#1 Posted by Leptok (942 posts) -

But damn, I am tired of them in their current form. I hate being the only one shot at, I hate watching waves come thru until I hit scripting checkpoints, and I hate AI "companions" that just make noise and kill one enemy every 5 minutes, usually by accident. 
 
 
Is anyone else just tired of the mechanics, not the setting?

#2 Posted by JasonR86 (9724 posts) -

Why would they want to do anything different if it still sells?

#3 Posted by Leptok (942 posts) -
@JasonR86 said:

Why would they want to do anything different if it still sells?

 
They wont. This is more about how like on the podcast they kind of sigh and go "Another modern military shooter." I think Brad has even said he's sick of them. 
 
I'm just saying I like the setting, not the mechanics of it. 
#4 Posted by Contrarian (1143 posts) -

Things usually change when sales go down. Why change what is selling? Changing it the "right" way is far more difficult than I imagine it is. Change and people complain. Can't win really.

#5 Posted by Dagbiker (6978 posts) -

I fell out of FPS's. But I agree. You can do a lot with modern military, or even future military. Its just the shooter part they need to fix.

#6 Posted by Blackout62 (1407 posts) -

I'm tired of the setting but not the mechanics. In fact if we could get a WWII shooter revival I would be absolutely giddy. I have not traveled down the digital wartorn roads of the most beautiful landscape Western Europe has to offer enough times in my gaming related existence.

#7 Posted by Hailinel (25205 posts) -

@Leptok said:

@JasonR86 said:

Why would they want to do anything different if it still sells?

They wont. This is more about how like on the podcast they kind of sigh and go "Another modern military shooter." I think Brad has even said he's sick of them. I'm just saying I like the setting, not the mechanics of it.

Years ago, the market was flooded with World War II shooters. People stopped buying them, and the developers moved on to the modern era. Things will change again once people stop buying modern shooters.

Me? I'm holding out hope for trends to shift toward Revolutionary War muskets and flintlock pistols.

#8 Posted by xXxLYNCHxXx (162 posts) -

Yeah, I like the modern warfare type setting... But am very tired of the Modern Warfare formula...

#9 Posted by Jrinswand (1711 posts) -

I still love first-person shooters, but I can't remember the last time I sat down and played through a single-player campaign of one. The multiplayer is really what keeps me coming back.

#10 Posted by believer258 (12184 posts) -

@Leptok said:

Is anyone else just tired of the mechanics, not the setting?

I can't say I'm entirely tired of the mechanics.

Start game - > Watch explosion - > Shoot dudes - Shout a) Oscar Mike or b) Oorah -> Shoot Dudes - > Watch explosion.

Nope. Still not tired of it.

#11 Posted by JasonR86 (9724 posts) -

@ Leptok said:

@ JasonR86 said:

Why would they want to do anything different if it still sells?


They wont. This is more about how like on the podcast they kind of sigh and go "Another modern military shooter." I think Brad has even said he's sick of them. I'm just saying I like the setting, not the mechanics of it.

I get that and I agree to a degree though I still enjoy most of the mechanics in military shooters now. But this is just such a common topic (I don't like game 'x') for people to bring up and the solution to fix the problem, i.e. don't buy the games you don't like, is so simple that it's hard not to come back with the comment I made. What lessons publishers and developers will learn from consumers not buying these games isn't clear (they might just change the setting and keep the mechanics thinking that is the solution we all want) but, regardless, the solution is still the same; don't buy games in the present that fit into genres, design styles, etc. you don't want to see rehashed in the future.

#12 Posted by mlarrabee (3060 posts) -

@Leptok: Completely agree.

I would love to see what a triple-A developer could do with a sniper simulator, or a truly squad-based game.

I was thinking recently about how death is inconsequential in every FPS I've played lately, and wondered what it would be like to play as a member of a military squad. But whenever you died, that member died permanently, and you took control of another character in the squad. Every time you died, your fighting force diminished, the enemies' targets became fewer, and your options for flanking and cover fire disappeared.

Kind of like bringing it back to the days of Doom, when death meant you started the level over again and lost every weapon.

#13 Posted by SlightConfuse (3963 posts) -

we need more future shooters, that canceled command and conquer FPS looked cool

#14 Posted by Brunchies (2484 posts) -

Modern shooters are turning into ww2 shooters, in about 2 to 3 years shooters will turn to something new. Call of duty was released in 2003 and people got sick of ww2 shooters in 2007, call of duty 4 was released in 2007 and people are starting to get sick of them. I'm surprised it lasted this long, a fad is still a fad.

#15 Posted by BigChickenDinner (761 posts) -

Honestly I think the quality of shooters has dropped dramatically since the days of CoD1 and 2. I think the really problem is the mass produced, assembly line feel of everything in the games. Nothing feels like it was taken past the "Ya, that sounds like a good idea" stage in games anymore.

