Couple of days ago one of the developers of the cult classic PS2 FPS Black, who’s currently working on Bodycount, had this to say: “It’s a shooter — it’s fundamentally about shooting a gun. What’s the thing I’m going to do a million times, second after second, in the game? I’m going to pull a trigger, yeah? That better be bloody amazing.” And he’s right. Too many shooters nowadays seem to focus on time powers, some acrobatics or other features while having really boring shooting part. Black didn’t have an amazing story, it wasn’t particularly innovative. But shooting felt good. So it got me thinking – does this affect other genres? When the strongest point or part of a game is actually weak?
Of course, with modern approach to games where they tend to blend many genres it might be hard to tell what the “strong point” is. To be fair, I sometimes feel like this idea of genre blending, something I actually love, is more often used as a crutch than as something nice. Something that can help the developers go “well, at least this went well”. So, let’s say the strong point is what developers are using to promote their game. Preferably, developers and not publishers, since publishers might decide to promote the game as something it wasn’t meant to be.
With this in mind, let’s have a look. How many shooters of recent years actually felt fun for their shooter part? Now, how many of them were released in total? I might be the minority here, but when I play a shooter I want to see glass break, bullets break off parts of the walls, lights swing on the cord, torn from the ceiling. I want to feel that the tool of destruction in the hands of my character are exactly that, tools of destruction, even if they’re used with good intentions. I want to hear that. I want to see that. I want to feel that. F.E.A.R. back in 2005 upped the quality for FPS games in this regard. Though it doesn’t mean that I can’t enjoy a far more static and cartoony Team Fortress 2, which is fun in a different way. Or don’t understand why breaking lights in Left 4 Dead could make the game simply less fun in multiplayer, where its focus lies. These games have stronger points of their own, so it all works out in the end. But if a shooter doesn’t have a point that is stronger than its shooter part, why is it even out?
This isn’t just true for shooter games. I recently completed Bayonetta, which managed to fully live up to my expectations. Heck, it did even better, despite being a far from perfect game. Just because of how strong its core is. How fun it is. DMC4, despite being a great game, didn’t do it as well. And God of War 3 is currently being criticized for the same. For starting out well, but then simply not living up to the expectations. And you dying to all manners of silly things, like bad camera or sloppy controls. Heavy Rain is criticized for the plot that conveniently obscures major plot points in a detective game, that’s all about having players play along as a detective.
So there we have it. I might later talk about open world games that feel limited. But for now I’d love to see more shooters where shooting is fun, racing games where racing is fun, RPGs where roleplaying is good, platformers where platforming is great and adventure games that actually feel like an adventure.