*nerd rage

[GONNAFISTYA]

it turns out to be another circle-strafe borefest in a fancy new engine, with some crappy looking driving bits in between.

Their legacy is undeniable, but anyone with half a brain cell knows they have been making effectively the same game over and over for almost 20 years now. For what it is, i'm sure the game will be fun for a little while, but theres only so many "oh look, heres another demon-like creature spawning behind me" gameplay I can take before it's time to move on. Even Crysis 2, which is essentially the same kind of game, at least had the suit to differentiate it from the rest. Rage has.... a boomerang?

The amount of sheer retardation in this post makes it so I can't really respond to it...as it'd be like talking to Sean Hannity.

Next you'll be complaining that all games use skyboxes.

[brisk]

it turns out to be another circle-strafe borefest in a fancy new engine, with some crappy looking driving bits in between.

Their legacy is undeniable, but anyone with half a brain cell knows they have been making effectively the same game over and over for almost 20 years now. For what it is, i'm sure the game will be fun for a little while, but theres only so many "oh look, heres another demon-like creature spawning behind me" gameplay I can take before it's time to move on. Even Crysis 2, which is essentially the same kind of game, at least had the suit to differentiate it from the rest. Rage has.... a boomerang?

The amount of sheer retardation in this post makes it so I can't really respond to it...as it'd be like talking to Sean Hannity.

Next you'll be complaining that all games use skyboxes.

So let me get this straight. You tell people not to buy games that you don't like, as this shapes future industry decisions. You blame consumers for publishers forcing the same game onto us year in/year out, so when I say that I find the previews for Rage boring and explain why I don't intend to purchase it, you call me a retard for it? Gotta love dat contradiction.

Wolfenstein, Doom and Quake are all of the same mold. The single player aspects are EXACTLY the same between all games. It's A to B gameplay, while shooting monsters in between. I'm saying that i'm bored of this style of gameplay and that Rage looks to fit in this mold too. Using your own words, i'm choosing as a consumer not to support this anymore.

[Eraser]

as well as exploding barrels and crates. Yes...it's fun to laugh at exploding barrels and crates, but in 20 years nobody has figured out a better way...simply because what is there - in terms of established gameplay mechanics - works the best.

I read some blog post or something from one of the Bulletstorm devs. He wrote about the inclusion of exploding barrels in their game. They originally had them colored green, but as it turned out from play testing, people didn't realize they would explode when shot. Then they colored them red instead and suddenly everyone knew what to do with the barrels.

I think this is just a tiny but very tangible example of subconscious expectations people have. Stuff that flows naturally out of being conditioned in a certain way. The basic rules for FPS games id laid down 18 years ago with Doom still apply to every shooter. The difference is that in the meantime, developers have been building stuff on top of that to mask the basic gameplay elements, even though they're exactly the same as they were with Doom.

I think that id Software's vision on making games has always been about simplicity. They never felt the need to mask the core gameplay mechanics that drive every FPS game with RPG elements, scripted events or other such newfangled ideas. What's left is a bare bones game which, yes, may feel a little 1990 but may just as well give a really unencumbered feeling of the joy taken from the intensity of what every shooter, at it's core, is about.

So sure, the Deus Ex-es of this world have their place and they're great to play, but once in a while I don't mind a mindless balls-to-the-wall shooter like Quake, Serious Sam and very likely Rage.

[brisk]

You realize that you've described every single boss battle in every single FPS, don't you? You've also described the most successful and widely used tactic in FPS history to avoid getting hit by enemy gunfire: strafe. You've also described the most successful and widely used tactic in FPS history to avoid getting hit by enemy gunfire while still firing on the enemy: circle strafe. As to reloading, well that can be "fixed" but why would you want to? It brings absolutely nothing to the discussion other than stating the obvious as to what's "not new" in any new FPS, never mind games from id.

So unless you can design a completely new (and superior) control/combat/tactics/weapon system that isn't based on WASD movement or hit-point weapons, you will always have this in FPS games...as well as exploding barrels and crates. Yes...it's fun to laugh at exploding barrels and crates, but in 20 years nobody has figured out a better way...simply because what is there - in terms of established gameplay mechanics - works the best.

It's not the control mechanics we're bored of. It's the same "monsters rush at you/shoot em/move onto next area/repeat" formula that is the problem.

A game can be in first person, involving gunplay and not be a repetitive blast-fest. Deus Ex is the obvious example, but Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Mirrors Edge, Bloodlines, America Army etc.. also do things differently. They're also 1000x more interesting as a result, at least for me.