#16 Posted by Leptok (942 posts) -
@Hailinel said:

@Leptok said:

@JasonR86 said:

Why would they want to do anything different if it still sells?

They wont. This is more about how like on the podcast they kind of sigh and go "Another modern military shooter." I think Brad has even said he's sick of them. I'm just saying I like the setting, not the mechanics of it.

Years ago, the market was flooded with World War II shooters. People stopped buying them, and the developers moved on to the modern era. Things will change again once people stop buying modern shooters.

Me? I'm holding out hope for trends to shift toward Revolutionary War muskets and flintlock pistols.

  
 
But that is just a setting change. It's still the same formula. Useless AI companions that are more of a distraction than help, feeling like a shooting gallery than anything else.  
 
 
I just got around to playing a bit of the BF3 campaign, it feels like a slightly crappier version of cod4.
#17 Posted by Hailinel (25205 posts) -

@Leptok said:

@Hailinel said:

@Leptok said:

@JasonR86 said:

Why would they want to do anything different if it still sells?

They wont. This is more about how like on the podcast they kind of sigh and go "Another modern military shooter." I think Brad has even said he's sick of them. I'm just saying I like the setting, not the mechanics of it.

Years ago, the market was flooded with World War II shooters. People stopped buying them, and the developers moved on to the modern era. Things will change again once people stop buying modern shooters.

Me? I'm holding out hope for trends to shift toward Revolutionary War muskets and flintlock pistols.

But that is just a setting change. It's still the same formula. Useless AI companions that are more of a distraction than help, feeling like a shooting gallery than anything else. I just got around to playing a bit of the BF3 campaign, it feels like a slightly crappier version of cod4.

Do you know how revolutionary-era muskets work? It wouldn't be nearly the shooting gallery that the Modern Warfare games are. :P

#18 Posted by Leptok (942 posts) -
@Hailinel said:

@Leptok said:

@Hailinel said:

@Leptok said:

@JasonR86 said:

Why would they want to do anything different if it still sells?

They wont. This is more about how like on the podcast they kind of sigh and go "Another modern military shooter." I think Brad has even said he's sick of them. I'm just saying I like the setting, not the mechanics of it.

Years ago, the market was flooded with World War II shooters. People stopped buying them, and the developers moved on to the modern era. Things will change again once people stop buying modern shooters.

Me? I'm holding out hope for trends to shift toward Revolutionary War muskets and flintlock pistols.

But that is just a setting change. It's still the same formula. Useless AI companions that are more of a distraction than help, feeling like a shooting gallery than anything else. I just got around to playing a bit of the BF3 campaign, it feels like a slightly crappier version of cod4.

Do you know how revolutionary-era muskets work? It wouldn't be nearly the shooting gallery that the Modern Warfare games are. :P

Well, it probably would be more of one. They'd have to balance it out with the slower fire. If you want something real, you'd have to get a Mount and Blade mod.
#19 Posted by upwarDBound (654 posts) -

Neither am I. Then again I've only played spec ops mode in MW2 and a bit of online multiplayer in Bad Company 2.

#20 Posted by WilltheMagicAsian (1542 posts) -

Play Quake

#21 Posted by the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG (4284 posts) -

That would be awesome if a WWII shooter had a Japanese gun with a katana in it....  Those wouldve been awesome to just swing at other people with guns.  

#22 Posted by TinoXtreme (300 posts) -

I would really like another unreal tournament. Tired of modern warfare shooters to be honest.

#23 Posted by WMWA (1162 posts) -

I'm tired of the genre too, in a sense. Yet, I still play BF3 a few times a week. Its gotten to the point where the killing is semi-ancillary. Im the top person in most every match, yet I never realize it until the end

#24 Posted by WMWA (1162 posts) -

@Hailinel: Assassin's Creed III says you're gonna get your wish. Maybe. Actually, probably not. Itd be really cool if flintlock pistols and the like could be a legitimate choice, though

#25 Posted by Leptok (942 posts) -
@mlarrabee

@Leptok: Completely agree.

I would love to see what a triple-A developer could do with a sniper simulator, or a truly squad-based game.

I was thinking recently about how death is inconsequential in every FPS I've played lately, and wondered what it would be like to play as a member of a military squad. But whenever you died, that member died permanently, and you took control of another character in the squad. Every time you died, your fighting force diminished, the enemies' targets became fewer, and your options for flanking and cover fire disappeared.

Kind of like bringing it back to the days of Doom, when death meant you started the level over again and lost every weapon.

Or even just do something more meaningful. Like I came out of a dark alley and took a snap shot at a civilian, fucking acknowledge it at least.


