New Shadow Warrior game? Oh hell yes

[shponglefan]

Shadow Warrior was a guilty pleasure of mine back in the day.  In fact, I loved all the original 3D Realms Build-engine games.  But now they have made a modern update with old-school FPS gameplay?  Suh-weeet!

[Rick]

Hmm. I was excited for Duke Nukem: Forever, and look how that debacle turned out.

[shponglefan]

The difference is that Duke 3D was a revered classic... Shadow Warrior less so.  So the new game has less to live up to. 

[Howard_Casto]

Eh no it wasn't.  Duke 3d was "revered" in the same way the Bevis and Butthead were.  And by that I mean a bunch of immature idgits got off on the fact that there were strippers in the game, duke swore and stole one-liners from Ash. 

And people wonder why DNF was a flop.  I played it btw and it was a very complete and competent fps.  The problem is that sort of humor doesn't age, especially when you yourself have aged.  Translation:  there was absolutely nothing wrong with DNF... it was completely faithful to the original, and that is exactly why it was terrible. 

[shponglefan]

Maybe you don't remember but at the time the FPS "war" was being duked out by 3D Realms and id software.  And immaturity aside, Duke Nukem 3D was a bit of a technological marvel when it came out (remember, Doom was its predecessor), was one of the few early FPS games to feature a main character with a personality, and was exteremely modifiable especially w/ the included level editor.  It was a landmark at the time for reasons beyond strippers and one-liners.

Yes, it didn't age well, but then again neither has Quake.  Duke 3D was and is an important FPS milestone.

[Howard_Casto]

No I remember the war.  Doom was a groundbreaking title and Duke 3d was not.  It simply ripped off what Doom had done and added a few minor improvements as well as several downgrades (like Duke's "personality" or lack there of). 

It's ok if you liked Duke 3D better so long as you understand that's like preferring Carmageddon over Twisted Metal.

[CoryBee]

No I remember the war.  Doom was a groundbreaking title and Duke 3d was not.  It simply ripped off what Doom had done and added a few minor improvements as well as several downgrades (like Duke's "personality" or lack there of). 

It's ok if you liked Duke 3D better so long as you understand that's like preferring Carmageddon over Twisted Metal.

Twisted Metal games were always fun to play when I was younger. Twisted Metal Black was my absolute favorite when I got a PS1. Played it through and through on every character just to see the cut scenes. Dark game.

[Paladin]

I thought I read somewhere that they were going to make it more politically correct.  That makes me sad, half the fun in the game were the over the top comments.  Without that it'll seem hollow.

[shponglefan]

No I remember the war.  Doom was a groundbreaking title and Duke 3d was not.  It simply ripped off what Doom had done and added a few minor improvements as well as several downgrades (like Duke's "personality" or lack there of). 

If by "minor improvements" you mean innovations.  Duke 3D had things like underwater environments, destructible/level deformation, unprecedented interactivity... and yes, even having a main character with a personality, things that AFAIK didn't exist prior to it.  Even some of the technology improvements on the 2.5D engine were far above its predecessors, until things switched to full 3D based engines with Quake.  And even then Duke Nukem 3D was a far better game than the original Quake was.

And in terms of style, I've always thought that Duke 3D was paying homage to the 80's/early 90's era of action film, with the overly testosteroned hero, the obvious use of one-liners from They Live, Evil Dead 2, etc.

Yeah... Duke 3D was pretty damned awesome.

Maybe you don't like Duke Nukem 3D and that's fine; but it was a pretty innovative game for its time.

[shponglefan]

I thought I read somewhere that they were going to make it more politically correct.  That makes me sad, half the fun in the game were the over the top comments.  Without that it'll seem hollow.

That would be too bad, but in today's world of trying not to offend anyone, wouldn't surprise me.

[Rick]

Sweet deal! I just checked Steam, and you can get Shadow Warrior as a 'free to play', or Shadow Warrior: Redux, for $9.99. Nice!

