Posted by DeadManRollin (69 posts) -

I used to be a big fan of first person shooters, with slight preference towards arena games like Quake 3 and Unreal Tournament. I've spent hundreds of hours playing Q3A and UT since these games came out more than a decade ago, and recently I played through the Q3A (not team arena, the original game) single player campaign once again to reinvigorate my interest in FPS (first person shooter) games. I enjoyed every minute of playing Q3A; the final confrontation with Xaero was as good as ever, but unfortunately, that's as much as I could get my te eth in to FPSs. 

 Fragfest in Quake 3


I thought after replaying Q3A, I'd feel more interested to play through some modern FPS games like Battlefield Bad Company 2, Duke Nukem Forever, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3, etc., but I couldn't really bring myself to playing any of these games. I did install and play DNF for a while, but even the new age Duke could not interest me much. I have been reading a lot of good stuff about MW3, and I also went to the store to buy it, but as soon as I picked up the DVD box, a silent alarm started ringing in my head which said "Don't waste your money, you'll never end up playing this!".


Instead of buying MW3, I came back home, dug my ****cs collection and re-installed a couple of old real time strategy games that I really enjoy(ed) playing. These are: Age of Mythology (AOM) and Lord of The Rings: Battle for Middle Earth (LOTR: BFME). I already finished AOM and AOM Titan's campaigns and I started playing the evil campaign in BFME, which I've always wanted to beat but never ended up doing.


I had a blast playing AOM and AOMT as I'm now an experienced gamer. When these games first came out, my primary objective was to beat them as soon as possible so that I could move on to other games. That was when I was still in my 20s. But now, at this point of time in my life, instead of having a rushed lunch, I wanted to try a relaxed meal with starters, 2nd dishes, desserts and even coffee, which resulted in a bigger and better playing experience.


I discovered a lot of optional quests, previously unseen areas, eccentricities and new ways of winning the same battles. The memory of my last gameplay was quite vague, as it's at least 8 years old, but still glimpses came back to me while I was playing, and I found some of the rather tough and irritations missions to be quite intriguing and innovative. Instead of rush based battles, I followed more turtling, and only attacked the enemies when I had a sizeable force, which means upgraded units with all sorts of armors and weapons. Previously I solely concentrated on the mythological units, but this time around, my armies were balanced and often the human units played a better part in the battles.

 Good old Age of Mythology
Both of the above mentioned games are quite old. AOM was released in 2002 and BFME in 2006. I played AOM campaign twice before (I did not finish the 2nd playthrough) and BFME good campaign twice. When I was playing BFME, memories of the movie was fresh in my mind and I just couldn't force myself to be on the evil side and watch the hobbits and the members of the fellowship die helplessly.


However, this time around, I am happily killing the good people and having a blast trying out the different unit combinations of Isengard and Mordor army. BFME was built upon a modified C&C: Generals engine, which has served Electronic Arts (EA) quite well. In fact, versions of this engine was used as recently as in the expansion for Red Alert 3, which is still a relatively new game.


Before getting in to the RTS games again, I've spent a significant time playing only RPG games. I believe I've spent the better part of years 2009 to 2011 Q2 playing Neverwinter Nights, Witcher, Mass Effect, Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age 2. I am still playing DA2, and even after 5-6 playthroughs, I still enjoy the battles. Albeit the story has become stale and nowadays I skip most dialogues. The new expansions (Mark of The Assassins and Legacy) are quite interesting, though.

              
       
Especially, Mark of The Assassins was a welcome change of pace and I look forward to playing it again. However, it is pretty much frustrating in one aspect--you need a high lever player character before attempting the expansion, or else you will keep on dying. Even with a healer character, all my companions died in my very first battle when I tried beating MAO at around level 5 or 6.


Unlike DA:O expansions, MAO can't be played after beating the main game. That is, you can't play it with your previous save games. Thus even if you've beaten the game with a two handed warrior before, you can't use him to play MAO--you need to start a new game with a new incarnation of a two handed warrrior in order to play it, and which also means you have to level up this new character up to at least 10-15 levels (beating Act 2 will take you there) until you get a feel of Talis, the new female companion available in MAO.


