Vapourware 2000s First-Person FPS Shooter Games

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

Ghost Recon (2001)

Including the add-ons Desert Siege and Island Thunder.

Island Thunder especially is one of the best tactical shooters ever. The main game was great, but I remember it had a lot of timed objectives in some of the missions that forced you to rush through and which were basically impossible without previous knowledge of the level. The mission where you have to escort the tanks or the one where you have to save a group of soldiers under attack come to mind. Island Thunder had none of that and offered systemic, freeform tactical gameplay throughout.

 

[Iucounu]

Ghost Recon (2001)

Including the add-ons Desert Siege and Island Thunder.

Island Thunder especially is one of the best tactical shooters ever.

I like the main game best, but the add-ons are well worth playing as well.

The main game was great, but I remember it had a lot of timed objectives in some of the missions that forced you to rush through and which were basically impossible without previous knowledge of the level. The mission where you have to escort the tanks or the one where you have to save a group of soldiers under attack come to mind.

Those missions are indeed impossible the first dozen attempts or so, but once you figure them out you have plenty of time and can finish them even with a single soldier. Huge difference in gameplay challenge compared with later FPS games.

 

[Ash]

I object to playing System Shock 2 before System Shock. Playing the original first provides a more interesting perspective on the sequel, and the latter is often treated as if Shodan were unique to it or developed better in it, while in fact it's more like SS2 only offered a rehash of the character.

Meh. To me, SS2 is simply a higher caliber of game than SS1 is in my opinion. I don't give two shits about some minor story detail.

 

[schru]

I object to playing System Shock 2 before System Shock. Playing the original first provides a more interesting perspective on the sequel, and the latter is often treated as if Shodan were unique to it or developed better in it, while in fact it's more like SS2 only offered a rehash of the character.

Meh. To me, SS2 is simply a higher caliber of game than SS1 is in my opinion. I don't give two shits about some minor story detail.

The gameplay in SS2 is far more cogent and functional, while SS1's is simply too limited by the crudeness of implementation, simplicity of most elements, and the way they don't interact with each other in very meaningful ways. Yet I do think that SS1 is better and my comment about Shodan was more of an example of an annoying misconception, though it's not a minor story detail either—all that is iconic about Shodan, including the dialogue lines and voice, was already there in the first game.

The reason I like the first game more, despite its clunkiness, is that I found the activity of exploring the open-ended space station and figuring out how to overcome various obstacles and reach goals more fun then the tighter and more systems-oriented sequel. The game is very lacking, of course, and yet even all the half-baked simulation and cyberpunk augmentation elements thrown into the mix make the whole vision rather interesting, although that of course is just flavour at best in gameplay terms.

SS2 has its systems worked out decently well and (for a new player) it succeeds at having some survival and resource management elements. However, the game's focus is quite narrow in comparison and one misses the open-ended scope of the level design from the original, and the sense that the player had to face more kinds of obstacles and hazards there.

At any rate, I like both, but my approach to games differs from yours in that while I've learned to recognize the overriding importance of core gameplay, I consider games to be worthwhile for the over-all sense of adventure or something otherwise interesting they might offer. I do think that the whole thing needs to have a basic foundation in gameplay systems and be consistently interactive to be more than a curiosity, though.

 

[deuxhero]

Replayed Nightfire a bit ago. It's still an excellent FPS. It's a shame it never got a PC version and instead we got a weird and completely different parallel game by Gearbox.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

I really liked Quake Wars (2007) despite it being multiplayer only, which I hate.

I liked that each mission had a story and that they were organised in a campaign that could be won by either side.

 

[Ash]

At any rate, I like both, but my approach to games differs from yours in that while I've learned to recognize the overriding importance of core gameplay, I consider games to be worthwhile for the over-all sense of adventure or something otherwise interesting they might offer. I do think that the whole thing needs to have a basic foundation in gameplay systems and be consistently interactive to be more than a curiosity, though.