[Xiaou2]

Ive never never been much into FPS.  I played a little Wolfenstein on my EXs pc, Doom on a store demo pc.. but its just never been much fun to me.

 However.. I did once get an old LCD 3d glasses package that had a version of a popular 3d fps in it... and it really changed the experience for me.  It still wasnt my favorite type of game.. but the depth drew me into it a lot more... and made it at least somewhat enjoyable.

 Im looking forwards to the Oculus rift in HD.   BUT..  I in addition to better designed 3d games, Id hope that there will be 2d style games in stereo 3d on it.  For example, a side scrolling shooter like Platypus, but with 3d depth.   As well as emulators providing 3d support in existing 3d games, as well as modifications to games to create depth where it once didnt exist.  (Outrun & Afterburner would be awesome)


 After the poster's video, there were other vid links.  I found this one interesting:



 A lot of what he says rings true.  Ive seen & played a few of the modern console games, and the on-rails limits as well as the boring game-stopping cut-scenes, just kill everything. (hard to believe they have done this with fighting games now too! :<  ) Also, hated the 'way too slow' ramp in difficulty and action killing 'must-do' tutorials 'in-game', rather than an outside chosen mode -or- figure it out yourself.

 Too much time & energy spent on graphics, cuts scenes, voicing, etc.. and not enough attention to adrenalized gameplay and difficult challenges.

 The only thing I may partially disagree with is the secrets aspect.  Thats really up to the kind of game you are making.
 But limited resources, is a reality of combat.. and its a natural difficulty that makes things challenging.

 Also, because these games cant really be simulated like true combat, due to not having peripheral & wrap-around vision...  games have to be made to be easy.  You cant have a bunch of people sneaking up from behind constantly & quickly.  So whats left to challenge?   Thats why FPS games were initially about secrets, exploration, and puzzles.


 I do find it somewhat odd that the Occulus Rift is vertical.  Having a wide aspect, would have given horizontal peripheral view much needed for true fps games.   I realize that hardware wise, its easier & cheaper this way.. but, with a few mirrors.....

[SithMaster]

A lot of what he says rings true.  Ive seen & played a few of the modern console games, and the on-rails limits as well as the boring game-stopping cut-scenes, just kill everything. (hard to believe they have done this with fighting games now too! :<  ) Also, hated the 'way too slow' ramp in difficulty and action killing 'must-do' tutorials 'in-game', rather than an outside chosen mode -or- figure it out yourself.

 Too much time & energy spent on graphics, cuts scenes, voicing, etc.. and not enough attention to adrenalized gameplay and difficult challenges.

 The only thing I may partially disagree with is the secrets aspect.  Thats really up to the kind of game you are making.
 But limited resources, is a reality of combat.. and its a natural difficulty that makes things challenging.

 Also, because these games cant really be simulated like true combat, due to not having peripheral & wrap-around vision...  games have to be made to be easy.  You cant have a bunch of people sneaking up from behind constantly & quickly.  So whats left to challenge?   Thats why FPS games were initially about secrets, exploration, and puzzles.

I'm somewhat surprised that I'm also finding a lot of what he has to say is sound after the nonsense he spouted in his video on used game sales.  On the flip side I can understand some of the logic behind not spending dev time building rooms for all those locked doors in games when most people won't explore them.  It almost seemed like some people thought "hey we can cut costs by making the minimal amount of assets for this level to keep the story/gameplay going and just make fancy cutscenes to pad the time from start to finish <twirl mustache>."  I also don't know what they would even put in secret areas since most fps games don't have powerups, health or armor pickups.  Actually for all the suckiness that Black Ops 2 was it was somewhat fun trying to find hidden locked areas accessible if you had the bolt cutters on your person.  Maybe Treyarch thought they were being original with that one.

I'll probably give shadow warrior a go right after I finish S.T.A.L.K.E.R..