I've also bought and installed Stronghold 3, the new version of an old castle building game, and I am finding it quite frustrating. There are two types of campaigns in the game, military and economic. I started off with the economic campaign, and I had to leave the game within 15 minutes--cause a rogue bear massacred my whole city! I thought this was the "economic" campaign where I was supposed to focus on resource gathering and building, but I didn't realise that the poor villagers needed protection, too. I had the poor excuse of a lone soldier; a settler with a weird looking pike (which actually resembled a rake rather than a pike) who was killed by a solitary pawing attack from the rabid bear! Even the apple farmers were tougher, they ran for their lives and took a couple of blows before going down.


I am yet to read a review of Stronghold 3; I just bought the game because I wanted to play a new RTS game. I also bought Cities XL 2011 sometime ago, but that game didn't really interest me much due to the sub-par graphics and complicated gameplay. I found the learning curve for Cities XL to be a bit higher than my current patience level.
As for SH3, I just read the wiki and found out that the game is heavily bugged and there's already a number of patches out. I guess I should apply the patches before attempting it again.

I actually ended up buying Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. Since I started playing Skyrim, I haven't touched another game. My experience with Skyrim deserves a full blog entry (or probably several blog entries), so I will write them down separately.  
#1 Posted by DeadManRollin (69 posts) -

I used to be a big fan of first person shooters, with slight preference towards arena games like Quake 3 and Unreal Tournament. I've spent hundreds of hours playing Q3A and UT since these games came out more than a decade ago, and recently I played through the Q3A (not team arena, the original game) single player campaign once again to reinvigorate my interest in FPS (first person shooter) games. I enjoyed every minute of playing Q3A; the final confrontation with Xaero was as good as ever, but unfortunately, that's as much as I could get my te eth in to FPSs. 

 Fragfest in Quake 3


I thought after replaying Q3A, I'd feel more interested to play through some modern FPS games like Battlefield Bad Company 2, Duke Nukem Forever, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3, etc., but I couldn't really bring myself to playing any of these games. I did install and play DNF for a while, but even the new age Duke could not interest me much. I have been reading a lot of good stuff about MW3, and I also went to the store to buy it, but as soon as I picked up the DVD box, a silent alarm started ringing in my head which said "Don't waste your money, you'll never end up playing this!".


Instead of buying MW3, I came back home, dug my ****cs collection and re-installed a couple of old real time strategy games that I really enjoy(ed) playing. These are: Age of Mythology (AOM) and Lord of The Rings: Battle for Middle Earth (LOTR: BFME). I already finished AOM and AOM Titan's campaigns and I started playing the evil campaign in BFME, which I've always wanted to beat but never ended up doing.


I had a blast playing AOM and AOMT as I'm now an experienced gamer. When these games first came out, my primary objective was to beat them as soon as possible so that I could move on to other games. That was when I was still in my 20s. But now, at this point of time in my life, instead of having a rushed lunch, I wanted to try a relaxed meal with starters, 2nd dishes, desserts and even coffee, which resulted in a bigger and better playing experience.


I discovered a lot of optional quests, previously unseen areas, eccentricities and new ways of winning the same battles. The memory of my last gameplay was quite vague, as it's at least 8 years old, but still glimpses came back to me while I was playing, and I found some of the rather tough and irritations missions to be quite intriguing and innovative. Instead of rush based battles, I followed more turtling, and only attacked the enemies when I had a sizeable force, which means upgraded units with all sorts of armors and weapons. Previously I solely concentrated on the mythological units, but this time around, my armies were balanced and often the human units played a better part in the battles.

 Good old Age of Mythology
Both of the above mentioned games are quite old. AOM was released in 2002 and BFME in 2006. I played AOM campaign twice before (I did not finish the 2nd playthrough) and BFME good campaign twice. When I was playing BFME, memories of the movie was fresh in my mind and I just couldn't force myself to be on the evil side and watch the hobbits and the members of the fellowship die helplessly.