[GONNAFISTYA]

So let me get this straight. You tell people not to buy games that you don't like, as this shapes future industry decisions. You blame consumers for publishers forcing the same game onto us year in/year out, so when I say that I find the previews for Rage boring and explain why I don't intend to purchase it, you call me a retard for it? Gotta love dat contradiction.

Whatever. My point is that your reasons for not buying Rage can be applied to any other FPS that you can name...and quite frankly you sound like a spoiled brat. That's why I'm saying you sound like a retard.

Wolfenstein, Doom and Quake are all of the same mold. The single player aspects are EXACTLY the same between all games. It's A to B gameplay, while shooting monsters in between. I'm saying that i'm bored of this style of gameplay and that Rage looks to fit in this mold too. Using your own words, i'm choosing as a consumer not to support this anymore.

Then don't buy another FPS for the rest of your life, because breaking it down to the ridiculous points of contention that you have in your posts pretty much disqualifies nearly every one of them. Play pong instead. Last time I checked there was no circle strafing in it.

Seriously...it's jaw-dropping to see comments complaining that developers have to reinvent the wheel on every single game that comes out, while complaining that the newer games aren't the same as the games that you liked earlier.

[GONNAFISTYA]

It's not the control mechanics we're bored of. It's the same "monsters rush at you/shoot em/move onto next area/repeat" formula that is the problem.

A game can be in first person, involving gunplay and not be a repetitive blast-fest. Deus Ex is the obvious example, but Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Mirrors Edge, Bloodlines, America Army etc.. also do things differently. They're also 1000x more interesting as a result, at least for me.

Uh huh...and when devs create games that are like the ones you listed you'll complain that the new games aren't original and then yearn for the "simple games" where "monsters rush at you/shoot em/move onto next area/repeat".

As I said, discussing this with you was going to end up like talking to Sean Hannity.

[Eraser]

tbh I think brisk is well entitled to form his own opinions, even though I do not share his views. I even think brisk puts his views to words relatively well.

What appalled me is that there seem to be scores of people who expect nothing less than revolutionary games from id Software, just like they did with Wolf3D, Doom and Quake, and when that doesn't happen, they slag off the game as being crap. I'm not saying brisk does this, but it seems a bit of a line of thought people have.

[GONNAFISTYA]

I know...I'm just being a prick.

Please understand that there are untold numbers of gamers who think that including the "lean left/lean right around corners" was a slap in the face to "traditional shooters" while they complained that "nothing new" had been introduced into FPS in 15 years.
When I speak with these people (and there have been tons of them) the expression on my face is akin to the same expression I'd have witnessing someone complain they haven't eaten "in years" while holding a half eaten bacon sandwich...and spitting out bits of bacon while complaining.

[brisk]

Hey, I even said i'm not expecting innovation in every game. I quote oblivion/fallout/new vegas as an example and it is pretty much the same game across 3 different titles. Still fun though. All i'm saying is i'm bored of a very particular kind of "classic" FPS and sadly, Rage fits into this particular niche, at least from that initial gameplay trailer. Multiplayer competitive FPS' are still my true love and I assure you, i'm more than adequate at the straffle. But single player FPS' often suffer from repetition and I listed a whole set of games that break away from the norm and remain interesting for me. So no, I don't need to stop playing FPS' for the rest of my life, because certain developers understand that not everything has to be a doom clone and they do occasionally make interesting games I enjoy.

As for being a "spoilt brat", again I can just keep quoting GFY's comment on expecting more from the industry by voting with your wallet. Either you want us to be satified with mundane sequels and the same old games released annually, or you want us to encourage publishers to take risks. By your own logic, we can't have both.

All I want is to play fun games that I enjoy. Theres really nothing more to it than that. I'm getting old enough now to have nostalgia trips and be bitter about certain issues like I discussed, but I still play loads of games I really enjoy being released every year.

[brisk]

Fallout 3/Vegas aren't shooters. Deus Ex is not a shooter. If you prefer RPGs to action games now, fair enough. But noone buys action games for complexity, depth and an engrossing plot.

They are as much shooters as they are any other niche you want to put on them. They include the first person perspective, the gun, the aiming reticle and people to shoot. Yet they also offer a decent story, characters you care about and choice. Can't fault them for wanting to do more.

Uncharted 2 is an action game, which has complexity, depth and an engrossing plot. Demons Souls too (well ok, maybe not the plot). Don't assume that just because a game has action in it, that it has to be mindless.

