I still found it really fun to play though. You've got to get into the feel of the game.
Yeah, it definitely would. One of the things I see in shooters with a recharging health system versus a non-recharging health system is that encounters can be much larger. In a game like Half-life 2, encounters tend to be relatively small scale, because you don't have enough health/energy nearby to fight more than a few enemies at once; the enemy's strategy revolves around a steady war of attrition on Gordon, with some exceptions. Then look at a shooter like Call of Duty 4 or Halo, which have recharging health; some encounters have 30+ enemies at once. I find that more interesting and exciting, but as always, YMMV.
By the way, if anyone hears about a mod that does something like this... WANT! Bonus points if it changes weapon accuracy and adds melee/grenade buttons. I can dream, can't I?
im wondering what he would consider a FPS in the last 4 years that doesnt feel stale and antiquated.
Gears of War
Rainbow Six: Vegas
I'm just mentioning these because of the cover system, aside from that I don't really know if theres much else you can do to improve on the actual core game play. The concept is pretty simple, you point your gun and shoot.
Oh and if you consider multiplayer only : Team Fortress 2, it's take on teamwork has more than rejuvenated FPS gameplay.
But Gears isn't a first person shooter. It takes place in the third person, making it a third person shooter.
Also, the cover system in R6 pulls you into third person. This wouldn't work for a half life game because they don't want you seeing Gordon. That's the main reason the vehicles are first person and everything.
Besides, I think cover systems are overrated. If my character is agile enough to move in an out of cover quickly enough there isn't really a need for pressing against a wall.
xWonderboyx on
XBL - Follow Freeman
0
Options
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
You can say this about any genre you want and people will agree.
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
You can say this about any genre you want and people will agree.
I'm sure you could. That doesn't not make the games I listed essentially identical to their pre-Halflife 2 predecessors. Doesn't make them bad, either.
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
You can say this about any genre you want and people will agree.
I will never be happy with the FPS genre. I forsee that it shall die and a new genre shall rise from its corpse and the corpse of the RPG and a new beast shall rise, a fusion of the two, and the people shall rejoice. Oh, wait, it already happened with Bioshock and Dark Messiah, and the Elder Scrolls series and a whole bunch of other crap coming down the line and some from my brain.
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
I've gone through it all earlier in the thread. Just look at some of the conventions that have become semi-standard since Halo's release (removal of health systems for some form of recharge, grenades and melee becoming a central part of gameplay, improvement (in some cases) of enemy AI, etc).
Not to mention a focus on combat rather than improbably coincidental environmental puzzles.
What the hell game were you playing? Mine was mostly combat, with the occasional puzzle.
im wondering what he would consider a FPS in the last 4 years that doesnt feel stale and antiquated.
Gears of War
Rainbow Six: Vegas
I'm just mentioning these because of the cover system, aside from that I don't really know if theres much else you can do to improve on the actual core game play. The concept is pretty simple, you point your gun and shoot.
Oh and if you consider multiplayer only : Team Fortress 2, it's take on teamwork has more than rejuvenated FPS gameplay.
But Gears isn't a first person shooter. It takes place in the third person, making it a third person shooter.
Also, the cover system in R6 pulls you into third person. This wouldn't work for a half life game because they don't want you seeing Gordon. That's the main reason the vehicles are first person and everything.
Besides, I think cover systems are overrated. If my character is agile enough to move in an out of cover quickly enough there isn't really a need for pressing against a wall.
Yeah, cover systems are good for some games, but their far from necessary*. I can hide behind cover just fine on my own.
* I can see cove being good for console First/Third Person Shooters, where controls are less precise.
im wondering what he would consider a FPS in the last 4 years that doesnt feel stale and antiquated.
Gears of War
Rainbow Six: Vegas
I'm just mentioning these because of the cover system, aside from that I don't really know if theres much else you can do to improve on the actual core game play. The concept is pretty simple, you point your gun and shoot.
Oh and if you consider multiplayer only : Team Fortress 2, it's take on teamwork has more than rejuvenated FPS gameplay.
But Gears isn't a first person shooter. It takes place in the third person, making it a third person shooter.