However, this time around, I am happily killing the good people and having a blast trying out the different unit combinations of Isengard and Mordor army. BFME was built upon a modified C&C: Generals engine, which has served Electronic Arts (EA) quite well. In fact, versions of this engine was used as recently as in the expansion for Red Alert 3, which is still a relatively new game.


Before getting in to the RTS games again, I've spent a significant time playing only RPG games. I believe I've spent the better part of years 2009 to 2011 Q2 playing Neverwinter Nights, Witcher, Mass Effect, Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age 2. I am still playing DA2, and even after 5-6 playthroughs, I still enjoy the battles. Albeit the story has become stale and nowadays I skip most dialogues. The new expansions (Mark of The Assassins and Legacy) are quite interesting, though.

              
       
Especially, Mark of The Assassins was a welcome change of pace and I look forward to playing it again. However, it is pretty much frustrating in one aspect--you need a high lever player character before attempting the expansion, or else you will keep on dying. Even with a healer character, all my companions died in my very first battle when I tried beating MAO at around level 5 or 6.


Unlike DA:O expansions, MAO can't be played after beating the main game. That is, you can't play it with your previous save games. Thus even if you've beaten the game with a two handed warrior before, you can't use him to play MAO--you need to start a new game with a new incarnation of a two handed warrrior in order to play it, and which also means you have to level up this new character up to at least 10-15 levels (beating Act 2 will take you there) until you get a feel of Talis, the new female companion available in MAO.


I've also bought and installed Stronghold 3, the new version of an old castle building game, and I am finding it quite frustrating. There are two types of campaigns in the game, military and economic. I started off with the economic campaign, and I had to leave the game within 15 minutes--cause a rogue bear massacred my whole city! I thought this was the "economic" campaign where I was supposed to focus on resource gathering and building, but I didn't realise that the poor villagers needed protection, too. I had the poor excuse of a lone soldier; a settler with a weird looking pike (which actually resembled a rake rather than a pike) who was killed by a solitary pawing attack from the rabid bear! Even the apple farmers were tougher, they ran for their lives and took a couple of blows before going down.


I am yet to read a review of Stronghold 3; I just bought the game because I wanted to play a new RTS game. I also bought Cities XL 2011 sometime ago, but that game didn't really interest me much due to the sub-par graphics and complicated gameplay. I found the learning curve for Cities XL to be a bit higher than my current patience level.
As for SH3, I just read the wiki and found out that the game is heavily bugged and there's already a number of patches out. I guess I should apply the patches before attempting it again.

I actually ended up buying Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. Since I started playing Skyrim, I haven't touched another game. My experience with Skyrim deserves a full blog entry (or probably several blog entries), so I will write them down separately.  
#2 Posted by jetsetwillie (857 posts) -

i just skimmed that, but the jist i got was playing the same genre to much leads to fatigue so mix your shit up a bit.

sounds like common sense to me

#3 Posted by DeadManRollin (69 posts) -

Skimming is fine, I know I wrote too much :) 
 
Yeah, I am trying to mix and match stuff. I am also alternating between Xbox360 and the PC, which makes things better

#4 Posted by BlinkyTM (1054 posts) -

I want more RPG's. Not enough swords and decapitations!

#5 Posted by Dagbiker (6939 posts) -

Consoles killed the stratigey game

#6 Posted by WinterSnowblind (7613 posts) -

I'd highly recommend Anno 2070. The new Age of Empires was pretty good as well, if you're happy to buy one faction and ignore the rest of the DLC.

#7 Posted by jetsetwillie (857 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

Consoles killed the stratigey game

but consoles have been round for 25 years!!!! how did it take so long for them to kill them.

#8 Posted by DeadManRollin (69 posts) -
@BlinkyTM: Yeah, more RPGs are welcome! 
@Dagbiker and @jetsetwillie:   It did take consoles a long time to kill strategy games. Actually, things started to get bad when RTS developers tried to scale down (or up; whichever way you want to look at it) the scope of RTS games to make them console friendly. As you can see with many RPG games, it is not really feasible to make two completely different versions for consoles and the PC, and thus what happened is that the core RTS games got lost.  
 