[Eraser]

I think what Memphis is trying to get across is that the style of game id Software makes is a genre on it's own and shouldn't be labeled as bad or unoriginal games simply because other games have a broader palette of features. id Software games should be judged on their own merits, not in comparison with the complexity of Deus Ex. Whether this style fits your tastes is a matter of... well... taste

[brisk]

I think what Memphis is trying to get across is that the style of game id Software makes is a genre on it's own and shouldn't be labeled as bad or unoriginal games simply because other games have a broader palette of features. id Software games should be judged on their own merits, not in comparison with the complexity of Deus Ex. Whether this style fits your tastes is a matter of... well... taste

Yeah, I get what you mean and I consider id games as "classic" FPS', since they did pretty much define them all in the first place. I still enjoy them for what they are, but it's just not enough for me anymore. Other games offer everything id defined and much more now.

I don't agree that id's games should be exempt from being judged against other games too. That's like saying Unreal Tournament should only be compared to other Epic games, when obviously it's main competition at the time was Q3A... and as we all know, Q3A was by far the more superior MP competitive game.

But yeah, pedanticism aside, i'm sure Rage will be the best "id game" yet, at least in single player.

[Yeahso]

]

Yes...that is exactly what you're saying.

Hey remember that time you told me Far Cry was a pretty good game? Why did you say that when you knew full well it wasn't Deus Ex?

No, it's really not. He asked what makes games fun for me, and what is excluded from Rage. I then made my comment-Rage exclusive.

Yeah, Far Cry was pretty enjoyable. Not enjoyable enough to finish, but it was fun, mainly because of the AI, the physics, and the amazing, original environments. Three things that are now relatively commonplace. Hence my point about Rage. Nothing new under the sun for id.

Now you're splitting hairs to justify your complaints. All I see are somersaults and logical fallacies in the way you've come to the conclusion that there's "nothing new under the sun for id".

Case in point:

You realize that you've described every single boss battle in every single FPS, don't you? You've also described the most successful and widely used tactic in FPS history to avoid getting hit by enemy gunfire: strafe. You've also described the most successful and widely used tactic in FPS history to avoid getting hit by enemy gunfire while still firing on the enemy: circle strafe. As to reloading, well that can be "fixed" but why would you want to? It brings absolutely nothing to the discussion other than stating the obvious as to what's "not new" in any new FPS, never mind games from id.

So unless you can design a completely new (and superior) control/combat/tactics/weapon system that isn't based on WASD movement or hit-point weapons, you will always have this in FPS games...as well as exploding barrels and crates. Yes...it's fun to laugh at exploding barrels and crates, but in 20 years nobody has figured out a better way...simply because what is there - in terms of established gameplay mechanics - works the best.

Yeah, the idea though, on top of circle-circle-strafe-shoot-reload is to have something called "substance", so that you aren't left with just the tried and tested.

You know when they put a cup holder in the car and it made the car more enjoyable? Then they put in radios and shit and sat-navs and tv's? Well, the car was usable before, but nowadays, people aren't too happy about cars that simply go backwards, forwards, left and right. It's called "progress".

[Yeahso]

it turns out to be another circle-strafe borefest in a fancy new engine, with some crappy looking driving bits in between.

Their legacy is undeniable, but anyone with half a brain cell knows they have been making effectively the same game over and over for almost 20 years now. For what it is, i'm sure the game will be fun for a little while, but theres only so many "oh look, heres another demon-like creature spawning behind me" gameplay I can take before it's time to move on. Even Crysis 2, which is essentially the same kind of game, at least had the suit to differentiate it from the rest. Rage has.... a boomerang?

The amount of sheer retardation in this post makes it so I can't really respond to it...as it'd be like talking to Sean Hannity.

Next you'll be complaining that all games use skyboxes.

There's no retardation in that post at all, it's completely reasonable. The only retarded argument really seems to be yours, which amounts to nothing more than "Yeah, id are unoriginal, So what?"

[Yeahso]

Whatever. My point is that your reasons for not buying Rage can be applied to any other FPS that you can name...and quite frankly you sound like a spoiled brat. That's why I'm saying you sound like a retard.

Then don't buy another FPS for the rest of your life, because breaking it down to the ridiculous points of contention that you have in your posts pretty much disqualifies nearly every one of them. Play pong instead. Last time I checked there was no circle strafing in it.

Seriously...it's jaw-dropping to see comments complaining that developers have to reinvent the wheel on every single game that comes out, while complaining that the newer games aren't the same as the games that you liked earlier.

hahaha, fucking hell, I'm always amazed at how angry people seem in their posts here.

Fuck man, it's just one guy's opinion, chill out!

