Vapourware 2000s First-Person FPS Shooter Games

[Goldschmidt]

"activate slow mo, lean out, headshot" i

You clearly have not played F.E.A.R. or have no clue how to properly play it.

Let me correct myself. Half the time you can't see the enemy well because it's dark and your flashlight evaporates at a range of 15 feet. In those instances you just go for 5 or so bodyshots

This just proves my point.

 

[Average Manatee]

Finished FEAR twice, both on the highest difficulty. It's an easy game

 

[soutaiseiriron]

Nah, you didn't.

I did, though. I finished it on July 1st. When did you last play FEAR? Because I can assure you it was not a month ago, as it was with me, because I play video games and I am not a fucking troglodyte who has shit-tier worthless opinions that are 10 years old because they don't play videogames, let alone the video games that they dickride. Fuck you. I played it on the highest difficulty and while I didn't unbind reflex, I didn't use it practically ever because the game is so fucking piss easy that making it any easier is a complete waste. I can assure you I did not die any more than maybe ten times and I can only remember 3 deaths total, I had maxed out healthkits throughout almost the entire game.
FEAR is DOGSHIT.

 

[Groover]

It's simple. Having to hide behind cover most of the time (not moving) because of lethal hitscanners -> boring. Shooting enemies while dodging various kinds of projectiles -> not boring.

You're always moving in both instances, it's just a question of the magnitude of the movement - micro camera movements and subtle re-positioning, vs running around the arena at lightning speed. We're just arguing a difference of taste here, so it's probably not worth going in circles for that. And, for the third time, I recommend trying out Half-Life Mmod to really see the difficulty that renders this a not quite so black-or-white point. You get more freedom and control when you enable projectile aiming, but lose out on a good chunk of the lethality of the gunfights. It just makes the game easier and less measured, and as a response to dedicated map design in Doom, my next point...

Good level designers are aware of the strengths and weaknesses of different enemies, and know how to use them to their advantage and create interesting encounters. Players are expected to abuse the simple AI by hoarding enemies, staying in a certain spot for a while to pull enemies away from walls and create space so you can move behind them. Well designed encounters won't allow you to simply circlestrafe. You have to earn it. Add some Revenants, and your movement completely changes because you have to avoid homing projectiles on top of dodging non-homing projectiles. Put some Archviles in strategic places for soft area denial. Force the player to move behind cover for a few seconds to avoid the AV's attack without getting hit by all the projectiles. You can't get those situations when all the enemies are highly lethal hitscanners.
The big health pool of Cyberdemons is usually balanced by either giving the player strong weapons (BFG) or use them for infighting (another lost art in FPS games) which weakens them. There is also a trend in modern maps to use a new type of Cyberdemon that has only 1/4 of his normal health.

I just played the first couple of levels of Sunlust on ultra violence, and while it is a little more interesting than the vanilla Doom 2 experience, it's by no means the revelation you seem to want it to be. My strategy usually involved sprinting full speed into a room, then sprinting out since most of them triggered traps and hidden enemies in walls. Then it was just a matter of retreating to a previous room and doing the typical left-to-right shooting by a wall, which works flawlessly until your ammo runs dry. I said nothing of circle strafing. Sometimes you get fucked over by a trap and are killed, but then the surprise is ruined since the map always plays out the same, so you just trigger it and immediately book it so that you can funnel the idiot mobs into a straight line (assuming they don't get stuck on a wall, back exposed for an easy kill) and, rinse-and-repeat, find the wall of your choice and, left to right, left to right, left to fucking right. I would run out of ammo sometimes because I hadn't memorized the enemy layout, so then it was just using berserk in the same way by a wall, running past the idiot waves to scavenge for ammo, or just getting overhwhelmed, dying, and trying again, only to lessen the challenge since, once more, the levels are completely static and nothing changes. Archviles do mix things up a little bit, but their fire is easy to work around and anticipate, so you just bait them into using it and deal with them in much the same way as you do everything else. You aren't adapting, you're memorizing, and that's just way less interesting. It's like autistic speed runners, it's the antithesis of the human experience to just suck all novelty out of one rigid, unchanging challenge.

Edit: And dear God, the music in this mod is the most grating shit I've heard in a good while

 

[Groover]

Nah, you didn't.

I did, though (...) I didn't unbind reflex

I sense a contradiction.

I would also typically have 10 health kits, but only because making mistakes often leads to you dying faster than you can use them. While I'm sure that 10 deaths is a conservative estimate on your part, the game was still able to take you out that much. The game isn't hot stuff and I'm not a big fan of it, but I also replayed it mid-July on Extreme, and it definitely demands sustained attention from the player, just because of how a small lapse of focus is enough to kill you, no matter how good you are. Calling it "piss easy" sounds more like posturing than anything else.

