IMO First person shooters are a little bit too much published lately. I mean, games like Medal of Honor; Allied Assault, Return to Castle Wolfenstein etc. It's an overflow if you ask me. New games (like C&C: Renegade) have absolutely no chance, because everyone already has such games. What's your opinion on this?

First-person shooters---ick, yuck, bleck, can't-stand-'em. Yep, that about sums up my opinion of them [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

I'd prefer a good RPG or strategy game to an FPS game any day, but they're good for getting rid of aggressions....

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Neb:
I'd prefer a good RPG or strategy game to an FPS game any day, but they're good for getting rid of aggressions....<hr></blockquote>

Indeed.. But I'd rather play Unreal Tournament, or a game of that sort to get rid of aggression. Nowadays, the first person shooters are more based upon realism, than upon 'shooting for fun'. I think that the new game Serious Sam 2 is definitely an exception.

I don't know, Neb...I use crpg for ridding myself of aggressions. Nothing so relaxing as kicking some serious (insert baddie-of-the-moment) butt, IMO! [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img] All I get with a fps is more frustrated.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Garnet FalconDance:
I don't know, Neb...I use crpg for ridding myself of aggressions. Nothing so relaxing as kicking some serious (insert baddie-of-the-moment) butt, IMO! [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img] All I get with a fps is more frustrated.<hr></blockquote>

Speaking of "insert baddie of the moment". My friend has some sort of screensaver, where you can kill Bin Laden heads again and again. It's fun, especially the first time you see it! [img]smile.gif[/img]

I think that's one of my main problems with the first person shooters---they're a little too realistically based for me. I mean, I wouldn't mind seeing Bin Laden within the sights once, but for the most part, I can watch the evening news or an 'adventure' movie to get the same sort of feel as a fps, IMO. The boys like them for their realism (and they're not violent boys, so this is a vicarious thrill, I suppose), but I cringe and have finally banned them from my computer. They sneak one by every now and then...but then Mom the Editor gets out the ol' Delete Button and poof! history.

Do you mean, too realistic, and thus no fun, as in no humor?

I love FPS games, Quake 3 arena for me is the ultimate deathmatch game, pure adrenalin screaming die you scum die. Its pure motion when you leap, spin in mid air and rail the guy who was chasing you, drop down a ledge to the rocket launcer, boom, fragged some gimp with a macine gun, move and frag, move and frag, see a blue glowing guy, shotgun in the back and then you are Hercules and zeus at the same time throwing lightning bolts and bludgeoning people with you gauntlet. Pure adrenalin. oh yeah.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Link:
Do you mean, too realistic, and thus no fun, as in no humor?<hr></blockquote>

In a way. The ones the boys have gotten are simply too gritty for me. They don't understand, but there simply is no pull for me, no incentive to even pop the cd in. I *have* tried, mind you, but to no avail. It's the same way with war movies and most 'adventure' movies. I have little to no interest (unless, of course, they're set in far history--and then I might *think* about it). Fps just isn't my cup of tea.....give me a cprg or rpg any given day, tho, and I'm a happy gamer for hours.

(EDIT: I think, too, it has to do with imaginative inducements--or my perceived lack of them in fps. I really enjoy the creative part of the crpg/rpg and fpsers simply do not have that element, IMO. So, again, no incentive for me to even attempt to enjoy...)

[ 02-13-2002: Message edited by: Garnet FalconDance ]</p>