Also, the cover system in R6 pulls you into third person. This wouldn't work for a half life game because they don't want you seeing Gordon. That's the main reason the vehicles are first person and everything.
Besides, I think cover systems are overrated. If my character is agile enough to move in an out of cover quickly enough there isn't really a need for pressing against a wall.
Yeah, cover systems are good for some games, but their far from necessary*. I can hide behind cover just fine on my own.
* I can see cove being good for console First/Third Person Shooters, where controls are less precise.
I mean, you don't really need much more than duck and sprint to basically get cover behind whatever.
im wondering what he would consider a FPS in the last 4 years that doesnt feel stale and antiquated.
Gears of War
Rainbow Six: Vegas
I'm just mentioning these because of the cover system, aside from that I don't really know if theres much else you can do to improve on the actual core game play. The concept is pretty simple, you point your gun and shoot.
Oh and if you consider multiplayer only : Team Fortress 2, it's take on teamwork has more than rejuvenated FPS gameplay.
But Gears isn't a first person shooter. It takes place in the third person, making it a third person shooter.
Also, the cover system in R6 pulls you into third person. This wouldn't work for a half life game because they don't want you seeing Gordon. That's the main reason the vehicles are first person and everything.
Besides, I think cover systems are overrated. If my character is agile enough to move in an out of cover quickly enough there isn't really a need for pressing against a wall.
Yeah, cover systems are good for some games, but their far from necessary*. I can hide behind cover just fine on my own.
* I can see cove being good for console First/Third Person Shooters, where controls are less precise.
I mean, you don't really need much more than duck and sprint to basically get cover behind whatever.
I just find that cover mechanic a little awkward compared to FPS games, i mean, playing as fenix felt like I was controlling a tank, compared to more fluid games like killzone and Halo, personally, I liked the close range instant kill of Killzone better than the melee mechanic. Not so good for multiplayer but dammit, I love the fact that I threw a knife into Helgan soldier's throat then charged him as he chocked on it and then slashed right on through the rest of his jugular. I Luger!
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
You can say this about any genre you want and people will agree.
I'm sure you could. That doesn't not make the games I listed essentially identical to their pre-Halflife 2 predecessors. Doesn't make them bad, either.
Half-Life 2 is stale and antiquated compared to Halo 1. It follows naturally that it would be the same for 2 and 3, regardless of whether they're any different from each other.
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
You can say this about any genre you want and people will agree.
I'm sure you could. That doesn't not make the games I listed essentially identical to their pre-Halflife 2 predecessors. Doesn't make them bad, either.
Half-Life 2 is stale and antiquated compared to Halo 1. It follows naturally that it would be the same for 2 and 3, regardless of whether they're any different from each other.
My admiration for Halo 3's enjoyable co-op campaign has for the most part allowed me to forget about the horror that is Halo 1. Halo 1 is pre-Halflife 1 in game design philosophy. The idea of interesting encounters and unique locales passed right over the developers heads. They even completely missed the the opportunities that having a game set on a giant ring could have for level design. 85% of the game takes place in identical cooridoors.
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
You can say this about any genre you want and people will agree.
I'm sure you could. That doesn't not make the games I listed essentially identical to their pre-Halflife 2 predecessors. Doesn't make them bad, either.
Half-Life 2 is stale and antiquated compared to Halo 1. It follows naturally that it would be the same for 2 and 3, regardless of whether they're any different from each other.
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
You can say this about any genre you want and people will agree.
I'm sure you could. That doesn't not make the games I listed essentially identical to their pre-Halflife 2 predecessors. Doesn't make them bad, either.
Half-Life 2 is stale and antiquated compared to Halo 1. It follows naturally that it would be the same for 2 and 3, regardless of whether they're any different from each other.
I'm going to assume you mean the use of vehicles, a seperate melee and grenade button, and shields. While ignoring Halo's use of level design that could have come straight out of a mid 90's Doom clone.