 

[Average Manatee]

I just played the first couple of levels of Sunlust on ultra violence

Warp to level 16 or so and play a few then. It's supposed to ramp up

 

[Lemming42]

I feel like there's no point comparing F.E.A.R. and Doom. They're both FPS games but they're deliberately different. It's like complaining that Another World doesn't have the same player movement as Super Mario Bros.

There's definitely a place for the high-lethality shooter, a lot of them are really fun. The "advance to cover -> lean out/pop out, attempt to fire -> rush to new cover or pop back into cover" model can be really good if it's done well.

I know opinions on it vary, but Doom 2016 is proof to me that prioritising player movement won't necessarily lead to a good game.

 

[Groover]

Warp to level 16 or so and play a few then. It's supposed to ramp up

It definitely gets harder, no doubt about it, but it's not a wholesome challenge and gets progressively less interesting with every loss since the map never changes. You're just slowly whittling down the experience by memorizing the configuration, so it almost feels like metagaming.

I feel like there's no point comparing F.E.A.R. and Doom. They're both FPS games but they're deliberately different. It's like complaining that Another World doesn't have the same player movement as Super Mario Bros.

I get the fallacy of the apples to oranges comparison, but we can still approximate the level of intellectual stimulation that both games provide when taken as a whole.

I know opinions on it vary, but Doom 2016 is proof to me that prioritising player movement won't necessarily lead to a good game.

It definitely doesn't. Doom Eternal, on the other hand, is what 2016 always wanted to be, and I think it's a considerably better game for it. It's not perfect by any means, but it introduces that level of uncertainty and adaptation that I've been endlessly harping about to the Doom formula. I like it better than the old games for that reason.

 

[Average Manatee]

Doom 2016 and especially Eternal is the opposite end where the level designers essentially can't meaningfully restrict player movement like levels can in doom. In fact the more obstacles that exist the easier they become since any usage of grappling/mantling across obstacles gives you an advantage over slower enemies. At the same time enemies are too deadly and mobile to be able to spam the area with enemies and use them as the obstacles

 

[soutaiseiriron]

I sense a contradiction.

How? I can just not use it, I simply didn't have the idea to unbind the key. I barely ever look at keybindings in games, I just adapt to what the game gives me. I'm not some lunatic who uses ESDF.

the game was still able to take you out that much.

The game is like 5 hours long. One death per 30 minutes is nothing, and that sounds like way too much tbh. Maybe more like one death per 1.5 hours sounds more reasonable. I can only remember two clearly, the third is kinda hazy.

and it definitely demands sustained attention from the player. Calling it "piss easy" sounds more like posturing than anything else.

Maybe if you're bad. It really doesn't if you have one functional eye, two pairs of hands and basic FPS gaming skills. I was doing what I usually do with all shit/mindless games, I was sleepwalking through it on 1% volume while watching something else on another monitor.
Literally the only reason why I finished FEAR is spite, because I knew it was shit, but I hadn't finished it (I only got halfway on a dropped playthrough years ago) and I wanted to finish it to conclusively say it's garbage in internet arguments.

It's not perfect by any means, but it introduces that level of uncertainty and adaptation that I've been endlessly harping about to the Doom formula. I like it better than the old games for that reason.

Yeah, it also completely scraps any goofy ideas about "level design" or "enemy placement" or "resource management" because all you have in nudoom is arena-style garbage where if you run low on ammo, you chainsaw an enemy. At least in 2016 you had to keep chainsaw ammo as sort of a liquid asset for ammo since it didn't just recharge like it does in Eternal.

 

[ind33d]

I feel like there's no point comparing F.E.A.R. and Doom. They're both FPS games but they're deliberately different. It's like complaining that Another World doesn't have the same player movement as Super Mario Bros.

There's definitely a place for the high-lethality shooter, a lot of them are really fun. The "advance to cover -> lean out/pop out, attempt to fire -> rush to new cover or pop back into cover" model can be really good if it's done well.

I know opinions on it vary, but Doom 2016 is proof to me that prioritising player movement won't necessarily lead to a good game.

FEAR and Doom 3 is a better comparison. Doom 2016 was better than Doom Eternal because the latter is too gamey and it ruins the immersion. Same problem with Diablo 2 vs Diablo 3, Diablo 3 is more fun but it doesn't evoke the same feelings as LOD

 

[NecroLord]

I sense a contradiction.

How? I can just not use it, I simply didn't have the idea to unbind the key. I barely ever look at keybindings in games, I just adapt to what the game gives me. I'm not some lunatic who uses ESDF.

the game was still able to take you out that much.

The game is like 5 hours long. One death per 30 minutes is nothing, and that sounds like way too much tbh. Maybe more like one death per 1.5 hours sounds more reasonable. I can only remember two clearly, the third is kinda hazy.

and it definitely demands sustained attention from the player. Calling it "piss easy" sounds more like posturing than anything else.