All the Oscar Mikes and ROEs could mean something, instead its more chintzy window dressing.

Maybe Spec Ops will be what I want, just hope the quality is decent.
#26 Posted by Ubersmake (754 posts) -

What I'd really love is something like Arma 2, but with a completely overhauled UI. The UI is, consistently, the thing that keeps me from really enjoying that game. There are menus on top of menus on top of menus to do something like order one of your troops to move to a specific point. I really believe that someone could look at all that stuff and streamline the entire thing without taking away from the ridiculous depth of that game. Unfortunately, from what few videos I've seen of the next game, Arma 3, it looks like the UI hasn't changed at all.

#27 Posted by Hizang (8532 posts) -

I think I am getting tired of Modern Day Shooters, I want some shooters set in the 90's.

#28 Posted by FancySoapsMan (5818 posts) -

Modern shooters are fine, but I'd love to play something more tactical like the classic Ghost Recon games or Swat 4.  

#29 Posted by lockwoodx (2479 posts) -

I'm tired of consoles. They give modern military shooters a bad name.

#30 Posted by OtakuGamer (1285 posts) -

What else could you possibly do with a modern military shooter that hasn't been done before.

#31 Posted by sins_of_mosin (1539 posts) -

I'm tired of the terrorist setting or the really impossible invasion theme like russia or north korea.

#32 Posted by Mr_Skeleton (5154 posts) -

You are literally the only person who is tired of modern shooters.

#33 Posted by Leptok (942 posts) -
@OtakuGamer

What else could you possibly do with a modern military shooter that hasn't been done before.

Africa? Far cry 2 didn't do a very interesting story there, but it could be done.
#34 Posted by Leptok (942 posts) -

I mean show some balls, let a character be part of genocide, or not. Do some real raw shit.

#35 Posted by Jimbo (9986 posts) -

The setting doesn't really bother me, it's just that they've become too consistently dumb and passive. Gaming used to be an alternative to mindlessly zoning out in front of a TV, but now it's a replacement. I was playing smarter games when I was 5 than most of what's on offer today. FOLLOW THIS GUY, PICK UP THIS GUN, SHOOT HERE... I can't sit through it anymore without feeling retarded. I'd like to say I've grown out of gaming, but that's not true, gaming just got dumber.

#36 Posted by StingingVelvet (574 posts) -

I like Call of Duty, an annual fix of insanely linear dumb explosion fun.

What I dislike is all the copycats that think we need even more of that exact same game. I have no interest in them, and wish they would do something unique so I could care.

#37 Posted by Dalai (7069 posts) -

I don't even play modern military shooters and I'm sick of them.

#38 Edited by sparks50 (373 posts) -

@Ubersmake said:

What I'd really love is something like Arma 2, but with a completely overhauled UI. The UI is, consistently, the thing that keeps me from really enjoying that game. There are menus on top of menus on top of menus to do something like order one of your troops to move to a specific point. I really believe that someone could look at all that stuff and streamline the entire thing without taking away from the ridiculous depth of that game. Unfortunately, from what few videos I've seen of the next game, Arma 3, it looks like the UI hasn't changed at all.

They tried to make the UI easier in Arma 2, but they did it by adding a (largely useless) new menu on top of the old one. And to make room for the new one, they hid the old one so you pretty much had to memorize the initial ten key-presses to use it. It was pretty much a disaster.

They say they are going to do something drastic with it in Arma 3. We will see I guess.

#39 Posted by MikkaQ (10344 posts) -

I'm pretty tired of the actual setting. The modern part is fine, but we have too many dull military shooters. Why not have an FPS about Triad gang warfare, or like a WWII shooter from the perspective of a resistance fighter as opposed to your standard stormin' Norman... dy level.

#40 Posted by tourgen (4542 posts) -

Yeah less rigid scripting and more dynamic encounters would be really cool and fun. I might even be up for some modern military action if it wasn't wrapped up in a straightjacket game style. maybe the next console gen will kick off with something cool like that.

#41 Posted by TheHT (11777 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@Leptok said:

Is anyone else just tired of the mechanics, not the setting?

I can't say I'm entirely tired of the mechanics.

Start game - > Watch explosion - > Shoot dudes - Shout a) Oscar Mike or b) Oorah -> Shoot Dudes - > Watch explosion.

Nope. Still not tired of it.

If it's presented well then I agree, but if that formula is so obvious when I'm playing the game then I'll get really bored really fast. I mean, on some level the set-pieces have to be so good and so varied to keep things from getting stale that the game's just a theme-park ride. But if it takes away too much control (like just throwing you into turret sequences) then it still gets boring, regardless of how cool the explosions are.