Every year seems to be getting better and better in regards to the number of triple A game titles being released, 2008 is no exception. However, it seems like as the years go by, there are more and more redundant games being released, only to be met by mediocre press coverage and review scores. It seems like we are beginning to see the decline of various gaming genres because developers seem reluctant to take chances or spend the time and effort to polish their games. Japanese RPG's have been on the decline recently because westerners are getting tired of the same old cliche story elements and game mechanics. In the past year, there has only been a handful of exceptions like Persona 4 and.... well that's about it. The genre that has got me thinking this week is first person shooters. The industry is absolutely overrun with FPS's and 60-70% of them are trash. The number of mediocre shooters released in the last year is astounding. Developers continue to send shallow, short, and dull shooters down the pipeline and we stand here helpless as they spoon feed us this crap. I have spend a lot of time this week playing Far Cry 2 for the PS3 and while the game is not perfect, it does some really ambitious things that many developers could benefit from. I will try to save my overall impressions of the game for this week's podcast but there are some key things that I think Far Cry 2 has done that should be acknowledged.
Story presentation is an aspect of FPS's that has been handled rather poorly for the most part. Infinity Ward set the bar for telling a great story in an FPS but the length and the linearity of the game suffered because of it. The challenge is finding a way to tell a compelling story and still provide the players with hours of gaming. Ubisoft Montreal had an idea and ran with it and the game is better because of it. Rather than being totally convoluted with cut-scenes and linear event sequences, they chose to present players with a single, underlying mission statement that acts a constant motivation for every action taken throughout the game. This mission of course is to kill the "Jackal", a rogue arms dealer who is fueling a brutal civil war. While their various missions taken throughout the game, players are constantly reminded of their primary mission. This simplicity fits the games design and scope perfectly and proves that stories don't need to be complex or deep to be good. 
I am fairly certain that many gamers would agree with me when I say that the FPS genre has become rather uninspired. Each game seems to be a rehash of the same point and shoot game play mechanic with little or no depth beyond that. Developers need to expand beyond basic shooting and give players more mechanics that support the basic game play. Far Cry 2 does this by providing a rewarding method of collecting money and purchasing new weapons and forces players to make key decisions on which aspects of each gun they desire to enhance. In addition to a vast arsenal of weapons to collect and upgrade, players must also maintain their Malaria fever by taking pills and physically address their worst wounds in the heat of battle by removing bullets or relocating a dislocated finger or arm. The team also implemented an intriguing buddy system that can get you out of tough situations but relies solely on decisions you make throughout the game. Basically, shooters should not rely on just one mechanic to sell copies when there is obvious room for improvement through innovation. Last but not least, I'm sick and tired of shooters taking place in uninspired locales such as office buildings or alien battlefields. A great setting can make the difference between a good shooter and a forgettable 4 or 5 hour investment.
thing that made Call of Duty 4 so good was its incredible set pieces. Despite the fact that I have never played Crysis, the main reason I want to play that game is to experience the lush and lively environment. On the other end of the spectrum is Call of Duty: World at War, a game that I know is fun but has not given me enough incentive to pick it up because of its rehashed setting. When Ubisoft Montreal chose to set the new Far Cry in an open world African environment, they were not only advancing the FPS genre but also revitalizing a dying franchise. I applaud that team for making some incredibly risky but rewarding decisions in the past few years. While Far Cry 2 doesn't necessarily execute all of these ideas perfectly, it is definitely not a "one trick pony" like so many other shooters that have come before it. FPS is a genre that can be deeper than what it has become if the developer is willing to apply themselves. I hope this becomes a trend in the coming years and I hope that the team at Ubisoft is acknowledged for taking steps to further the genre.
(Expect details regarding all of these mechanics and my full impressions of Far Cry 2 on this week's podcast)
-Nick
10 comments:
Agreed. Completely. I wish developers would just stop making half-assed, mediocre shooters. And WW2 shooters. If I had a dollar for every single WW2 shooter or related game, Id be a gazillionare.
This game, along with Mirrors Edge, and Valkyira Chronicles are on my list of games I need to go through. Thr game looks good, I hope it plays good.
While it's true that Far Cry 2 made alot of attempts to do something a little different in the FPS genre, I personally think a lot of the elements of the game come off as a little half-baked and don't all work right.