I certainly still think of SS as a valuable game and stepping stone, don't get me wrong. And I do consider it to provide a cool sense of adventure, explores interesting and original concepts and whatever other secondary elements. But so many games provide that while also having a better grasp of core gameplay.

...But perhaps we are not so different, as Deus Ex is still my number 1 game and while it is absolute genius, its core gameplay was also a bit scattershot. Balance was fucked just go master pistols and you can one shot most humans, ammo is everywhere which makes the problem even worse, half the skills & augs redundant often with no sensible use, others beyond overpowered, AI was absolutely retarded, various features were super clunky. But the gameplay was even more broad & ambitious than SS1 so I think I forgive on the sheer complexity of it. Also SS' engine & controls certainly damage the experience for me, whereas SS2 on the other hand just feels timeless, games today are the same thing just largely prettier and dumber. Such as Prey.

One more thing: perhaps my lack of forgiveness comes from me playing it later in my gaming career rather than earlier. It was one of the last Immersive Sims I played, and I also have quite an extensive background with survival horrors which are all similar in concept and likely even inspired by it to some degree. I respect the game but I ultimately think it fails in one of the most important aspects and that is gameplay cohesion/synergy as you acknowledge, which can be forgivable, but when you throw controls you have to fight with, super early 3D graphics, level design that sometimes is lacking, and an underwhelming (but cool!) soundtrack on top, it doesn't make my absolute favorites list. It's just a game I think is important and semi-enjoyable. I've played it once and probably will never again, maybe the remake if a significant mod comes out. Recommending SS2 over it, especially to a newcomer of old first person games, seems like a no-brainer.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

The only good shooters of the 00s are the Stalker ones.

 

[Groover]

I'm surprised no one's mentioned Left 4 Dead 2 yet. Playing under the realism ruleset provides a tense and rewarding experience, and a considerably deeper one than a lot of the rather bare 90s stuff.

 

[Spacer's Nugget]

+ TimeShift (2007)

 

[Feyd Rautha]

How about Boiling Point: Road to Hell (2005)?

People and reviewers said it was riddled with bugs but I never encountered any. Boiling Point is an early example of a free-roaming open world FPS with questing, factions and vehicles. Later Far Cry games borrowed a lot from it.

 

[Eisen]

I think Serious Sam TFE + TSE are the only games that matter to me
EDIT: I kinda like DUSK

 

[Blutwurstritter]

When people discuss the FPS genre, the discussion naturally turns to the 90s, for obvious reasons.

There are also, of course, the "boomer shooters" of the late 2010s and early 2020s. Whatever you think of them, they're here, they're a big scene, and there's a lot to discuss.

The 2000s gets written off as a dark age for the FPS (and for plenty of other genres too), with most people's recollection being a bunch of shitty WW2/Iraq military shooters, or endless derivative games about burly space marines fighting generic alien bastards.

Let's compile a list of all the actual good FPS games from the 2000s. I'll start. I'm listing games that I think are worthy of revisiting today only (so no Daikatana, for example, even though I don't think it's quite as bad as people make out):

Spoiler

Soldier of Fortune (2000) - no, the level design isn't the best, but the combat feels quite unlike anything else. Possibly the only FPS game in history where you wince every time you have to shoot someone, and feel less like a hero and more like a bit of a prick. No need to bother with the sequel, it's kind of shit.

No One Lives Forever (2000) - I've always had my criticisms of this one but it's undeniably a creative game with some superb ideas. Cate Archer rocks.

Gunman Chronicles (2000) - wonderfully creative GoldSrc game where you get a copyright-dodging diet-SHODAN as your new best pal. People sometimes write it off as a mere Half-Life mod, but that's not fair - there's a hell of a lot of good ideas here (the weird chemical gun with a trillion settings), and the setting and story are bizarre enough for a great time.

Serious Sam (2001) - I'll be honest, I can't distinguish between the first and second encounter, other than that TFE was desert and TSE was jungle. Still, these games are great when you get into the swing of them - they kind of suck but something about them just works when you're in the right mood. Probably the most exciting set of enemies since Doom.