[brisk]

I like GFY, but I do get the impression he doesn't know what he wants from games. I've read him say loads of times on here that he's sick of dumbed-down/rehashed/buggy games and he blames consumers for it. Yet now, he has done a complete 180 degrees and says we should all just accept that "this is the way it is" and we're retards for actually wanting more from the games we pay for.

Yeahso's car analogy is perfect. You can have a great game concept and always go further with it. Doom became Quake. Quake became Half Life. Half Life became Deus Ex. Deus Ex became Morrowind (and with this example, I don't mean in overall quality, but rather how it offered similar qualities, but gave a fully open world, with more freedom).

You can always find a winning formula and offer something additional, on top of what already works. What exactly does Rage offer, other than more polish? This may be enough for some people and fair enough if that is the case. All I know is that from experience, i'll get bored within a few hours (and considering how short games are now, that may even be enough to finish it, heh)

[Mat Linnett]

Yeah, a more accurate timeline is the separate, Looking Glass Studios one.
System Shock > Thief > Thief 2 / System Shock 2 > Deus Ex > Arx Fatalis > Dark Messiah > Bioshock

[GONNAFISTYA]

Yeah, the idea though, on top of circle-circle-strafe-shoot-reload is to have something called "substance", so that you aren't left with just the tried and tested.

You know when they put a cup holder in the car and it made the car more enjoyable? Then they put in radios and shit and sat-navs and tv's? Well, the car was usable before, but nowadays, people aren't too happy about cars that simply go backwards, forwards, left and right. It's called "progress".

Dude...you are still complaining about the game mechanics of a boss fight and applying them to a whole game.

Full disclosure: I agree with you that boss fights are repetitive and tedious (for the exact reasons you describe) and I loathe any game that forces you to defeat a specific enemy before being allowed to progress. However, until boss fights in shooters are removed for pacing purposes, then you'll always have this complaint. It's quite apparent that the boss fight in the video was most likely designed to be fast paced gun battle, with not alot of strategy involved and the player simply wears down the health of a bigger, tougher enemy.

If you want a boss battle that involves strategy and planning, then I'd recommend Shadow Of The Colossus or some other game.

[brisk]

Yeah, a more accurate timeline is the separate, Looking Glass Studios one.
System Shock > Thief > Thief 2 / System Shock 2 > Deus Ex > Arx Fatalis > Dark Messiah > Bioshock

The point is though, you are in a first-person perspective in all those games and you have a gun/weapon to shoot people with. They cross genres (or in some cases, invent them) but this is what progress is all about anyway. Offering exactly what the previous game offered and then giving you something else on top of it. This might be traditional RPG elements, puzzles that consist of more than finding a keycard for a door, or something else not thought of yet.

[Mat Linnett]

Ah, but look at the concurrent history:
While that is the Looking Glass and descendants timeline, id and id related games would go something like this:
Wolf 3D > Doom / Doom 2 > Heretic / Hexen > Quake > Quake 2 > Half Life > Quake 3 > Return to Castle Wolfenstein > Wolfenstein Enemy Territory > Medal of Honor Allied Assault > Call of Duty > Doom 3 > Half Life 2 > Quake 4 > Call of Duty 2 > Portal / TF2 > Call of Duty Modern Warfare > Left 4 Dead

As we can see, Valve are the only people who've changed the formula substantially. The rest are "just" big, dumb shooters. Indeed, with the CoD branch, I'd argue that level design has actually gotten worse, devolving into bowling-alley level design as opposed to the surreality and somewhat non-linearity of levels in earlier games such as Doom and Quake.
I like to think of level design versus enemy design as actual human intelligence versus artificial intelligence. While it's interesting to see how they've tried to make the monsters we fight more realistic, they just can't compare to some of the fiendishly designed levels and puzzles from earlier games.
What we need is a modern graphics engine where the development team aren't afraid to turn the level itself into the enemy.
And in that respect, that's the direction Valve have gone with Portal and Left 4 Dead.

The real tragedy in all this is the death of Looking Glass and Troika. Their legacy lives on somewhat in Obsidian, but these were companies that really were pushing the boundaries with what RPS call "Immersive Sims".

[GONNAFISTYA]

I like GFY, but I do get the impression he doesn't know what he wants from games. I've read him say loads of times on here that he's sick of dumbed-down/rehashed/buggy games and he blames consumers for it. Yet now, he has done a complete 180 degrees and says we should all just accept that "this is the way it is" and we're retards for actually wanting more from the games we pay for.

lol wut?