The whole malaria thing, for example, seems like almost a good idea but in the end it just ends up as a an occasional "press button to not die" mechanic. That just doesn't add anything to the game at all, and in some ways I think detracts from the apparent pretentions toward realism that Ubisoft seems to have gone for in the game - the idea that I can just take a pill to instantly survive an attack of malaria (which in real life does not in any way, shape or form behave in an even vaguely similar manner to its portrayal in the game) is just silly.
The weapon upgrade system is ok but let's face it, it's not new at all. It's just a slightly unusual thing to find in an otherwise straightforward action FPS. I think it basically works in the context of the game, so it's an appreciated inclusion - not that it generally makes an appreciable difference; I found, playing on the PC, that even a rusty pistol I found on the floor a few hours in had 100% perfect accuracy and could kill with one headshot at any distance.
Then there's the story... oh, hold on... what story? "Find this dude"? Wow. Powerful, life-affirming stuff. To be honest I really don't mind about the game having no plot to speak of, but for you to praise the storytelling because there is no story doesn't really hold water. The one thing about it that does annoy me is the way this is one of those games like Mass Effect, where you're set up with "you must find this guy and stop him at all costs!" and then instantly sent off on hours and hours of missions that have absolutely nothing to do with finding him, which is always kind of galling. And don't even get me started on the voice acting, which (apart from the taxi driver right at the beginning) is easily, by far, the most atrociously bad I've ever heard in any game, ever. At least in some shitty, ear-splittingly annoying anime-style JRPG they have actors who are at least trying.
Anyway I know it might not sound like it, but I am actually agreeing with you Nick - I do think FC2 is a step in the right direction for hopefully a new era of more experimental FPS games which mess around with some more unusual influences (although I must say the whole open world non-linear objective-based FPS thing was done better by STALKER a while back). I guess I'm just playing devil's advocate, giving the other side of the argument so we can identify the areas where something like this could become even better.
Oh, and incidentally Crysis is actually a lot more of a sequel to Far Cry than Far Cry 2 is. Check it out some time, it's a lot of fun but it's basically Far Cry with invisibility.
Later
- Quater (that rhymes!)
First of all, the Malaria thing is deeper than you think. You can actually run out of pills. When you run out you actually have to go seek out someone who can give you a new bottle. This can lead to situations where you are forced to save a friend or save yourself which has permanent affects on the world.
2nd- I am complimenting the story because it is straight forward and simple. It comes across well and provides you with great motivation. You are a man on a mission and you must do what you have to achieve that goal. Its about stopping a war and I like that.
3rd- Not all of the mechanics work great. I said that in the post but the fact that there is more than one mechanic is a step in the right direction. So many shooters out there are: run from room to room shooting enemies and then move onto the next level with little else to offer.
Anyways, I appreciate your opinion. Keep up the good discussion!
Far cry 2 is a step backwards as far as combat is concerned. No going prone leaning... ect. The Ai is worse than the past games in the series. Stealth gameplay is pretty much impossible. Even the console versions of far cry (instincts) did stealth combat well and you can tell where Crysis got its roots for its suit with power and speed when you evolved, it was great fun. Whats the point of havening a large jungle environment (stuck between large mountain walls) if you can't really use it to your advantage other than for cover?
I have successfully pulled off a stealth mission however it is rare to be able to use it. I completely agree with you on that one.
The AI is basically what I have come to expect from shooters but the buddy AI is pretty good. They have actually managed to save my ass on more than one occasion.
"You are a man on a mission and you must do what you have to achieve that goal. Its about stopping a war and I like that. "
...actually the one thing I do find at least slightly interesting about the story is that you're not trying to stop the war at all. You're just a mercenary who's been hired to take out one arms dealer, and you're taking part in the war just as much as anybody else involved, and plenty of the missions have you doing utterly despicable and completely morally repugnant things like aiding in the destruction / theft of medical supplies etc. The interesting thing is that you're no better than any of the other mercs and guerillas you're fighting against. After all you can't stop a war by taking part in it/
True but you are working to bring down the single factor that is fueling the war in the first place. Without weapons, the war can't continue.
I played it and it really had nothing on STALKER. The real reason most people don't know about it is because It's a PC exclusive and is made in Russia. But I would have to say it is the best FPS ever made.
Post a Comment