Hey Lork, granted, Halo 2 and 3 have taken some existing ideas and brought them together in a way that has brought a lot of first time gamers into the fray and given them something to enjoy, but I don't think Halo 1 was as great as you make it out to be. I mean, I didn't even like the multiplayer compared to Counter Strike, Dystopia, or team fortress. I mean, as far as console FPS go, Quake and Red Faction 2 felt better than Halo. I mean the environments in Red Faction 2 or even the original Red faction with its horrible textures felt better than many of the monotonous corridors of Halo.
I haven't played the sequals but I will grant that they are probably better and look forward to playing them, but I think that you give the original too much credit. Play Halo or Halo:Combat Evolved and them play HL2 and tell me what you think then.
How is HL 2 "stale" and "antiquated" compared to other shooters? I mean, all shooters are, thats why I'm not particularly interested in the genre anymore. Halo 3 is the same thing as Halo 1 with better graphics, Bioshock is a remake of System Shock 2, etc.
You can say this about any genre you want and people will agree.
I'm sure you could. That doesn't not make the games I listed essentially identical to their pre-Halflife 2 predecessors. Doesn't make them bad, either.
Half-Life 2 is stale and antiquated compared to Halo 1. It follows naturally that it would be the same for 2 and 3, regardless of whether they're any different from each other.
Do tell. Cite some examples to humor me please.
Read the last page.
I guess it all comes down to personal preference. I personally don't like recharging shields. The vehicle issue between the two games doesn't really bother me either because I like the driving in them both.
However, Halo 1 (and to an extent 2 and 3) have shitty level design, while I think HL2 is constantly fresh and not repetitive. That's just me.
xWonderboyx on
XBL - Follow Freeman
0
Options
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
I'm going to assume you mean the use of vehicles, a seperate melee and grenade button, and shields. While ignoring Halo's use of level design that could have come straight out of a mid 90's Doom clone.
Not to mention the painful voice-acting and obnoxious Aliens rip-off Space Marines. I like Halo and all, but comparing Halo 1 to HL2 is ridiculous.
I'm going to assume you mean the use of vehicles, a seperate melee and grenade button, and shields. While ignoring Halo's use of level design that could have come straight out of a mid 90's Doom clone.
Halo's level design is visually uninteresting, but if you think it plays or flows anything like a Doom clone, or even a Half-Life 1 style "linear corridor" affair (a rut which HL2 is stuck in, coincidentally), you're not very observant.
I would like to see a first person cover system, switching to third person always seems a bit odd sometimes.
Uh, you can take cover in most fps games. Assuming there is stuff to hide behind. I use cover in HL 2 all the time. Well, when I play HL 2 I use it all the time, I don't play it much.
I'm going to assume you mean the use of vehicles, a seperate melee and grenade button, and shields. While ignoring Halo's use of level design that could have come straight out of a mid 90's Doom clone.
Halo's level design is visually uninteresting, but if you think it plays or flows anything like a Doom clone, or even a Half-Life 1 style "linear corridor" affair (a rut which HL2 is stuck in, coincidentally), you're not very observant.
That is a valid point, and in my defense, its hard to be observant when you are fighting the urge to quit to desktop and play something else. Also, I shouldn't have soiled Doom's good name, it has quite fun levels, and some decent clones.
I should just forget that there are other games in the Halo trilogy besides the 3rd one, really, I'm getting bored thinking about some of Halo 1's levels.
I'm going to assume you mean the use of vehicles, a seperate melee and grenade button, and shields. While ignoring Halo's use of level design that could have come straight out of a mid 90's Doom clone.
Halo's level design is visually uninteresting, but if you think it plays or flows anything like a Doom clone, or even a Half-Life 1 style "linear corridor" affair (a rut which HL2 is stuck in, coincidentally), you're not very observant.
HL2 is far from "linear corridor". Sure it's heavily scripted, but that's just the type of game it is. FarCry would be an example of the opposite, in which almost nothing is scripted. Either are valid types of FPS.
You'd have to be an idiot not to see Halo's effect on modern FPS design. Many of its ideas, whether they were new or old, or whether you liked them or not, have become part of the standard FPS featureset. Everything from the limited inventory to the vehicles to the checkpoint system.