[Vigo]

After the poster's video, there were other vid links.  I found this one interesting:

That video reminded me exactly what I hate about early FPS games. If you actually sit and watch him play, he sits looping the same areas over and over and over again trying to remember that exact secret spot that will allow him to progress a bit more in the nonsensical maze of a level. Of course no enemies or or danger in those completed areas, just pressing the "open door" button over everything.  If I am gonna repeat the same thing over and over again, I would rather it be an arcade game where there is at least danger and action coupled with the repeat mechanics.

As far as traditional FPS games go, I love the Goldeneye style games the best. IMO, Timesplitters 2 hit the genera perfectly. 1 player levels that ranged from open areas, to mazes, to linear paths, all with unique objectives and fun themes. Multiplayer with tons of unique characters and weapons of all varieties and strengths and weaknesses. Perfect customization of multiplayer game types, weapons sets, and AI difficulty, with many modes types and maps. Ability your build your own maps, bonuses like challenge modes and arcade mini-games. The list goes on and on with that game.

[Howard_Casto]

I do get what you are saying, but if you prefer FPS that don't do what FPS traditionally do then it could be argued that you just don't like FPS.   

Mazes, secrets and other nonsensical things are major elements of the genre.  Modern FPS aren't single-player fps imho, they are arena fps (think Unreal Tournament) gimped to allow you to play in single player mode. 

I like a story and logical level design as much as the next guy, but not if it gets in the way of fun.  Almost all of the modern FPS, they just aren't fun. 

To give an example, a lot of Nintendo fans will say something idiotic like "LOLZ I like fighting games, as long as they are Smash Bros." to which I reply "So you don't like fighting games then?" 
What I mean by that is that obviously while still technically a  fighting game, Smash Bros. is so far removed from the genre that it barely fits in.  So if that's all you like, then you really don't like fighters.

To be fair, if we are talking about modern FPS it could also be argued that I don't like those, seeing as how the last few I enjoyed were the Metroid Prime series (a FPA) and the Portal Series (a FPP). 

[shponglefan]

That video reminded me exactly what I hate about early FPS games. If you actually sit and watch him play, he sits looping the same areas over and over and over again trying to remember that exact secret spot that will allow him to progress a bit more in the nonsensical maze of a level. Of course no enemies or or danger in those completed areas, just pressing the "open door" button over everything.  If I am gonna repeat the same thing over and over again, I would rather it be an arcade game where there is at least danger and action coupled with the repeat mechanics.

Well, he could have saved his game...

[Vigo]

I do get what you are saying, but if you prefer FPS that don't do what FPS traditionally do then it could be argued that you just don't like FPS.   

I don't think the first 5 years of FPS games canonically define the entire genre. FPS games evolved, and I like what they became in the late 90's. For the record, I loved early FPS games. I spent more hours on Doom and Doom 2 than any other game back in the day. I loved Marathon series as well (Bungie's early FPS games) and I not only played the hell out of Wolf 3D, but it I made mods to it.

I just never liked the whole aspect of hunting for secrets and memorizing enemy locations, then repeating the level over and over until you can do it all in under 5 minutes. Thing is, until the late 90's, I never knew how much more variety FPS games could have. When Goldeneye came out, I realized that instead of a 64x64 maze map, you could have an expansive world to explore the secrets of. You also didn't need to simply find things to shoot, you had objectives to carry out, people to protect, prisons to escape. Weapons got more interesting as well. Sniper rifles, remote mines and tools like laser watches. Not to discount old FPS games, but there was now suddenly a variety of FPS styles to explore. Split screen gaming was now an option as well so it meant that FPS games could easily be a group experience.

The points that I agree with is the FPS games now have somewhat regressed today, and I really look at the fringe titles for fresh ideas rather than subscribing to every military FPS that people consistantly line up to preorder. Left for Dead is one of the most innovative FPS games in the last 5 years, and that series seemed to have already petered out after the second one.

