Are all shooters the same?

As in style and game-play.



Write your opinions below. Obviously -_-

define "the same"? ..
-The same storyline? NO
-The Same style? no, sometimes yes
-the same graphics? nowadays yes..
-The same concept? no
-The same gameplay? (walk , shoot, run, pick up guns?) HELL YES..

Does that cover everything ?..

Yeah I can vouch for that.

In terms of story, it started to feel very much the same. Russians, Terrorists, and Middle Eastern Conflict.... You know the stuff.

In terms of gameplay, Jesus christ... hopefully in the near future there could be some innovation in that system... A perk system and a treadmill style of leveling is really starting to annoy me.

The same graphics? What? FPS like Borderlands and Brink use cel-shading, which isn't evident in games like Battlefield and Modern Warfare. And TF2? Completely different graphics style than most games use.

-- OT

Most first person shooters aim to be unique in their own way, Brink uses a free-climb implementation, which even allows you to jump off of objects and walls while shooting. But even so, they are generally the same in the way that, oh I don't know, they're all in the same fucking genre?

Unless of course you mean shooters in general, bullet hell, FPS, top-down etc. In which case you can find a massive amount of variety.

You can say that all games are similar to each other. That doesn't mean they are all the same.

They have all the same basic mechanics (e.g fighting games - beat each other up, RPGs - grind to beat the last boss, etc.), but they all have something that tries to make them stand out more than the others. Halo, for example, was the one that revitalized the FPS industry with it's great storyline, fun fast action, and addictive multiplayer.

My point is, games all have the same basic concepts, but they are never truly the same (Unless you have an HD remake of it, then yes, it's the same, just with better graphics).

I've come to believe that anyone who thinks that all FPS games are the same have probably missed out on many of the good ones or are just very close-minded to the genre. I mean, just try to compare the following games outside of the fact that they all have a first-person perspective.

Metro 2033
Condemned 2: Bloodshot
Mirror's Edge
Deus Ex
Fallout 3
Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners Of The Earth
Amnesia: The Dark Descent

How is that a First Person SHooter? Maybe I haven't gotten that far into the game.

you shot the head..thats is all take to win =_="

-TF2
-Left4Dead
-Portal 2

Valve goes to show they can constantly bring innovative new FPS's without being bogged down by the mainstream modern shooter garbage. Each game has a unique style/aesthetic, gameplay, game mechanics, story, characters, and general sense of personality which most current FPS's lack these days. Graphics are always the least of my concerns as it's always aesthetics before graphics and general mood and setting that creates a good game. The characters in Valve games are memorable and likable which is why it gives life to the games.

Other examples of unique shooters not made by Valve.

-Gears of War series brings in cover based shooting in 3rd person perspective.
-Monday Night Combat is a third person shooter that is also a DOTA/MOBA/Action RTS style game.
-Bioshock, Borderlands, Fallout carry an rpg like element to their FPS and put on great aesthetic details to their settings creating the perfect mood for the player.

No, no. You're right. The lack of any offensive capabilities kinda makes it exempt from being a FPS. Guess I just overlooked that fact before adding it to my list.

All shooters that make use of cover based shooting and can only hold two weapons are the same. But generally not all shooters are the same because there are some that tries to transcend the formula every now and then like Portal.

Since when did shooters have stories? o_o

Modern shooters are pretty much all the same, with constant upgrades and increases in poly counts that distract from the game itself.

A game where you can sit in a corner with only your left nut being visible, and still get shot in the head by a guy with a pistol across the map doesn't sound appealing to me. A game where each map is made up of 20 brushes, all strategically placed to aid and improve gameplay and ONLY gameplay, is my kind of game. 100% gameplay, with no fluff :)

That's why I play Quake; it's only gone downhill since Quake 3, though a lot of people would argue that shooters started sucking after Quake 2, or even Quake 1.

Deus Ex Human Revolution.

Good one. I haven't played Deus Ex before :P

I have found that stories (especially nowadays) distract and detract too much from gameplay. It is completely possible to have a great story and top-notch gameplay, but rare, and nothing really comes to mind. I have strange tastes, though.

Surprised I didn't see Metal Gear Solid. A stealth third-person shooter with a solid story. And it's usally to your advantage to avoid direct conflict, unlike some games where you go someplace, kill some guys, move on and repeat.

EDIT:

psbox said it all with this to me.

I dont think so, like Pyre said, there are tons of different art styles and game mechanics to first person shooters.

I would say today most FPS's are the same in terms of gameplay, graphics, etc. but if you look at the older ones you see a remarkable difference in gameplay and other factors

Def not. The basic formula is the same (point shoot) but the way its executed the missions in between the game play mechanics really differ between games.

To quote myself...



I'll give you some credit in regards to Battlefield and COD. Military shooters tend to lack variety in general these days (disregarding multiplayer). That said, there are still plenty of great FPS games in recent years that each stand out in their own way.