This doesn't stop you from being an anti-halo fanboy, though. I mean, you could always say that it's had a negative influence on the genre. Half-Life 2 mostly escaped its influence by being halfway through development at the time of its release (just look at the difference between it and other shooters that came out around the same time, like Far Cry), so you still have that.
I'm going to assume you mean the use of vehicles, a seperate melee and grenade button, and shields. While ignoring Halo's use of level design that could have come straight out of a mid 90's Doom clone.
Halo's level design is visually uninteresting, but if you think it plays or flows anything like a Doom clone, or even a Half-Life 1 style "linear corridor" affair (a rut which HL2 is stuck in, coincidentally), you're not very observant.
HL2 is far from "linear corridor". Sure it's heavily scripted, but that's just the type of game it is. FarCry would be an example of the opposite, in which almost nothing is scripted. Either are valid types of FPS.
I didn't say that it wasn't a valid type of FPS, just that it plays like you're trapped in a narrow corridor. Which it does.
I would like to see a first person cover system, switching to third person always seems a bit odd sometimes.
Uh, you can take cover in most fps games. Assuming there is stuff to hide behind. I use cover in HL 2 all the time. Well, when I play HL 2 I use it all the time, I don't play it much.
I'm going to assume you mean the use of vehicles, a seperate melee and grenade button, and shields. While ignoring Halo's use of level design that could have come straight out of a mid 90's Doom clone.
Halo's level design is visually uninteresting, but if you think it plays or flows anything like a Doom clone, or even a Half-Life 1 style "linear corridor" affair (a rut which HL2 is stuck in, coincidentally), you're not very observant.
That is a valid point, and in my defense, its hard to be observant when you are fighting the urge to quit to desktop and play something else. Also, I shouldn't have soiled Doom's good name, it has quite fun levels, and some decent clones.
I should just forget that there are other games in the Halo trilogy besides the 3rd one, really, I'm getting bored thinking about some of Halo 1's levels.
You know what I think? Forget Doom level design! What we need is Doom II level design! Circle of Death, Barrels o' Fun...they were fun times.
You'd have to be an idiot not to see Halo's effect on modern FPS design. Many of its ideas, whether they were new or old, or whether you liked them or not, have become part of the standard FPS featureset. Everything from the limited inventory to the vehicles to the checkpoint system.
This doesn't stop you from being an anti-halo fanboy, though. I mean, you could always say that it's had a negative influence on the genre. Half-Life 2 mostly escaped its influence by being halfway through development at the time of its release (just look at the difference between it and other shooters that came out around the same time, like Far Cry), so you still have that.
We're just annoyed that you think superficial stuff like shields are integral to game design. You can have a good fps with recharging life or healthpacks.
Also, you don't need checkpoints in a game where you can save at any time.
The one great innovation Halo gave us was integrated use of vehicles.
DisruptorX2 on
0
Options
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
You'd have to be an idiot not to see Halo's effect on modern FPS design. Many of its ideas, whether they were new or old, or whether you liked them or not, have become part of the standard FPS featureset. Everything from the limited inventory to the vehicles to the checkpoint system.
This doesn't stop you from being an anti-halo fanboy, though. I mean, you could always say that it's had a negative influence on the genre. Half-Life 2 mostly escaped its influence by being halfway through development at the time of its release (just look at the difference between it and other shooters that came out around the same time, like Far Cry), so you still have that.
I'm going to assume you mean the use of vehicles, a seperate melee and grenade button, and shields. While ignoring Halo's use of level design that could have come straight out of a mid 90's Doom clone.
Halo's level design is visually uninteresting, but if you think it plays or flows anything like a Doom clone, or even a Half-Life 1 style "linear corridor" affair (a rut which HL2 is stuck in, coincidentally), you're not very observant.
HL2 is far from "linear corridor". Sure it's heavily scripted, but that's just the type of game it is. FarCry would be an example of the opposite, in which almost nothing is scripted. Either are valid types of FPS.
I didn't say that it wasn't a valid type of FPS, just that it plays like you're trapped in a narrow corridor. Which it does.
Except the parts where you're not. Like any time you fight a strider, a gunship or are outside at all. Which is a large portion of the game.