Red Faction (2001) - Half-Life on Mars! Okay, not every part of the game works well, but few other FPS games of the era have such a thrilling range of ideas that they're willing to try out. From the SHIT disguise segments to the unique (albeit buggy) battle against the "suppression bot" to a tram chase to a trip into a low-gravity space station, Red Faction is just one idea after another. They don't all work, but who cares, we're having fun.

Gaylo (2001) - putting this on the list with a little bit of hesitation, but I do think it's still worth a playthrough these days. As a kid I never liked the spongey enemies and resented the console-first design, but when you get to grips with it there's a pretty sound game here, even if its reputation ended up being blown out of all proportion.

(I'm going to mention RTCW here - I'm not a massive fan of it, honestly, but people will ask "where's RTCW" if it's not mentioned. So here, RTCW.)

Medal of Honor: Allied Assault (2002) - do you like military shooters? Nah, me neither. Get past the dull WW2 trappings though and MoHAA is not bad for what it is. True, you're fighting the same enemy over and over and over again, but at least they try to give you a bit of level variety - from the infiltration of the u-boat pens to the sniper-ridden village to the tank segment. I think what helps MoHAA is that it's just a very professional, high-quality product, which makes a change from some other games of the era.

Iron Storm (2002) - might be the first one on this list some people haven't heard of. Hear me out - it's an alternate history where WW1 went on for-fucking-ever. Compared with MoHAA, Iron Storm is shovelware crap that barely functions. It is, however, very rich in ideas, and the devs really tried to make something unique and cool. Check it out.

Rainbow Six 3 (2003) - well, actually... if you want to play Rainbow Six, go download Black Ops, which lets you play R6 and Rogue Spear with all their expansions. Rainbow Six 3 is just not quite as good somehow - shooting doesn't feel as good, team sizes are smaller, maps just aren't as tight. But look, it's still good, alright. It's fine.

Postal 2 (2003) - yeah, it's a load of shit, but there's never really been anything else like it. Do a pacifist run if you want to have a really hilarious time.

Call of Duty (2003) (and United Offensive) - not much to say that I didn't already say for Medal of Honor. Is the WW2 setting deeply boring? Yes. Are you fighting the same guy over and over again? Yes. Does it work anyway just through sheer quality and smoothness? Yeah, I think so.

Far Cry (2004) - I fucking love Far Cry. It's superb. It's genuinely brilliant. No, it's not just an "tech demo", DO NOT CALL IT A TECH DEMO. Weapons all feel great to use, headshots are unbelievably satisfying, vehicle segments are always welcome, and you go through a whole range of locations. Play on highest difficulty if you want a laugh, the jeep section where Val's driving and you're on the gun is almost impossible to beat.

Doom 3 (2004) - yeah yeah, it's Doom 3, yeah yeah, flashlight, yeah yeah, monster closet. I don't care, I think this game's fine. BFG Edition is the one to play, since it fixes the flashlight insanity.

Gaylo 2 (2004) - I enjoyed this more than the first one overall, I think. The FMV cutscenes in the Master Chief Edition are fucking amazing.

Half-Life 2 (2004) - I'm not a big fan of this game, and I know a lot of other people here aren't. Vehicle sections are boring, combat feels utterly weak, enemy AI sucks balls, the story is badly written and highly intrusive, and the gravity gun gets old after about thirty seconds. Mentioning it just because I can't not mention it, and I do think it's worth playing today just to see what you make of it - I'd be interested to hear what someone who's never played it before would think, especially if they haven't been primed with the "oooh you're about to play one of the GREATEST GAMES OF ALL TIME" horseshit.

SWAT 4 (2005) - fucking fantastic, absolute high watermark of tactical shooters. Play on hardest difficulty or you're a pussy. Oh, you're mad because you failed the mission with a score of 94 out of the necessary 95, just because you shot a guy who was screaming "DIE PIG" and firing a bullet into your head? Well maybe you should go back to police academy you fucking rookie. Just because someone has shot one of your eyeballs out doesn't mean it's acceptable to shoot back. Go learn the rules of engagement, and bring the paintball gun next time.

