The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Hacing had a dig against FPS in the Return to Castle Wolfenstein topic, I thought I'd do it again here.
FPS really are the most basic and pointless of games. Sure, they're good for a bit of mindless relaxation from time to time, but people take them far too seriously.
All you have to do is point a gun at something. Where's the massive amount of technical skill in that. I've played most of them - Doom, Quake, Wolfenstein, Goldeneye, Resident Evil, Serious Sam and so on. They all get so boring. The enemies shuffle along at varying paces, and you wander aimlessly around, looking happy and not suspicious when a high powered rocket launcher just happens to be lying on the floor. Then you shove blue keys into the usefully marked blue slot, and congratulate yourself on your cleverness, but not for long, because some idiotic half mutated thing is shuffling at you, waving a gun. You're OK, because you have a bigger gun you found halfway down a sewer on a shelf.
Where's the skill in that? Other games are far more representative of skill. Strategy games are a great example. You actually have to think, about deployment, investment of money/ore/tiberium, and enemy strength. You don't find a tank lying around on the floor somewhere, and the enemy doesn't charge at you one at a time.
Adventure/Point and clicks are another one. Admittedly, it takes me a long time to complete one, but at least you have to think. My favourites are the two Broken Swords. Who really cares if the graphics aren't amazing, because you're interested in the gameplay. Thats what you bought the game for. Games like Grim Fadango, Monkey Island, Broken Sword, Disworld Noir - they all involve varying moderations of skill.
Now, if I've annoyed all you FPS addicts, I apologise. I'm sure you'll all come out with good quality arguments on why FPS need skill. Maybe they do. But they don't need it in the same way a Command and Conquer game would. I'm not trying to be provocative, simply realistic. Now all shout at me....
FPS really are the most basic and pointless of games. Sure, they're good for a bit of mindless relaxation from time to time, but people take them far too seriously.
All you have to do is point a gun at something. Where's the massive amount of technical skill in that. I've played most of them - Doom, Quake, Wolfenstein, Goldeneye, Resident Evil, Serious Sam and so on. They all get so boring. The enemies shuffle along at varying paces, and you wander aimlessly around, looking happy and not suspicious when a high powered rocket launcher just happens to be lying on the floor. Then you shove blue keys into the usefully marked blue slot, and congratulate yourself on your cleverness, but not for long, because some idiotic half mutated thing is shuffling at you, waving a gun. You're OK, because you have a bigger gun you found halfway down a sewer on a shelf.
Where's the skill in that? Other games are far more representative of skill. Strategy games are a great example. You actually have to think, about deployment, investment of money/ore/tiberium, and enemy strength. You don't find a tank lying around on the floor somewhere, and the enemy doesn't charge at you one at a time.
Adventure/Point and clicks are another one. Admittedly, it takes me a long time to complete one, but at least you have to think. My favourites are the two Broken Swords. Who really cares if the graphics aren't amazing, because you're interested in the gameplay. Thats what you bought the game for. Games like Grim Fadango, Monkey Island, Broken Sword, Disworld Noir - they all involve varying moderations of skill.
Now, if I've annoyed all you FPS addicts, I apologise. I'm sure you'll all come out with good quality arguments on why FPS need skill. Maybe they do. But they don't need it in the same way a Command and Conquer game would. I'm not trying to be provocative, simply realistic. Now all shout at me....
Page:
Gronti - The tank rush problem may have occured in early Command and Conquer, but by the stage of Red Alert 2, its been refined, and strategy comes into play a lot.
I'll agree they're is a difference between skill and tactics, but it doesn't change the fact that most FPS's are simply shoot as many as you can. Serious Sam, for example. They're are good FPS's, but, ironically, they're not as popular as the poor ones. Thief involves skill, but its no way near as popular as Quake. FPS fans don't want to think about tactics, they want something to blow apart and leave a nice smear of blood on the floor.
I'll agree they're is a difference between skill and tactics, but it doesn't change the fact that most FPS's are simply shoot as many as you can. Serious Sam, for example. They're are good FPS's, but, ironically, they're not as popular as the poor ones. Thief involves skill, but its no way near as popular as Quake. FPS fans don't want to think about tactics, they want something to blow apart and leave a nice smear of blood on the floor.
First Person shooters require alot of skill, not the chess style strategy type skills but split second decisions, timing, accuracy and many more.
I enjoy first person shooters aswell as adventure games, both require a degree of skill, although of different types.
FPS require instant thinking where to go who to shoot while making sure you dont fail the mission objectives.
Adventure games require slower but more methodical thinking in order to progress.
Both genres have a lot to offer, however I disagree with you when you say playing a FPS requires no skill. If that was true then my sister would beat me everytime she played Perfect Dark...and thats just not going to happen!
FPS require instant thinking where to go who to shoot while making sure you dont fail the mission objectives.
Adventure games require slower but more methodical thinking in order to progress.
Both genres have a lot to offer, however I disagree with you when you say playing a FPS requires no skill. If that was true then my sister would beat me everytime she played Perfect Dark...and thats just not going to happen!
Ah I see what you've done there. Skill and tactics, you have them as the same thing. They aren't. Why do you think soldiers go through lots of training, is it just so they can shamble onto a field and fire their weapon randomly in the hopes that they'll hit something? Actually that's a bad example because that's about right in battlefield situations but what about Commandos? Yes that's it, they have to sneak into places, sneak up on guards and remove them then hide the body, infiltrate by pretending to be on the enemy side, take sniping shots and put someone down in one quick clean and quiet shot and so many other things which require skill. This is often represented in FPS games, especially in the multiplayer aspect of it. People enjoy improving their aim, reactions and avoidance abilities by playing FPS games. Everybody develops their own tactics be it hiding in small corners and taking pot shots, charging into an open field and dodging all the pot shots or whatever and they enjoy to play against other players and see how well they can do using this. That is why FPSs make the most popular multiplayer games. There is also the single player aspect, remember that Perfect Dark and such were FPSs in which you had to sneak behind people and knock them out or kill them silently. Stealth does take skill and practice and there are more and more FPS games which are making enemy AI and stealth more realistic, more challenging and more fun.