And if you think that Valve would have included a recharging shield system or dual wielding or whatever the fuck if they had started making HL2 after Halo 1 you are huffing paint.
You'd have to be an idiot not to see Halo's effect on modern FPS design. Many of its ideas, whether they were new or old, or whether you liked them or not, have become part of the standard FPS featureset. Everything from the limited inventory to the vehicles to the checkpoint system.
This doesn't stop you from being an anti-halo fanboy, though. I mean, you could always say that it's had a negative influence on the genre. Half-Life 2 mostly escaped its influence by being halfway through development at the time of its release (just look at the difference between it and other shooters that came out around the same time, like Far Cry), so you still have that.
I'm going to assume you mean the use of vehicles, a seperate melee and grenade button, and shields. While ignoring Halo's use of level design that could have come straight out of a mid 90's Doom clone.
Halo's level design is visually uninteresting, but if you think it plays or flows anything like a Doom clone, or even a Half-Life 1 style "linear corridor" affair (a rut which HL2 is stuck in, coincidentally), you're not very observant.
HL2 is far from "linear corridor". Sure it's heavily scripted, but that's just the type of game it is. FarCry would be an example of the opposite, in which almost nothing is scripted. Either are valid types of FPS.
I didn't say that it wasn't a valid type of FPS, just that it plays like you're trapped in a narrow corridor. Which it does.
Except the parts where your not. Like, most of the game. Where is this narrow corridor thing coming from?
shryke on
0
Options
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
edited January 2008
Plus Halo 1 has it's share of corridors. At least in the Half-Life games those corridors are interesting and make you feel like you're going somewhere. Unlike a little crime against God and Man called The motherfucking Library.
Posts
I've gone through it all earlier in the thread. Just look at some of the conventions that have become semi-standard since Halo's release (removal of health systems for some form of recharge, grenades and melee becoming a central part of gameplay, improvement (in some cases) of enemy AI, etc).
I agree about some of this. Suit energy recharging and being able to melee would be really nice. Although, the recharging shields would necessitate changes in gameplay.
I still found it really fun to play though. You've got to get into the feel of the game.
Yeah, it definitely would. One of the things I see in shooters with a recharging health system versus a non-recharging health system is that encounters can be much larger. In a game like Half-life 2, encounters tend to be relatively small scale, because you don't have enough health/energy nearby to fight more than a few enemies at once; the enemy's strategy revolves around a steady war of attrition on Gordon, with some exceptions. Then look at a shooter like Call of Duty 4 or Halo, which have recharging health; some encounters have 30+ enemies at once. I find that more interesting and exciting, but as always, YMMV.
By the way, if anyone hears about a mod that does something like this... WANT! Bonus points if it changes weapon accuracy and adds melee/grenade buttons. I can dream, can't I?
Not to mention a focus on combat rather than improbably coincidental environmental puzzles.
We get it..
If you are responding to me; Dark Messiah, but thats another story.
Gears of War
Rainbow Six: Vegas
I'm just mentioning these because of the cover system, aside from that I don't really know if theres much else you can do to improve on the actual core game play. The concept is pretty simple, you point your gun and shoot.
Oh and if you consider multiplayer only : Team Fortress 2, it's take on teamwork has more than rejuvenated FPS gameplay.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
S-Mod
CSS:SCI-FI Big project that combined Counter strike with S-mod for a grand single player experience.
Seriously, the gravity and black hole grenades alone are well worth the chaos you will cause, but forwarned that Vortigants will kill you in one hit.
Also, keep an eye out for a floating gun and a blur around it, that is the invisible combine.
Also, the black combine with one red eye jump around like crazy so be careful not to let them get behind you.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
Also, the cover system in R6 pulls you into third person. This wouldn't work for a half life game because they don't want you seeing Gordon. That's the main reason the vehicles are first person and everything.
Besides, I think cover systems are overrated. If my character is agile enough to move in an out of cover quickly enough there isn't really a need for pressing against a wall.
XBL - Follow Freeman
You can say this about any genre you want and people will agree.
I'm sure you could. That doesn't not make the games I listed essentially identical to their pre-Halflife 2 predecessors. Doesn't make them bad, either.