Maybe if you're bad. It really doesn't if you have one functional eye, two pairs of hands and basic FPS gaming skills. I was doing what I usually do with all shit/mindless games, I was sleepwalking through it on 1% volume while watching something else on another monitor.
Literally the only reason why I finished FEAR is spite, because I knew it was shit, but I hadn't finished it (I only got halfway on a dropped playthrough years ago) and I wanted to finish it to conclusively say it's garbage in internet arguments.

It's not perfect by any means, but it introduces that level of uncertainty and adaptation that I've been endlessly harping about to the Doom formula. I like it better than the old games for that reason.

Yeah, it also completely scraps any goofy ideas about "level design" or "enemy placement" or "resource management" because all you have in nudoom is arena-style garbage where if you run low on ammo, you chainsaw an enemy. At least in 2016 you had to keep chainsaw ammo as sort of a liquid asset for ammo since it didn't just recharge like it does in Eternal.

Speaking of Doom and Doom: Eternal, the art direction in those games does get on my nerves. I'll take the horror atmosphere of Doom 3 over the one in the Doom reboot and Doom:Eternal any day. Remember the Hell level in Doom 3? Now put the gameplay of Doom reboot and Eternal with the design and atmosphere of the Hell level in Doom 3. Fucking PERFECTION!

 

[Groover]

Speaking of Doom and Doom: Eternal, the art direction in those games does get on my nerves. I'll take the horror atmosphere of Doom 3 over the one in the Doom reboot and Doom:Eternal any day. Remember the Hell level in Doom 3? Now put the gameplay of Doom reboot and Eternal with the design and atmosphere of the Hell level in Doom 3. Fucking PERFECTION!

Yeah, it was a little too wacky 'lolrandom'. It did look beautiful on an IPS monitor though, with the vivid colours.

 

[NecroLord]

Speaking of Doom and Doom: Eternal, the art direction in those games does get on my nerves. I'll take the horror atmosphere of Doom 3 over the one in the Doom reboot and Doom:Eternal any day. Remember the Hell level in Doom 3? Now put the gameplay of Doom reboot and Eternal with the design and atmosphere of the Hell level in Doom 3. Fucking PERFECTION!

Yeah, it was a little too wacky 'lolrandom'. It did look beautiful on an IPS monitor though, with the vivid colours.

Doom 3 gets a lot of flak, but it did a lot of things right. Mars City was designed pretty well, using dynamic lighting, shadows and not going overboard with all the fancy Sci-fi shit. Delta Labs was awesome and the game peaked with the Hell level. The Hell level might be one of the best depictions of the JudeoChristian version of Hell, a true Dantean horror experience. The gameplay of classic Doom 1 and Hell on Earth with the Hell level in Doom 3? Recipe for awesome.
Doom reboot and Eternal has that shit modern filter, you probably know what I am referring to. Good gameplay, but the art design is shit/goofy.

 

[antimeridian]

Doom reboot and Eternal has that shit modern filter, you probably know what I am referring to. Good gameplay, but the art design is shit/goofy.

It's much worse in Eternal. 2016 visuals are mostly fine, not as grimdark or good as Doom 3 but works as its own thing. Eternal ramped up the visual goofiness past the point of tastelessness.

 

[Goldschmidt]

Maybe if you're bad. It really doesn't if you have one functional eye, two pairs of hands and basic FPS gaming skills. I was doing what I usually do with all shit/mindless games, I was sleepwalking through it on 1% volume while watching something else on another monitor.
Literally the only reason why I finished FEAR is spite, because I knew it was shit, but I hadn't finished it (I only got halfway on a dropped playthrough years ago) and I wanted to finish it to conclusively say it's garbage in internet arguments.

You talkin out of your ass.

Then again codex is the ideal place for your typical boomer shooter circlejerk together with all other degenerates here. Enjoy your stay!

 

[DJOGamer PT]

Bungie's Halo games are fine
CoD 2, 4 and MW2 are fun

 

[Hobknobling]

The first two TimeSplitters games were quite good for being console shooters.

 

[Bad Sector]

Again, goes back to Doom, or even pre-Doom - Wolfenstein 3D loved to put keys in your line of sight and then have bastards pop out at you as an ambush when you went to pick them up. Navigating the maze to find the elevator is the focus; the combat is there to complicate things.

Or as sometimes is described in dungeon crawlers, the map itself is as much of an enemy to beat as the enemies you encounter in it.

Arcane Dimensions does this perfectly, a mod for Quake which replaces its hitscanning shotguns - both for the player and for enemies - with fast projectiles that can be dodge and must be properly aimed.

No, let me have the hitscan weapons, a nice shotgun blast or machinegun rip feels great with their instant effect on enemy bodies, watching bullets fly in space is meh.

Remember the Hell level in Doom 3?