In my opinion, RTS can't be played without mouse and keyboard. Period. 
#9 Posted by DeadManRollin (69 posts) -
@WinterSnowblind said:

I'd highly recommend Anno 2070. The new Age of Empires was pretty good as well, if you're happy to buy one faction and ignore the rest of the DLC.

I played Anno 1400, but didn't really like it much. But then again, I didn't give the game too much time, either.  
 
I am hearing good stuff about the new AOE, but I am not too keen on playing an online only game due to my high speed(!) internet connection.
#10 Posted by Xeiphyer (5594 posts) -
@WinterSnowblind said:

I'd highly recommend Anno 2070. The new Age of Empires was pretty good as well, if you're happy to buy one faction and ignore the rest of the DLC.

I'll vote for Anno 2070. Strategy games are still alive and strong on PC. 
 
If you mean Age of Empires 3... no, that game is not good. Hopefully you mean Age of Empires: Online, which is pretty awesome!
#11 Posted by NyxFe (248 posts) -

Quake 3 Arena is the greatest FPS ever made, so you aren't missing much.

Maybe check out Serious Sam sometime if you haven't (HD 1&2 over 3, probably). It's about as close to the old style as you can get.

#12 Posted by emem (1961 posts) -

@DeadManRollin: Well, sadly pretty much all the new multiplayer first person shooters are military shooters and those are slow and just not as much fun as Quake 3 was... we've been spoiled back then and I'm not sure if there will ever be another game like that. Just imagining a Quake game in which you have to pick perks, unlock weapons, and level your rocket launcher makes me choke. Somehow I feel like a lot of games these days are more about achievements and unlocking stuff (especially in first person shooters) than just playing them and having fun doing it. I wonder if that's really what people want.

#13 Posted by w00ties (186 posts) -

@emem: Yep, you're right there. +XP! + XP! +XP! - So exciting.

#14 Posted by DeadManRollin (69 posts) -
@Xeiphyer said:
@WinterSnowblind said:

I'd highly recommend Anno 2070. The new Age of Empires was pretty good as well, if you're happy to buy one faction and ignore the rest of the DLC.

I'll vote for Anno 2070. Strategy games are still alive and strong on PC.   If you mean Age of Empires 3... no, that game is not good. Hopefully you mean Age of Empires: Online, which is pretty awesome!
I actually liked Aoe 3 quite a lot. Initially I hated it, but I revisited the game after the last expansion was released (I think it was called Asian Dynasties) and I really liked the Home City concept. I haven't yet tried AOE: Online. I might actually give it a shot soon
#15 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

Consoles killed the stratigey game

I don't know how somebody can say that with a straight face when StarCraft II only came out last year, and has taken the e-sports world by storm.

#16 Posted by DeadManRollin (69 posts) -
@NyxFe: Yeah I did play Serious Sam first and second encounter when they came out originally. Didn't try the HD versions, though. They might get in to my next line of purchases.  
 
@emem: Hell yes! That'd  really be a good game. I also agree that story telling took a back seat in FPS games nowadays. Remember playing the original Medal of Honor: Allied Assault game? That was a hell of a great game. Thinking about the Omaha beach level still makes me excited.  
#17 Posted by Xeiphyer (5594 posts) -
@DeadManRollin said:
@Xeiphyer said:
@WinterSnowblind said:

I'd highly recommend Anno 2070. The new Age of Empires was pretty good as well, if you're happy to buy one faction and ignore the rest of the DLC.

I'll vote for Anno 2070. Strategy games are still alive and strong on PC.   If you mean Age of Empires 3... no, that game is not good. Hopefully you mean Age of Empires: Online, which is pretty awesome!
I actually liked Aoe 3 quite a lot. Initially I hated it, but I revisited the game after the last expansion was released (I think it was called Asian Dynasties) and I really liked the Home City concept. I haven't yet tried AOE: Online. I might actually give it a shot soon
Yeah I loved the home city stuff, all that was super awesome, though it broke online play completely until you were max rank. I really didn't like all the gun units, especially since formations were broken and it was really clunky. Some great ideas otherwise, I just wish they didnt advance to guns.
#18 Posted by Clinkz (1118 posts) -

Maybe its just because its 4:10 am but I really couldn't comprehend some of your sentences or the thread name. I like your avatar though.