Remember when you had to run like hell and dodge behind stuff when the chopper is shooting at you near the start of HL2?
If the whole game was like that, it wouldn't be as exciting when you really had to GTFO.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I will never be happy with the FPS genre. I forsee that it shall die and a new genre shall rise from its corpse and the corpse of the RPG and a new beast shall rise, a fusion of the two, and the people shall rejoice. Oh, wait, it already happened with Bioshock and Dark Messiah, and the Elder Scrolls series and a whole bunch of other crap coming down the line and some from my brain.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
What the hell game were you playing? Mine was mostly combat, with the occasional puzzle.
Did you accidentally load up Portal or something?
Yeah, cover systems are good for some games, but their far from necessary*. I can hide behind cover just fine on my own.
* I can see cove being good for console First/Third Person Shooters, where controls are less precise.
I just find that cover mechanic a little awkward compared to FPS games, i mean, playing as fenix felt like I was controlling a tank, compared to more fluid games like killzone and Halo, personally, I liked the close range instant kill of Killzone better than the melee mechanic. Not so good for multiplayer but dammit, I love the fact that I threw a knife into Helgan soldier's throat then charged him as he chocked on it and then slashed right on through the rest of his jugular. I
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
My admiration for Halo 3's enjoyable co-op campaign has for the most part allowed me to forget about the horror that is Halo 1. Halo 1 is pre-Halflife 1 in game design philosophy. The idea of interesting encounters and unique locales passed right over the developers heads. They even completely missed the the opportunities that having a game set on a giant ring could have for level design. 85% of the game takes place in identical cooridoors.
Do tell. Cite some examples to humor me please.
XBL - Follow Freeman
I haven't played the sequals but I will grant that they are probably better and look forward to playing them, but I think that you give the original too much credit. Play Halo or Halo:Combat Evolved and them play HL2 and tell me what you think then.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
I guess it all comes down to personal preference. I personally don't like recharging shields. The vehicle issue between the two games doesn't really bother me either because I like the driving in them both.
However, Halo 1 (and to an extent 2 and 3) have shitty level design, while I think HL2 is constantly fresh and not repetitive. That's just me.
XBL - Follow Freeman
Not to mention the painful voice-acting and obnoxious Aliens rip-off Space Marines. I like Halo and all, but comparing Halo 1 to HL2 is ridiculous.
Uh, you can take cover in most fps games. Assuming there is stuff to hide behind. I use cover in HL 2 all the time. Well, when I play HL 2 I use it all the time, I don't play it much.
That is a valid point, and in my defense, its hard to be observant when you are fighting the urge to quit to desktop and play something else. Also, I shouldn't have soiled Doom's good name, it has quite fun levels, and some decent clones.
I should just forget that there are other games in the Halo trilogy besides the 3rd one, really, I'm getting bored thinking about some of Halo 1's levels.
HL2 is far from "linear corridor". Sure it's heavily scripted, but that's just the type of game it is. FarCry would be an example of the opposite, in which almost nothing is scripted. Either are valid types of FPS.
This doesn't stop you from being an anti-halo fanboy, though. I mean, you could always say that it's had a negative influence on the genre. Half-Life 2 mostly escaped its influence by being halfway through development at the time of its release (just look at the difference between it and other shooters that came out around the same time, like Far Cry), so you still have that.
I didn't say that it wasn't a valid type of FPS, just that it plays like you're trapped in a narrow corridor. Which it does.
You know what I think? Forget Doom level design! What we need is Doom II level design! Circle of Death, Barrels o' Fun...they were fun times.
We're just annoyed that you think superficial stuff like shields are integral to game design. You can have a good fps with recharging life or healthpacks.
Also, you don't need checkpoints in a game where you can save at any time.
The one great innovation Halo gave us was integrated use of vehicles.
Except the parts where you're not. Like any time you fight a strider, a gunship or are outside at all. Which is a large portion of the game.
And if you think that Valve would have included a recharging shield system or dual wielding or whatever the fuck if they had started making HL2 after Halo 1 you are huffing paint.
Except the parts where your not. Like, most of the game. Where is this narrow corridor thing coming from?