The first time i played Doom 3 i loved the Hell level - the intro with the birdcage, the walls flying around me and creating platforms to step on, the map rearranging itself, etc - it was great.

But i've played and finished the game many times since then and the Hell level is now by far my least favorite, i feel my interest drop hard whenever i reach it and the main reason is that it is actually just a series of scripted gimmicks. The rest of the game is based on some gameplay loops that are consistent for the entire game with very little scripting to spice up things (like the monorail breaking) but the Hell level is just one scripted event after another. This way lie the corridors of CoD, not Doom IMO. And TBH i think it made such a good first impression back then because the previous levels felt too repetitive (i always believed that the game could improve itself by getting rid of a few levels before you reach Hell).

That said it looked nice.

 

[jaekl]

I hope you guys itt are happy, you almost bullied Groover off the whole website. Anyone want to apologize?

 

[Ash]

The first two TimeSplitters games were quite good for being console shooters.

Nah, they're quite good despite being 2000s shooters. But 90s shooters (including console) still wipe the floor with them.

Also....the third timesplitters was the best one. Odd that you'd exclude it.

 

[Ash]

The shooting aspect really improved in the 2000s. .

No it absolutely did not. Weapon limits, regen health, hitscan galore, simplified enemy roster, slower movement speed, linear & realism-based level design was all heavy decline, and then some. Furthermore all the good things usually attributed to the 2000s were already introduced in the 90s - dedicated grenade & melee input, recoil, vertical aiming, alt fires etc.

I don't think it's as dire as you seem to want it to be. Weapon limits introduce a layer of decision making and playstyle, instead of just mindlessly sucking up all pickups in something like Doom, Quake or Duke, and going about your business.

Enemy rosters ARE simplified, that's for sure, but they're typically more dangerous, to the point that a larger pool of baddies to shoot at would seem almost redundant. How many enemies in your glorified 90s shooters can be defeated by just mindlessly strafing left and right by a wall (or out in the open for some)? Say what you want about the decline of CoD, I won't deny most of it, but leaning out of a piece of cover to frantically search for your enemy who's easily able to take you out is more interesting than dancing the polka with a braindead minion... to say nothing of the bulletsponge galore of the classic Doom games. Cyberdemons are a cakewalk once you figure out how their ai works, but they never stop being a pain in the ass to take down due to bloated hp pools.

I think, with the advent of CounterStrike, there was a desire to introduce a closer-to-life lethality to gunfights that didn't really exist up until that point - an encouraged level of hyper awareness and vulnerability that wasn't emphasised with the static encounters of most of 90s FPS level design. Most video games are power fantasies, but there seems to have been a concerted effort in the 2000s to move past that and introduce a more cerebral challenge, rather than the rote reactions and trial-and-error oriented gameplay of older shooters. It's more structurally interesting to play against enemies on a level playing field.

I am fine with slower movement speed, or higher lethality. It's the combination of it all together (realism focus, graphics over gameplay, story over gameplay, linear bland level design, zero interactivity, weapon limits etc etc etc) that makes 2000s shooters retard-tier. Singleplayer in particular. A lot of depth comes from human opponents in multiplayer, and things like weapon limits or regen health actually have merit there, but applying that exact same design to the singleplayer and putting it in a non-interactive braindead shooting gallery is just retarded. Singleplayer was really dire for FPS in the 2000s, and I care about singleplayer far more than multiplayer.

Edit: I get the impression that most people on this forum are jaded old fucks who talk about games considerably more than they play them, teetering on the edge of a midlife crisis by stubbornly holding onto the last vesitges of their youth. What a pathetic existence, if that's the reality

I get the impression you're mentally challenged. One has to be to think fondly of 2000s trash FPS.

What is there that surpasses Quake? Nothing. Unreal tried to be Quakey but with its own flavor, and while it succeeded at being interesting, it's not quite at the level of Quake.
Several recent retro FPS games are inspired by Quake (Dusk, HROT) but they don't quite reach its quality, either.

Quake stands alone as the giant of its genre.

Quake is, as the advertisements of its time rightfully claimed, the most important computer game of all time.

Quake is certainly good but idk about most important computer game of all time. To me it's just another great 90s game, one of many, and if I had to pick an FPS as the "most important", it'd be Doom. That's the one that established solid standards for 3D action game design for the rest of the industry to follow. aside from mouselook and jumping, quake didn't really add much to the formula. And both mouselook and jumping was already done by other FPS before it too.

 

[Silverfish]

I think I may have mentioned this in another thread, but it's so weird being the only person who remembers that Black existed.

 

[Ash]

Black is shit!

I remember all 2000s FPS. I wish I didn't.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

Doom 2016's aesthetics feel like you're playing with your action figures, which makes the inclusion of the Doomguy doll as an easter egg/collectable all that more ironic.