#19 Posted by DeadManRollin (69 posts) -
@Clinkz said:

Maybe its just because its 4:10 am but I really couldn't comprehend some of your sentences or the thread name. I like your avatar though.

Thanks, I am a big fan of the Beatles (which I guess is quite obvious).   
 
Through the title "Sick about FPS games" I wanted to show my disappointment with the direction FPS (first person shooter) games are heading to, and I also wanted to share why I haven't been playing them too much lately. 
 
Sorry about the sentence structure. While I try to be very careful regarding grammar and spelling while writing blogs, I won't be too surprised if some mistakes remain. I'd be very happy if you can point out my errors so I can correct them. 
#20 Posted by fuzzybunny566 (448 posts) -

1990s PC FPS games FTW!

#21 Posted by Clinkz (1118 posts) -

@DeadManRollin said:

@Clinkz said:

Maybe its just because its 4:10 am but I really couldn't comprehend some of your sentences or the thread name. I like your avatar though.

Thanks, I am a big fan of the Beatles (which I guess is quite obvious). Through the title "Sick about FPS games" I wanted to show my disappointment with the direction FPS (first person shooter) games are heading to, and I also wanted to share why I haven't been playing them too much lately. Sorry about the sentence structure. While I try to be very careful regarding grammar and spelling while writing blogs, I won't be too surprised if some mistakes remain. I'd be very happy if you can point out my errors so I can correct them.

Sorry for not offering anything constructive in my first post. I also have generally become disenchanted with the FPS genre too. Looking at the releases this year, it is no surprise though. I have stayed away from the past 2 modern warfare games and won't touch anymore releases until they innovate.

#22 Posted by jetsetwillie (857 posts) -

@Clinkz said:

@DeadManRollin said:

@Clinkz said:

Maybe its just because its 4:10 am but I really couldn't comprehend some of your sentences or the thread name. I like your avatar though.

Thanks, I am a big fan of the Beatles (which I guess is quite obvious). Through the title "Sick about FPS games" I wanted to show my disappointment with the direction FPS (first person shooter) games are heading to, and I also wanted to share why I haven't been playing them too much lately. Sorry about the sentence structure. While I try to be very careful regarding grammar and spelling while writing blogs, I won't be too surprised if some mistakes remain. I'd be very happy if you can point out my errors so I can correct them.

Sorry for not offering anything constructive in my first post. I also have generally become disenchanted with the FPS genre too. Looking at the releases this year, it is no surprise though. I have stayed away from the past 2 modern warfare games and won't touch anymore releases until they innovate.

innovation does not always equal fun and thats exactly what i found the last 2 MW games to be FUN.

what innovations would you like to see

#23 Posted by Dagbiker (6939 posts) -
@jetsetwillie

@Clinkz said:

@DeadManRollin said:

@Clinkz said:

Maybe its just because its 4:10 am but I really couldn't comprehend some of your sentences or the thread name. I like your avatar though.

Thanks, I am a big fan of the Beatles (which I guess is quite obvious). Through the title "Sick about FPS games" I wanted to show my disappointment with the direction FPS (first person shooter) games are heading to, and I also wanted to share why I haven't been playing them too much lately. Sorry about the sentence structure. While I try to be very careful regarding grammar and spelling while writing blogs, I won't be too surprised if some mistakes remain. I'd be very happy if you can point out my errors so I can correct them.