Anyway, in your example of Command & Conquer, wasn't there often a problem of things like the tank rush? How much skill is involved in building a horde of tanks and just walking all over your more tactically minded foe who had expected a long arduous task? Plus it's not much fun for either side surely but it is certainly a possibility.
The problem is that you take FPS games down to bare bones stereotype level, many FPS games have challenging puzzles, stealth aspects requiring tactics and skill, an interesting and involving story and many other features that you would gladly forget. Perhaps FPS games aren't everyone's thing, perhaps some people prefer a slow logical game of tactics and thinking but you must remember that tactics and skill do exist in FPS games, it's just that they have to be done quickly and so it may be easy not to notice them going on. Which brings me back to my battlefield example, the troops there will be taking in everything that's going on around them and calculating little plans in their heads for how to approach the situation all in the space of a few seconds because that is the skill that they learn.
Anyway, in your example of Command & Conquer, wasn't there often a problem of things like the tank rush? How much skill is involved in building a horde of tanks and just walking all over your more tactically minded foe who had expected a long arduous task? Plus it's not much fun for either side surely but it is certainly a possibility.
The problem is that you take FPS games down to bare bones stereotype level, many FPS games have challenging puzzles, stealth aspects requiring tactics and skill, an interesting and involving story and many other features that you would gladly forget. Perhaps FPS games aren't everyone's thing, perhaps some people prefer a slow logical game of tactics and thinking but you must remember that tactics and skill do exist in FPS games, it's just that they have to be done quickly and so it may be easy not to notice them going on. Which brings me back to my battlefield example, the troops there will be taking in everything that's going on around them and calculating little plans in their heads for how to approach the situation all in the space of a few seconds because that is the skill that they learn.
Yep Tarrant, once again your oratory skills amaze me.
Hacing had a dig against FPS in the Return to Castle Wolfenstein topic, I thought I'd do it again here.
FPS really are the most basic and pointless of games. Sure, they're good for a bit of mindless relaxation from time to time, but people take them far too seriously.
All you have to do is point a gun at something. Where's the massive amount of technical skill in that. I've played most of them - Doom, Quake, Wolfenstein, Goldeneye, Resident Evil, Serious Sam and so on. They all get so boring. The enemies shuffle along at varying paces, and you wander aimlessly around, looking happy and not suspicious when a high powered rocket launcher just happens to be lying on the floor. Then you shove blue keys into the usefully marked blue slot, and congratulate yourself on your cleverness, but not for long, because some idiotic half mutated thing is shuffling at you, waving a gun. You're OK, because you have a bigger gun you found halfway down a sewer on a shelf.
Where's the skill in that? Other games are far more representative of skill. Strategy games are a great example. You actually have to think, about deployment, investment of money/ore/tiberium, and enemy strength. You don't find a tank lying around on the floor somewhere, and the enemy doesn't charge at you one at a time.
Adventure/Point and clicks are another one. Admittedly, it takes me a long time to complete one, but at least you have to think. My favourites are the two Broken Swords. Who really cares if the graphics aren't amazing, because you're interested in the gameplay. Thats what you bought the game for. Games like Grim Fadango, Monkey Island, Broken Sword, Disworld Noir - they all involve varying moderations of skill.
Now, if I've annoyed all you FPS addicts, I apologise. I'm sure you'll all come out with good quality arguments on why FPS need skill. Maybe they do. But they don't need it in the same way a Command and Conquer game would. I'm not trying to be provocative, simply realistic. Now all shout at me....
FPS really are the most basic and pointless of games. Sure, they're good for a bit of mindless relaxation from time to time, but people take them far too seriously.
All you have to do is point a gun at something. Where's the massive amount of technical skill in that. I've played most of them - Doom, Quake, Wolfenstein, Goldeneye, Resident Evil, Serious Sam and so on. They all get so boring. The enemies shuffle along at varying paces, and you wander aimlessly around, looking happy and not suspicious when a high powered rocket launcher just happens to be lying on the floor. Then you shove blue keys into the usefully marked blue slot, and congratulate yourself on your cleverness, but not for long, because some idiotic half mutated thing is shuffling at you, waving a gun. You're OK, because you have a bigger gun you found halfway down a sewer on a shelf.
Where's the skill in that? Other games are far more representative of skill. Strategy games are a great example. You actually have to think, about deployment, investment of money/ore/tiberium, and enemy strength. You don't find a tank lying around on the floor somewhere, and the enemy doesn't charge at you one at a time.
Adventure/Point and clicks are another one. Admittedly, it takes me a long time to complete one, but at least you have to think. My favourites are the two Broken Swords. Who really cares if the graphics aren't amazing, because you're interested in the gameplay. Thats what you bought the game for. Games like Grim Fadango, Monkey Island, Broken Sword, Disworld Noir - they all involve varying moderations of skill.
Now, if I've annoyed all you FPS addicts, I apologise. I'm sure you'll all come out with good quality arguments on why FPS need skill. Maybe they do. But they don't need it in the same way a Command and Conquer game would. I'm not trying to be provocative, simply realistic. Now all shout at me....
Page: