The future of SP FPS

[Shakermaker]

Something has been nagging me since playing Oblivion. Why can't SP first person shooters have the kind of depth and open-ended-ness that game offers? Most shooters just require you to walk down one or two possible paths to the exit and exterminate everyone you meet.

A recent attempt at a more open setting was Boiling Point. All in all a fair attempt but it stranded in bugs and lack of budget. But besides that game no game even came close. The new Allied Assault game offers some kind of freedom, but it all sounds too mainstream to be really ground breaking. Armed Assault and OFP2 are also on the horizon, but besides those games, it's just run of the mill shooters all the way. This genre needs a kick in the butt IMHO. A wake up call if you will. It's been almost 15 years since DOOM so it's about time we have the next revolution.

I think it would be total awesomeness to have a game taking place on during D-day, on one of the landing beaches plus the hinterland. When you start you can spawn on one of multiple landing craft, containing platoons that have different objectives. A few examples: one platoon has to secure a command bunker on the way to the beach, another has to capture a village, yet another has to meet up with airborne troops that landed the night before, etc etc. Since you are not in a 'level' but in a living and breathing world, while you do one mission, the other missions are taking place simultanuously.

Defending German troops would be controlled by radiant AI. Since the playing world would consist of about 1/4 beach and 3/4 hinterland, there should be different lines of defense and multiple layers of command. Because the gameplay takes place during one day, there should be a set number of NPC's; respawning would hurt the immersion.

If you finish one mission line, you can start the next. During a mission there should be sidequests you run into as well. And it would be very cool to have some kind of freeform mode where you hit the wrong part of the beach with your landing craft and just improvise from there on.

This is just one idea. There are so many other possibilities. When FarCry was first announced, I thought it would be open ended. Imagine what kind of game it could have been, if it that would have been true. What are your ideas?

[Asuka]

Because its nearly imposible to do something like this with a game with a true deep story. Oblivion doesnt really have a story and if you follow the main quest its like every other game. I think that it depends on what game it is. FarCry/Crysis/oblivion all games open-ended-ness works or can work. In my opinion it only works with certain games. A game like Half-Life 2 maybe they can add a FEW more options or make it like Deus Ex which in my opinion was the perfect mix. Ya you know what every single player game should be like Deus Ex perfect mix..

What you guys think?

[Gunner]

Yeah Deux Ex was pretty good at that, but look at where it got them... Deus EX 2 sucked major donkey balls. It's a business, and as in all businesses, nobody likes to take risks, people like sure things like "Shooter Man 3" with a shiny new graphics engine. Oh and there's also the fact that publishers prefer MP games over SP.

[DeusExMachina]

Deus Ex 2 was decent :(. The gameplay was dumbed down, but the plot was still great. And the setting was original.

We need another game like Deus Ex. Set during a zombie apocalypse.

[Tamer17]

Because Oblivion is a RPG and FPS are that - shooter.

In RPG games alot of the gameplay time is exploring , walking around , improving the char. , you can advance in your pace.

Shooters are there to provide high adrenaline , a rollacoaster ride. You can't provide that game experience across 40 hr game , the quality will suffer , repetiton will kick in and there will be a feeling that the game is extending his invitation.

[Asuka]

Deus Ex 2 was decent :(. The gameplay was dumbed down, but the plot was still great. And the setting was original.

We need another game like Deus Ex. Set during a zombie apocalypse.

I agree Deus Ex 2 wasnt BAD it was OK. It didnt have the INSANE factor of Deus Ex 1 but was above most games even with all the problems.

[Pesmerga]

Non-linear story lines are a bad idea. It sounds good to someone who has never really thought about it, but just spend 2 minutes thinking, it's a bad idea.

[VirusType2]

It sounds cool Shaker, but that is so complicated. Games don't get made like that, they evolve from something else that was successful.

What you described is around 5 years of work by a powerful and skilled development team, using the most expensive game engine, and has no guarantee of selling 1 copy.

The way these type of great games come, is that they take a successful game, and the next version is a little deeper, a little more complex, and of course, much better graphics. Cry engine seems like it could evolve to something like that, but probably not for another 5-10 years. But the good news is that the graphics will be = UHHHHHHHHH. wow.

Programming is seriously a lot of hard work, especially when you are creating it, and figuring out how to make it work as you go along - unlike nearly every cookie-cutter game that you see on store shelves, where it's been done, and they know how to do it. And even still, cookie cutter games take forever to make, a true example of how much work programing is.

[boglito]

Few people seem to understand the truth; fans of the fps-genre do not want open-endedness.

.bog.

[Asuka]

Few people seem to understand the truth; fans of the fps-genre do not want open-endedness.

.bog.

I like the perfect mix like i said before. Its the option to go many ways and discover more of the story. You know? As i said Deus Ex did this perfect.

[Pesmerga]

Like I said before...

Non-linear story = bad
Non-linear combat = goodness

[Asuka]

Like I said before...

Non-linear story = bad
Non-linear combat = goodness

Oh i agree. Would the Deus Ex endings be Non-Linear story tho? I dont think so. Just a few views that a player can take or see. Not saying your saying that, just wordering how that would be put.

[Gray Fox]

Someone needs to license the bf2 engine and make a mercenaries type fps, I want that type of fps, I want to call in airstrikes, artilerry, tanks. I want to steal heli's and kick ass with it. How ****ing hard is it for dev to figure something like that out, take one of the most popular games today namely GTA and mix it with an FPS, it would be a succes even if it sucked.

I do not have a big problem with fps beeing too linear, it's just that fps seem to offer far les interactivity and variety then other genres, levels are still to simplistic.

[Mr-Fusion]

I think it would be total awesomeness to have a game taking place on during D-day, on one of the landing beaches plus the hinterland. When you start you can spawn on one of multiple landing craft, containing platoons that have different objectives. A few examples: one platoon has to secure a command bunker on the way to the beach, another has to capture a village, yet another has to meet up with airborne troops that landed the night before, etc etc. Since you are not in a 'level' but in a living and breathing world, while you do one mission, the other missions are taking place simultanuously.
Extremely awesome idea.

I'm also not sure why fps games have to be totally on-a-rail with little or no room for deviation or interactivity.

Few people seem to understand the truth; fans of the fps-genre do not want open-endedness.

Hmm it'd be sad if that were true. I think you're underestimating the fps fans. I'm certain there'd be a market for open ended fps games. Could they really keep playing call of duty type linearity forever?

[MiccyNarc]

Well a game like this is coming out but because it's been delayed everyone wrote it off.

[VirusType2]

Someone needs to license the bf2 engine and make a mercenaries type fps, I want that type of fps, I want to call in airstrikes, artilerry, tanks. I want to steal heli's and kick ass with it. How ****ing hard is it for dev to figure something like that out, take one of the most popular games today namely GTA and mix it with an FPS, it would be a succes even if it sucked.
sounds sort of like the new Quake Enemy Territory.

That reminds me, I can't wait for the GTA MMO game.

/begs
Bring that game Rockstar! Try something new, please do not continue to make the exact same game over and over - look what resident evil has become. Same game, totally different feel - a new feel.

I do not have a big problem with fps being too linear, it's just that fps seem to offer far less interactivity and variety then other genres, levels are still to simplistic.
I think Doom 3 has way more interactivity than any game I can think of in any form. What is there, Max Payne? Thats not FPS, 3rd person, I don't think the interactivity is as good as Doom3. (the physics are better though) I don't know, it's harder to aim where you press the interactive buttons in 3rd person IMO. Half-LIfe2 is interactive, with physics puzzles and other stuff even. I can't stand platformer games so, I wouldn't know if they are more interactive.

Maybe I'm just a FPS gamer at heart though. (no maybe about it really)

Oblivion is interactive is it not? Pulling levers and figuring out traps and all of that. I think its perfect, maybe you haven't played it enough or at all.
Well a game like this is coming out but because it's been delayed everyone wrote it off.
What game is that? S.T.A.L.K.E.R.? I think it looks hot still. Everyone just complains. it's still not here thats all. Sort of like what I was saying, programing takes forever! =/

[Pesmerga]

In my mind, the future of FPS games will hinge on the attribute of cinematics. (ex. Project Offset)

Immersion, the feeling of vertigo, escape. It's all about escape. Playing Doom II wasn't fun because of the story line, it was fun because of the role you were filling. You were a badass with guns and you owned a lot of mother ****ing demons, going into the toughest place imaginable by human culture; Hell. Now take this kid who plays Doom II, who probably has been relatively weak his entire life, and tell him he's going to be a space marine when he grows up. He'll jump for ****ing joy.

[Spoonoop]

I like FPS games with the Battlefield approach. Your on one big battlefield fighting many bots. You have an army on your side while your fighting another. Battlefield 1942 had me hooked for the longest time. Battlefront II is pretty fun also. Need more FPS games like those!

[Vegeta897]

I'm also not sure why fps games have to be totally on-a-rail with little or no room for deviation or interactivity.Don't you think the developers have thought of this? If they could, they would. Adding all that open endedness and interactivity takes a ton of time to do. They can't just keep working on a game forever, they have a limited time and budget. You've got to understand that if they could, they would.

Perhaps some companies could join together to work on a game like that.

If one company decided to make a game with tons of non linear stuff, they have to make a sacrifice. Be it graphics, or a shitty storyline, you can't just say "make the perfect game plz" in reality.

[Warbie]

Because Oblivion is a RPG and FPS are that - shooter.

In RPG games alot of the gameplay time is exploring , walking around , improving the char. , you can advance in your pace.

Shooters are there to provide high adrenaline , a rollacoaster ride. You can't provide that game experience across 40 hr game , the quality will suffer , repetiton will kick in and there will be a feeling that the game is extending his invitation.

I disagree. A fps rpg would be great. My favourite moments in HL2 all involved exploring and looking at the beautifully detailed world Valve had created - I found the combat to be quite poor distraction in comparison.

'Oblivion with guns' would be superb.

[Pesmerga]

'Oblivion with guns' would be superb.

So you think.

[Warbie]

Why not? Shooting bows or guns, there's not alot of difference.

I also think a fps mmo could be excellent.

[Samon]

I want more of my First person shooters to be like HL2. I don't want to make choices with the story; I'd reserve that for RPG/FPS games like Deus Ex. Not shooters. I'm not really for hugely open-ended level design either. I enjoy a little-less restriction, but at the same time, I don't want the quality to drop because of this - HL2's environments are beautifully detailed. It looks like an Earth marred beyond recognition as it has been described. The artwork is insane.

I don't want to be spoon-fed anymore. With HL2 I was playing a character who had no idea what was going on. But everyone assumed he did. That was what made the game for me. I learnt what my character learnt, by investigating my environments whilst events unravelled around me.
See, most games have dire, dire dialogue. But the people in HL2 managed to be feel like human characters. Their dialogue was superb. These were people. Not some cheesy card board cut outs.

HL2 is a near perfect example of what I want my First persons shooters to be. It was never just about shooting your enemy. It had extremely well played out scenarios that took the Gameplay to the next level. Episode 1 for instance. A great example would be you using your flashlight to help your AI companion aim. That's taking things to another level.
My only gripe would be it's combat situations. Whilst awesome, they needed that little more bang. I'd have preferred to feel as though the Combine were bearing down upon me, rather than me wanting to just rush out and gun them all down because I knew I would survive. That needs improvement.

But for future SP first person shooters games I want immersion. I want storytelling that grabs you and swings you into its world. You just can't get away with a shooting gallery anymore; it's not going to work.
Oblivions central storyline sucks. But that's not what I why Oblivion, and it's not where I want FPS games to go.

Now call me Half-life 2 fanboy all you want. But in my opinion I’ve yet to see a shooter that’s reached the level of quality Valve has.

[Pesmerga]

I did think about it for a bit, and MAYBE, if it was done properly, MAYBE it could be done. But... I don't know... it just doesn't work!

An MMOFPS would be the best thing ever if done properly. It hasn't been done properly yet, though. And don't give me this shit about Huxley, oh my god don't get me started on that pile of wasted bytes. It's a disgrace to the engine.

[DeusExMachina]

You haven't played it yet...

[Warbie]

I think the main problem a mmofps faces is finding an engine that's capable. If it can handle 100's of people running about, fighting, and driving vehicles, while still maintaining a ping under 50, it could be great.

[Samon]

That type of thing just doesn't interest me.

[Pesmerga]

You haven't played it yet...

I've seen the video where some asshole in charge of the game talks about it. I swear to god, he went to worldofwarcraft.com and literally repeated the features page. It's not how an mmofps is supposed to be done. It's. Not. How.

[Pi Mu Rho]

The future of SP FPS. Coming soon.

:)

[Samon]

;)

[Pesmerga]

;)







Wait what are we talking about. HETAIRIA?!?!

[Thunderclap]

Alright, how about this for the most awesome FPS with RPG elements. First: create your character, FaceGen, but it has no real effect on you ingame.

Area is a modern city, but it doesn't need to be big. 1-4 sq. miles I'm thinking. An enemy nation has invaded and surrounded the city (the edge of the map is the massive enemy cordon, no way in hell of slipping through.) City is MASSIVELY detailed, all houses can be entered, ditto sewers etc. The enemy is closing in on the city. It's either timed or moves forward by completing missions.

Hyper-insane Operation Flashpoint realism, though you can pilot any vehicle like in Battlefield. Fully dynamic city siege with thousands of RAI bots, advancing in a logical fashion. City goes from a teeming metropolis, to panicked mobs and rioting, until the first air raids when the evacuations begin. By the end of the game the city is a rubble-strewn hellscape, like City 17 during the rebellion. You've just got to stay alive. You're drafted into the local militia.

You have a Fatigue bar that is ALWAYS going down, and so you have to sleep to recover it. Standing still just slows it to a crawl. As the command structure breaks down, you frequently find yourself on your own, hiding in some bombed out skyscraper (all 60 levels of which are fully rendered and DESTRUCTIBLE). There is almost no scripting, the enemy has a goal to achieve and reacts realistically to your attempts to hinder him.

Like when you say enter a tank factory. Enemy AI works like this. It is alotted 60 men. It's goal is to occupy the factory. The player obviously tries to stop this. If he stakes himself on a tower with a sniper rifle, a tank's going to roll up and administer the smack down. If he's armed with an RPG, they're going to send all infantry to try and take you out. You never know where the enemy will be. You know there are 60 enemies, but the AI deploys them where it thanks it will do the most damage. You can influence this by say destroying a bridge, laying landmines, or even blocking a road with a wrecked vehicle.

Just remember, this is realistic, so if you're up against ten men, you're royally screwed. Yet it also works in your favor. You can take out a tank with an SMG, IF you rush it from behind, leap onto the top, pry open the hatch, and butcher the crew. You are actually IN a detailed vehicle interior, not just where you "become" the vehicle like in so many FPSs.

Realistic area damage. If you're hit in the leg, you limp. If it deals enough damage, it blows the damn thing off. You heal with medkits, but you actually bandage yourself, it doesn't just disappear and POOF, medkit's gone. (hlcomic has a really funny comic about the medkits in HL2.)

Your AI pals have unique personalities and voices a la Oblivion, but they don't go about eating and sleeping and what not. They're just trying to stay alive in an urban warzone. The enemy will have morale, fatigue, and ammunition. If you strike at the right moment they might even surrender.

Game is set in real-time, over say seven days. Day 1 the bombs first start falling, midnight between Day 7 and 8, DEPENDING ON YOUR ACTIONS, the enemy withdraw, having taken obscene casualties, or capture the city.

What say you?

[Samon]

It sounds interesting, but I don't want SP shooters to go that way :)

[Warbie]

There's plenty of ways fps can go - the more the merrier.

I'm still waiting for a linear, mission based fps that can even begin to match Golden Eye.

[sinkoman]

'Oblivion with guns' would be superb.

No it wouldn't.

The story would be way too stupid, and just ruin the whole ****ing thing.

I mean, it works in oblivion, because that's how things were back in medieval ages. Mercenaries, no cops, gotta watch your own back, I won't tell if you don't.

Now we have police officers roaming the streets, whom if they catch you with so much as a knife in your hand, will arrest you.

Now running through the forest with a gattling gun isn't realistic AT ALL. Finding an ancient tomb and raiding it with said gattling gun isn't realistic AT ALL. Realism does not equal fun, but there is a certain limit before the player will stop and think "wait, why the feck am I doing this stupid shit?"

[Warbie]

No it wouldn't.

The story would be way too stupid, and just ruin the whole ****ing thing.

I mean, it works in oblivion, because that's how things were back in medieval ages. Mercenaries, no cops, gotta watch your own back, I won't tell if you don't.

Now we have police officers roaming the streets, whom if they catch you with so much as a knife in your hand, will arrest you.

Now running through the forest with a gattling gun isn't realistic AT ALL. Finding an ancient tomb and raiding it with said gattling gun isn't realistic AT ALL. Realism does not equal fun, but there is a certain limit before the player will stop and think "wait, why the feck am I doing this stupid shit?"

You're taking what I said far too literally. Of course I didn't mean the Oblivion we are all playing, just with guns added.

What i'm thinking of is more a Mad Max type setting. It doesn't have to be, there's many others that would lend themselves perfectly to a free roaming 'Oblivion style' fps.

And what did that stuff about police and realism have to do with anything at all? :rolling: You crazy foo ...

[sinkoman]

You're taking what I said far too literally. Of course I didn't mean the Oblivion we are all playing, just with guns added.

What i'm thinking of is more a Mad Max type setting. It doesn't have to be, there's many others that would lend themselves perfectly to a free roaming 'Oblivion style' fps.

And what did that stuff about police and realism have to do with anything at all? :rolling: You crazy foo ...

Well, the whole thing with oblvion, is that there's a sprawling world out there for you to discover.

Not so much so nowadays.

The closest to that is maybe nevada or newmexico. Roam the streets for a while, then go running around the deasert.

The whole thing with the cops is, what in gods name would you actually do in a game like that, without having the cops on your ass?

[Vegeta897]

Perhaps make it a post-apocolyptic type deal, where you are on your own and find weapons along the way, and there are certain groups of people that have banded together that can either be your friend or enemy.

No cops or overdone GTA type things then...

[Shakermaker]

Thanks for all your replies, dudes.

Some of you say shooters are and should stay linear. For you people I have another idea. Imagine a forward firebase in - say - Vietnam. You can walk around the firebase freely, and you get your different missions there. Think Vietcong, but done right. You start as a grunt but you branch off in different directions. For example, you can start a mission arch where you focus on getting Charlie out of the tunnels. Or you can join a unit that operates in enemy territory and do a couple of missions with them. Maybe even start a career as a helo gunner. I wouldn't focus on the story that much; you make up your own story as you go along. Most 'stories' in shooters are generic anyway ...

[Vegeta897]

Some of you say shooters are and should stay linear. For you people I have another idea. Imagine a forward firebase in - say - Vietnam. You can walk around the firebase freely, and you get your different missions there. Think Vietcong, but done right. You start as a grunt but you branch off in different directions. For example, you can start a mission arch where you focus on getting Charlie out of the tunnels. Or you can join a unit that operates in enemy territory and do a couple of missions with them. Maybe even start a career as a helo gunner. I wouldn't focus on the story that much; you make up your own story as you go along. Most 'stories' in shooters are generic anyway ...Well obviously that would be fun, but like I said in the post right above yours, it's simply too much work for one company to do in a decent amount of time. It's like saying "Games today are bad, why don't they make good ones?" and then the developers look and say "Oh, GOOD games! What an excellent idea! Why haven't we been doing this before?"

[Dalamari]

Condemned...amazing FPS game, very scary, a lot to do, feels responsive and interactive

[VirusType2]

You're taking what I said far too literally. Of course I didn't mean the Oblivion we are all playing, just with guns added.

What i'm thinking of is more a Mad Max type setting. It doesn't have to be, there's many others that would lend themselves perfectly to a free roaming 'Oblivion style' fps.

And what did that stuff about police and realism have to do with anything at all? :rolling: You crazy foo ...
Yea it could be cool. Oblivion mod with Gatling gun, running through a dungeon wasting masses of hordish creatures, with flesh flying.

I don't think Bethesda Softworks allows that much freedom with their construction set however. Unfortunately. Well, possibly later down the line after people can add models, then there can be guns, but I'm surprised I didn't see anything like that for Morrowind come to think of it.

[Vegeta897]

Condemned...amazing FPS game, very scary, a lot to do, feels responsive and interactiveA lot to do? Not like what was described earlier where you could pretty much choose your own story. Condemned was completely linear. I don't think there were any alternate routes, and there was no way to change the storyline in any way. The only things extra were some extra deadends that wouldn't lead anywhere except to maybe one of those dead birds.

Now, Operation Flashpoint was a very nice nonlinear game. But you may notice that it did suffer in the graphics department slightly, and some other annoying things, but the nonlinearity really made the game. You don't see those too often anymore, which is the topic of the thread. It's a lot easier for game companies to put their effort into better graphics than expanding on more storyline. Why? Because graphics are the first things that hook you. You can't look at a screenshot and be able to tell if it's linear or not, or how the gameplay is.

[Dalamari]

Now, Operation Flashpoint was a very nice nonlinear game. But you may notice that it did suffer in the graphics department slightly, and some other annoying things, but the nonlinearity really made the game. You don't see those too often anymore, which is the topic of the thread. It's a lot easier for game companies to put their effort into better graphics than expanding on more storyline. Why? Because graphics are the first things that hook you. You can't look at a screenshot and be able to tell if it's linear or not, or how the gameplay is.

OFP was a good game, but tbh after doing so many online missions and stealth missions, it gets a tad boring without any real story to follow (the default one is just more missions that don't feel connected) although the vietnam mods and such really made the game fun, but not enough to really bring much else to the table.

[Vegeta897]

OFP was a good game, but tbh after doing so many online missions and stealth missions, it gets a tad boring without any real story to follow (the default one is just more missions that don't feel connected) although the vietnam mods and such really made the game fun, but not enough to really bring much else to the table.I was actually talking about the singleplayer, which offered huge amounts of gameplay, and you could really shape the gameplay. Don't make it to the Evac point on time? New branch in the storyline. Didn't manage to steal enough Russian tanks? The scheduled battle tomorrow is off.

And nobody ever said the game was going to last forever, that's something that's quite difficult to do, and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with whether the game is linear or not. I don't know why people assume nonlinear games will automatically have a lot of replay value. I mean I still play Halflife every now and then and it's simply because it's a great story, linear or not.

Which brings us back to the discussion, making a game non-linear doesn't always make it fantastic, mainly because they often lack in the other departments.

In a perfect world where game companies had an infinite supply of money and time, games like mentioned before with the multiple directions you can take would be possible. But they just aren't by normal standards. It's basically like making an entire game for each path the player can take. It's just unrealistic.

[Pesmerga]

It's basically like making an entire game for each path the player can take. It's just unrealistic.

Not only is it an impossible task to create all infinite pathways, the player is oft left worried about whether he or she has taken the right decision, or will back track his steps to try out all paths before making any crucial advancements.

Real life is not your choice, you are pushed and shoved into it by yourself and other forces. Being forced into the video game's path is just the same.

[Vegeta897]

Not only is it an impossible task to create all infinite pathways, the player is oft left worried about whether he or she has taken the right decision, or will back track his steps to try out all paths before making any crucial advancements. This is correct. A lot of people, including me, get overwhelmed when they are presented choices. Then again, that's where the replayability comes in. But like I said, it's pointless anyway because why not just make each of those things different games on their own? What's the point of having all the stuff before it if it all boils down to a certain number of main routes anyway?
Real life is not your choice, you are pushed and shoved into it by yourself and other forces. Being forced into the video game's path is just the same.This is where your logic falls apart... I don't know what you could possibly be thinking when you say you have no freedom in real life. I make choices all the time, huge ones, and I'm not even a young adult yet. College is the big choice coming up for me right now. That could have a radical effect on my life. I could choose to murder someone tomorrow. That would have a huge effect too. Please explain what you mean.

The difference is, I don't really feel overwhelmed in real life, simply because I know it's impossible to "load" or go back in time to change a decision, so there is no point in regretting, just to live with it. In a game though, you do feel overwhelmed and regretfull because you are going to just groan when you know you have to replay the whole game just to get back to that choice. Unless ofcourse a really great save system was implemented, but it would get far too messy to keep track and all that. It would also make the game really cheap when you could just load if you didn't like the choice you made. It's like cheating in those "Choose your own adventure" books. It takes out the feeling of risk COMPLETELY, and it can kill a game. So there's your double edged sword.

[clarky003]

You must read the crysis previews in PC gamer.. I think I'll write some of it down.. seeing as the gameplay introduces some non linear story based aspects not in terms of conclusion however.

Historically, FPS squadmates have been annoying more often than useful, but Crytek have been careful not to let these ones become a hinderance. You're not responsible for keeping them alive, you don't need to tell them what to do, and you can go off and do your own thing if you prefer. If one dies, he's dead forever. By the end of the game you might have your entire squad intact (six of them currently), or be the only survivor.

They're likely to be an IQ point or two above the standard for friendly AI too: Crytek made admirable strides with the AI in Far Cry. Its not just the other marines that will make Crysis a different kettle of fish. Your own character, Jake Dunn, is better prepared for his jungle expedition than Jack Carver was. Concept art shows him swinging an enormous gattling gun around, and dual-wielding has been confirmed, but the exotic centerpiece of his loadout is the armour. The Nano Muscle Suit is a futuristic bit of kit that can be set to one of four different modes: Speed, Strength, Protection or Stealth.

The idea is that by switching between these with hotkeys, you can sneak into an enemy camp, take whatever you want, survive a few shots a few shots if you're discovered, and get away quickly before things get out of hand. The one mode that's slightly mysterious is Strength -- there's no word on what you can do in the game that requires physical strength, except presumably a melee attack. We're hoping for boulder throwing antics.

But some of the nano suit's features don't come in handy until you get closer to the probably-not-a-meteor. It's around there that the sunny paradise starts to get a bit chilly. The object is of course an alien ship, the aliens are alive and well, and the prefer colder climes. Rather than move to Scotland, they're using an enourmous ice cannon to turn chunks of the island into a winter wonderland.

and it goes on.. basically, you get to order in new weapons for changing situations and mod them with scopes and silencers, and later in the game you can obtain two types of alien weapon... one that fires razor sharp ice shards that pin your oponents, and an other that freezes your oponents.. allowing you to smash their limbs off etc..

There's also mention of the change in outcome depending how you fight the Korean native forces.. if you go on a murderous rampage then when the Koreans agree to join forces against the aliens near the end.. they wont be as forthcoming with attitude and supplies, if you play it cool and leave most of them in your stealthy tracks they will be more inclined to lend a helpful hand. It's all very interesting!.

[Ren.182]

Just give me BF2 with destructable terrain, buildings and people who actually like teamplay. I'd be happy then.

[Venmoch]

No it wouldn't.

The story would be way too stupid, and just ruin the whole ****ing thing.

I mean, it works in oblivion, because that's how things were back in medieval ages. Mercenaries, no cops, gotta watch your own back, I won't tell if you don't.

I dunno, really really old steampunk-escue guns would be cool. And work.

[Gargantou]

Just give me BF2 with destructable terrain, buildings and people who actually like teamplay. I'd be happy then.
QFT, just replace "people who actually like teamplay" with bots that have the ability to think and behave like military professionals.:D

[Sulkdodds]

The player is oft left worried about whether he or she has taken the right decision, or will back track his steps to try out all paths before making any crucial advancements.But for me, this only applies when the game is supposed to be linear-ish. If I play Far Cry, Operation Flashpoint or even Deus Ex, I don't go back. That's because I have enough freedom to just roll with it and carry on with whatever consequences result from my actions. I choose the route I think looks most tactically safe or most fun; maybe next time I play through the game I'll do it radically different. The only time I do what you described is in 'two corridor fork' situations.