Sorry for not offering anything constructive in my first post. I also have generally become disenchanted with the FPS genre too. Looking at the releases this year, it is no surprise though. I have stayed away from the past 2 modern warfare games and won't touch anymore releases until they innovate.

innovation does not always equal fun and thats exactly what i found the last 2 MW games to be FUN.

what innovations would you like to see

Repetition is boring, I got board of fps's after COD:MW. I don't think anyone is at fault for that, and I am perfectly happy playing my rpgs and my occasional tps.
#24 Posted by jetsetwillie (857 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

@jetsetwillie

@Clinkz said:

@DeadManRollin said:

@Clinkz said:

Maybe its just because its 4:10 am but I really couldn't comprehend some of your sentences or the thread name. I like your avatar though.

Thanks, I am a big fan of the Beatles (which I guess is quite obvious). Through the title "Sick about FPS games" I wanted to show my disappointment with the direction FPS (first person shooter) games are heading to, and I also wanted to share why I haven't been playing them too much lately. Sorry about the sentence structure. While I try to be very careful regarding grammar and spelling while writing blogs, I won't be too surprised if some mistakes remain. I'd be very happy if you can point out my errors so I can correct them.

Sorry for not offering anything constructive in my first post. I also have generally become disenchanted with the FPS genre too. Looking at the releases this year, it is no surprise though. I have stayed away from the past 2 modern warfare games and won't touch anymore releases until they innovate.

innovation does not always equal fun and thats exactly what i found the last 2 MW games to be FUN.

what innovations would you like to see

Repetition is boring, I got board of fps's after COD:MW. I don't think anyone is at fault for that, and I am perfectly happy playing my rpgs and my occasional tps.

i play lots of different genre's not just a couple so i don't ever really get bored with any one genre. happy playing either a FPS, RPG, TPS as long as it fun and well made i don't really care.

have you never found RPG's repetitive then. i find all games repetitive to some extent. but i don't find that a bad thing. i've been a fan of football for 25 years and every game revolves around a ball being kicked and some on trying to get the ball.

#25 Posted by bartok (2420 posts) -

I think the FPS is still a viable genre it is just that companies aren't using it in exciting and interesting ways.  Games like Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher's Bay, SIngularity, and The Darkness should of revolutionized the genre but instead were interesting footnotes.   Also with the exception of The Darkness those games sold like shit. 

#26 Posted by DeadManRollin (69 posts) -

The problem with MW is that every game follows a similar pattern; especially the single player part. There's no memorable battles, only battles. Things are too chaotic and so many things keep happening that you don't get the feeling of immersion anymore.

This doesn't necessarily mean that the games are lacking a proper storyline. In fact, there's really not much of a need to have a very memorable storyline in a FPS game. But if you don't find a good reason behind the fights you are participating in, what fun does it bring?

#27 Posted by medacris (643 posts) -

That's the whole reason I like Team Fortress 2, it avoids everything I usually hate about first-person shooters:

  • Set during World War II? Nope.
  • Incredibly serious? Nope.
  • Realistic graphics? Nope.
  • Completely out-of-context popular song on soundtrack? Nope.

I don't think consoles will ever die, honestly. I personally would rather play games like platformers on a console- if I'm gonna buy a controller, I'd rather play the game on console.

@bartok: Somewhat unrelated, but do you know of any articles comparing The Darkness to the comic it's based on? I haven't read it, but whenever something's a licensed property, I always hope they stay as truthful as they can to the source material.

#28 Posted by RJMacReady (346 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

Consoles killed the stratigey game

I think the lack of mouse/keyboard is partially to blame. Can you imagine trying to play starcraft witha gamepad? Hopefully motion controls on next gen consoles will remedy this.

#29 Posted by DeadManRollin (69 posts) -

@RJMacReady said:

@Dagbiker said:

Consoles killed the stratigey game

I think the lack of mouse/keyboard is partially to blame. Can you imagine trying to play starcraft witha gamepad? Hopefully motion controls on next gen consoles will remedy this.

Yeah! I read about the controls for the Xbox360 version of C&C: Red Alert 3 and it sounded completely broken. You use the left analog stick to navigate to an area of the map, and once you click on the ground, a radial menu appears from where you can select a building. I wonder how armies are managed. It just doesn't feel right!

I believe PS2 had support for mouse and keyboard.