F.E.A.R. (2005) - story's a load of shit but wow, what a fun game. Just radiates coolness. The combat is extraordinary, what else do you need

Mirror's Edge (2008) - okay, go ahead and tell me it's not an FPS. Look, I don't know if you've noticed, but the last entry on this list was 2005. There's fucking nothing in the late 2000s, it's a wasteland. Just let me have Mirror's Edge. I love this game.

As you can see, 2000 - 2005 is not a bad stretch of games. 2005 - 2009 is nothingness.

Go ahead, name some more.

Call of Juarez is a great fps game in the 2005-2009 range.

Dark Messiah of Might and Magic might also be worth a mention, even though I wouldn't call it a shooter, rather a first-person action game. But the genre is so small its often counted along fps.

Then there is also Mechwarrior 4 and Mercernaries, which can be played pretty much like fps and don't feel like simulations.

 

[soutaiseiriron]

Battlefield 2: Modern Combat. It only came out for consoles but it's very creative and sandboxy. It's a score-based arcade shooter with a really neat gimmick where you can swap to any soldier that you have line of sight with. You could complete a mission by taking control of a tank on the ground, or you could swap to a sniper and shoot out the pilot of a helicopter and take it for yourself. It's also finally reasonable to emulate thanks to improvements in PCSX2. I couldn't really think of a better 6th gen console shooter, other than maybe Halo.

 

[Paladino]

F.E.A.R. (2005) - story's a load of shit but wow, what a fun game. Just radiates coolness. The combat is extraordinary, what else do you need

That happens to be my favorite FPS. I think the story is fine though.

I also think Halo: Combat Evolved is a memorable FPS, still worth playing.

 

[Spacer's Nugget]

How about Boiling Point: Road to Hell (2005)?

People and reviewers said it was riddled with bugs but I never encountered any. Boiling Point is an early example of a free-roaming open world FPS with questing, factions and vehicles. Later Far Cry games borrowed a lot from it.

Clint Hocking, the Creative Director for Far Cry 2, did mention it by name in a video interview back in the day.

Also:
+ White Gold: War in Paradise (2008) aka. Xenus II
+ The Precursors (2009)

Wesp5

 

[Morenatsu.]

Unless you're talking about Shmups, those don't really qualify as having level design

This wasn't true at all until the Danmaku (bullet hell) masturbation that happened after Cave kind of took over the genre in the mid 2000s.

Earlier shmups (especially horizontal, but many vertical shmups as well - for example, Mahou Daisakusen/Sorcer Striker) had very intricate levels full of obstacles that the player had to navigate in addition to enemy ships and bullets, and devious enemy placement that required both strategy and memorization.

Even as recently as 2004 shmups had excellent level design - play Gradius V on the PS2 for a great example.

The enemies are the level design, though. Whether there are walls to crash into doesn't really change that. Of course, shoot em ups are very different from first-person shooters, they're auto-scrollers, the same standards don't apply. On the other hand, lack of level design in a game like Serious Sam can be kind of annoying since it's still an FPS and you still have to walk through all the environments, or at least they are annoying if they waste too much time.

Anyway, Ash talking shit about shmups, again? PLAY MORE GAMES!!!

 

[V17]

Vietcong (2003) was pretty cool, and it didn't fuck around with its difficulty either. Only, sometimes the companion AI was frustratingly idiotic, especially in points where you couldn't affect what they do and them dying was a fail state.