I really do believe that the potential for a non-linear FPS just hasn't generally been realised yet. Operation Flashpoint is a shining beacon that shows it works. And why must it have to be all that hard to make? We're entering, or perhaps already halfway into, an age where increased standardisation can make it easier to build maps. Imagine some new-flashpoint game in the future. All you need to make a mission is:

- Map out a landscape with terrain tools.
- Designate areas of scrub, swamp, forest, etc. These areas get randomly generated in a certain pattern defined by the map editor.
- Add roads, buildings, fixtures.
- Add AI units.
- Add flags: where does the AI want to get? What's tactically important?
- Build a base. Add game logic: if player destroys four tanks, player recieves message telling him to get to a chopper.
- Add chopper and 'end mission' flag.

If the game is built in the right way, this is easily possible and versatility and variety will result.

Correct me if I'm wrong on the following paragraph: I think this was in PC Gamer, but right now, the problem with programming in general is that builders try to create a solution to everything; you get millions and millions of interlocking one-offs and instructions. This is the way the internet used to be build; this is the way people used to go about trying to build AIs. But what both Tim Berners-Lee and the AI people have realised is that they're going about it the wrong way; they need to create a very basic system first and it needs to grow from there. Current AI research focuses on imitating stupid animals and building basic instincts from which more complex behaviour can arise; Tim's building the Semantic Web.

If you can do the same with games - create a system from the ground up instead of from the top-down - the possibilities may well be endless.

Think of the possibilities the non-linear structure presents. Theatres of war, republics in chaos, the depths of space, non-linear emergent TIME TRAVEL.

Imagine, now, a game that gives you a large area of Russia. It's 2043 and Russia has no government; territory is owned by private interests, organised crime and, in a few cases, foreign governments (EU-occupied Moscow; The Republic of Chechnya). Unfortunately, this means that the government's nuclear weapons are scattered all over the place and free. There have already been a couple of nuclear exchanges between corporations and mafias. The Chinese have just finished restructuring their entire country; with that revolution done with they're now free to dedicate resources to sending agents into Russia to get nukes. Your job, as an NSA agent recruited when you were captured as a young conman, is to get 50 nuclear warheads any way you can. You're an independent cell; while backup is available (airstrikes! connections! Entire squads of operators!) you walk around in plain clothes and it's entirely up to you whether you cause more damage with your mobile phone, laptop computer and friends in high places or with a rusty Lada, a sportsbag full of guns and brute force.

Imagine Urban Dead. Imagine it with a huge city, and countryside, and gas stations, and derelict malls, and wasteland and Las Vegas in ruins and pile-ups and all that post-apocalyptic gubbins. Imagine it in 3D, with a gun hovering in front of your camera. Imagine an alternative: an FPS where you must survive in a post-apocalyptic landscape so fundamentally lonely that the first time you meet another living human being (not a zombie, mutant or turned-insane-by-plague-dude) you cry real tears. Imagine heat haze on a dead city as smoke from funeral pires curls lazily into a cloudless bowl of sky. Imagine a boot stampimg on an undead face - forever.

A pipe dream? Maybe it's unfeasible. But as computer technology becomes more and more advanced, I can see more games like this appearing.

If STALKER is good, and sells well, it may well prove to be a paradigm shift for FPS gaming.

Now, I'm not arguing against linear shooters, because a lot of them are great. However I see the FPS splitting off into two genres - the so called 'Interactive Action Movie' and 'Sandbox Shooter'. In a similar way I see future games genres being defined by subject matter as well as/more than the type of gameplay.

At least...

...I hope so.

[Gargantou]

there're quite a few really deep games out there, problem is most gamers diss'em because they're not pretty(or even graphical tbh), roguelikes for example..
One could do a great open-ended zombie survival roguelike if they bunched together the great brains from ADOM, Dungeon Crawl etc..

I want a open-ended zombie survival sim, I've mentioned it here a few times before, a breed of REs monsters, 28 Days Later(For objective), and The Dead movies for the "evolution" of the zombies.:)

[A True Canadian]

Wasn't S.T.A.L.K.E.R. supposed to offer the type of open-ended gameplay being described in this thread? Yes, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. promised a living-breathing world for you to roam around in, and it also promised less linearity than your standard FPS. Perhaps the game is too ambititious, and is the reason for all the delays. The future of SP FPS will probably have to wait until technology improves.