[Howard_Casto]

Why wouldn't they?  They do with literally every other genre of video game.  You give video games a bit too much credit.  Things have been tweaked and polished to perfection in some cases, but if you are playing a platformer, for example it won't stray too much from when the genre was firmly defined in 1985.  When it deviates too far.. well it becomes a new genre.   

Sorry man,  Left 4 Dead was terribly generic for me.  It's the first game I've bought in decades that I didn't bother to finish.  Fast moving zombies?  Using a gun as your primary weapon against said zombies?  No thank you. 

I would argue that again, Golden Eye, like Metroid Prime, is a FPA  (first person adventure)  when your primary goal is not shooting everything that moves, you've moved away from the genre.  Also the weapons were ridiculous and over the top, with each one doing wildly different things.  Again, that is classic fps-style mentality you won't see today.  I like GoldenEye a lot and even though you might hear me occasionally refer to it as a fps, it never really struck me as one.    Then again the main storyline was never the fun bit of that game....  multiplayer was... and that's by the book "unreal tournament" arena stuff. 

[Vigo]

I have to disagree with your philosophy on that one. You can get nitpicky about subgenres and special classifications, but a FPS has only two qualifications, it is first person, and you shoot things. In goldeneye, you still shoot everything 99% of the time. The fact that you had to sometimes defend Natalia, or plant mines, or shoot computer mainframes and security cameras did not make it so much of an adventure that it is no longer a FPS. I can pretty much guarantee that the reason none of this was in early FPS games, and the reason the maps were small and twisty was due to game limitations of the time.

And for left 4 dead, it really does get back to certain roots of classic FPS games, while putting new twists on the genre. First of all, I can't think of many FPS games these days where you simply need to stay alive. Dying repeatedly and respawning is the norm these days, especially in anything multiplayer, and it is nice to see a new departure from it. Now throw in with the maze like paths where a wrong turn can cost you your life, and you have something much less linear than anything in a military FPS. Health is very rare and you have to hunt around for areas where it is hidden. Good weapons don't last and ammo is scarce for everything else. Now throw in the team element and that you have to stick close and help each other to survive. The sequel was a huge improvement with introducing melee weapons as well.

[shponglefan]

I have to disagree with your philosophy on that one. You can get nitpicky about subgenres and special classifications, but a FPS has only two qualifications, it is first person, and you shoot things.

Also, freedom of movement.  Otherwise rail shooters and light-gun games would be FPSs.

[Vigo]

I have to disagree with your philosophy on that one. You can get nitpicky about subgenres and special classifications, but a FPS has only two qualifications, it is first person, and you shoot things.

Also, freedom of movement.  Otherwise rail shooters and light-gun games would be FPSs.

Good point, you are right about that.

[kahlid74]

Eh no it wasn't.  Duke 3d was "revered" in the same way the Bevis and Butthead were.  And by that I mean a bunch of immature idgits got off on the fact that there were strippers in the game, duke swore and stole one-liners from Ash. 

And people wonder why DNF was a flop.  I played it btw and it was a very complete and competent fps.  The problem is that sort of humor doesn't age, especially when you yourself have aged.  Translation:  there was absolutely nothing wrong with DNF... it was completely faithful to the original, and that is exactly why it was terrible.

You and I did not play the same DNF.  DNF was riddled with bugs and non playable elements and a story that was sorely lacking.  DNF was also completed by two entirely different studios.  You could tell when you played the game.  Disjointed IMO.  Humor can stand the test of time if done well.  Duke3D had bad elements and some incredibly funny ones.  Much of the humor is immature but it doesn't invalidate it because of that.

Late to the party but I've been playing FPS's since the genre first opened it's eyes and I think I agree with everyone.  To me the core of an FPS is a play type similar to doom and then tree branches off of that are the modern era with adventure elements.  I like them all, even if their stories are ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- or they play horribly I'll try them.  I'm just a glutton for PC Gaming.