 

[Ol' Willy]

Games that don't belong in this topic:

- dedicated multiplayer shooters like Battlefield, Left 4 Dead, Quake Wars, etc
- warsims like OFP/ARMA
- tacticool shooters (early Rainbow 6, Ghost Recon, SWAT, etc)
- action games like Mirrors Edge
- stealth based games with FPV (Hitman, etc)

Those are not what is usually meant as FPS

 

[NecroLord]

Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Undead, Nazi mutants and Super Soldiers and hot Nazi chicks in tight black suits...
Good fun, gotta replay it.
Call of Duty: World at War. Now, I know what you might be thinking. A COD game? Yes, but this one is actually pretty damn awesome. Has blood and gibbing. A lot darker in tone than your typical heroic COD shit. This one depicts war as it actually is: horrifying, brutal, dehumanizing. Burning japanese imperial soldiers in bunkers and trenches makes you feel like you are committing war crimes. Highly recommended, one of the very few COD games worth your time.
Jedi Outcast and Jedi Academy are also awesome. Play this stuff.

 

[Lemming42]

Speaking of Call of Duty, I can't stop listening to the soundtrack for CoD1. Michael Giacchino did great work on both MoH and CoD. The game itself is obviously comic book hero bullshit that flippantly treats WW2 like a big fun joke, but the soundtrack gets across a real sense of horror, unease, danger, and slowly-encroaching doom:


Which reminds me a lot of Soldier of Fortune's dynamic soundtrack, which always scored the gunfights with music designed to cause panic and dismay rather than make you feel like a big swinging dick:


The car chase music from CoD1 is great too, it manages to work in a dumb fun action movie kind of way while still being underscored with a profound feeling of dread:

 

[antimeridian]

Speaking of Call of Duty...

The original Call of Duty isn't the grittiest game ever but it felt like they were trying to emulate Band of Brothers, Saving Private Ryan etc. rather than the action hero movie shit of most of the later installments. It still feels pretty charming in that regard, and the health pack system (which was immediately ditched for regeneration in the console focused sequel) made it a more engaging playthrough than any of the sequels. It's still good fun for a post-Half-Life scripted shooter before that was totally played out. Agreed on the soundtrack, it has been 10+ years since I played the game and I remember the music pretty vividly.

 

[Iucounu]

Those are not what is usually meant as FPS

What's the difference, if they are in first person and you shoot a lot?

 

[soutaiseiriron]

It still feels pretty charming in that regard, and the health pack system (which was immediately ditched for regeneration in the console focused sequel) made it a more engaging playthrough than any of the sequels

Disagree, CoD2, MW and WAW are better. Regenerating health, better grenade utility, respawning enemies, improved AI and encounter design all made the later games significantly more thoughtful, dynamic and meaningfully challenging on Veteran. Player aggression is baked into COD2, if you're holding a building and just camp instead of creating space, you're going to die, because you'll be dealing with massed fire and grenades and lose all of your space to breathe.
CoD1 incentivises camping, savescumming, cornerhacking and generally terrible boring low-tier gameplay because of insane enemy reaction times, not knowing when the next healthpack would be*, lack of meaningful grenade utility, braindead passive enemy AI and lack of respawning enemies that would force you to push forward to progress. Also about one third of COD1 is just boring/shit soviet missions. Not all the soviet missions are bad, but about half are incredibly dull.

*ok, admittedly I don't actually know about this, because I played on Veteran which removes every single healthpack (except for one in one specific mission, don't know if that's an oversight or intentional). Regardless, I presume this would remain the core issue with COD1 + UO on Hardened and still incentivise risk aversion instead of a more fun or aggressive playstyle.

 

[DemonKing]

Allied Assault was one of my all time favourite games in multi, especially the objective mode.

Original COD especially with the expansion pack was also very good.

COD2 was when decline/consolitis set in. I hated how the barrels of the guns would go low res on PC at a certain distance for no good reason except the consoles couldn't handle it so the PC players had to suffer as well. At least you still got dedicated servers for multi back then.

Battlefield was also ok to play in the 2000s, especially Battlefield 2 (although until some of the more recent installments the infantry combat was pretty poor).

Loved the original Far Cry and FEAR although haven't really enjoyed any of their sequels or Crysis that much.