Ah I see, you've been taking my comments calling you guys all idiots for comparing Rage to competely different games (and basing alot of your complaints on the differences) and how I even pointed out that "gamer focus groups" contradict themselves and don't seem to know what they want...and are now claiming that I don't know what I want from games.

The best "no u" in the history of the internet.

Yeahso's car analogy is perfect. You can have a great game concept and always go further with it.

Uh...no. He's complaining about circle strafing and more circle strafing. How exactly do you "progress" a basic movement/combat mechanic? Perhaps if the game forced the player to press an additional button/joystick? Or a cover-based system like Gears Of War?

Doom became Quake. Quake became Half Life. Half Life became Deus Ex. Deus Ex became Morrowind (and with this example, I don't mean in overall quality, but rather how it offered similar qualities, but gave a fully open world, with more freedom).

And there you go again comparing apples and oranges. And since Rage seems to offer a fully open world, with more freedom than previous id games...I still don't understand your complaint/comparison.

[Yeahso]

Yeah, the idea though, on top of circle-circle-strafe-shoot-reload is to have something called "substance", so that you aren't left with just the tried and tested.

You know when they put a cup holder in the car and it made the car more enjoyable? Then they put in radios and shit and sat-navs and tv's? Well, the car was usable before, but nowadays, people aren't too happy about cars that simply go backwards, forwards, left and right. It's called "progress".

Dude...you are still complaining about the game mechanics of a boss fight and applying them to a whole game.

Full disclosure: I agree with you that boss fights are repetitive and tedious (for the exact reasons you describe) and I loathe any game that forces you to defeat a specific enemy before being allowed to progress. However, until boss fights in shooters are removed for pacing purposes, then you'll always have this complaint. It's quite apparent that the boss fight in the video was most likely designed to be fast paced gun battle, with not alot of strategy involved and the player simply wears down the health of a bigger, tougher enemy.

If you want a boss battle that involves strategy and planning, then I'd recommend Shadow Of The Colossus or some other game.

Here's the deal though, I bet that "boss" fight happens at least 50 times in the course of the game.

It's back to the same old thing: Do something new. Try something different. Shit, it's like they're actually trying to remain stale, guaranteed this game wouldn't have had vehicles in if they weren't run-of-the-mill in nearly every FPS game these days.

This is the same shit that happens when I get a photographic commission. I tell the client my vision for the shot, and it's always something relatively bold, but without a doubt workable, and 80% of the time, the client says something along the lines of "Nah, we're just gonna stick with X because that's how Y did it".

[Tsakali]

take the money and run! those are the easiest jobs. Plus you're still keeping your conscience clean cause all you can do is make them aware of your opinion...nothing more.

[DooMer]

All I want from an SP FPS is to have fun shooting things. Even small stuff like that off hand boomerang blade can have a big impact on that.

[brisk]

lol wut?

Ah I see, you've been taking my comments calling you guys all idiots for comparing Rage to competely different games (and basing alot of your complaints on the differences) and how I even pointed out that "gamer focus groups" contradict themselves and don't seem to know what they want...and are now claiming that I don't know what I want from games.

The best "no u" in the history of the internet.

Nope, you're missing the point again. You specifically called consumers retards for accepting sub-standard/boring/null-of-new-ideas games and not using our wallets to encourage industry change, yet when we do say we want more from our games, you moan at us for it and effectively tell us "this is how it is". Just because they're "completely different games" (they're not), it doesn't mean we can't compare a great game with one that is void of any new ideas and is just rehashing the same gameplay mechanics of the past 20 years.

Uh...no. He's complaining about circle strafing and more circle strafing. How exactly do you "progress" a basic movement/combat mechanic? Perhaps if the game forced the player to press an additional button/joystick? Or a cover-based system like Gears Of War?

Again, missing the point of his post. Just look above this one and you'll see his concern isn't about strafing/movement, but rather that id are intentionally not pushing for anything new outside their tried/tested formula. Oh and crappy vehicles don't count either.

And there you go again comparing apples and oranges. And since Rage seems to offer a fully open world, with more freedom than previous id games...I still don't understand your complaint/comparison.

Just because Rage offers more in comparison to other id titles of past, it doesn't mean it actually offers anything new compared to the rest of the market.

Vehicles? Halo did it.
Open world, set in a wasteland? Borderlands/Fallout did it.
Red goo in your face every time you get hit? Every FPS made in the last 10 years did it.
A constant stream of mutants, which you have to kill before reaching a bigger mutant you have to kill? id did it. Every. Fucking. Game.

Innovation isn't the be all and end all for me, but like Yeahso said, it's like they're not even trying to do anything more than what people already expect from them now.