What do you think are the main reasons as to why the FPS genre is so stagnant?
>>320801992
*shooty tooty*
*kill*
*win*
wow so diverse
>>320801992
It's an inherently limited genre. Short of amazing story, innovative game types and changing gameplay elements (kind of like COD has been doing with exosuits and shit), there's not much you can do. Probably something to do with companies taking risks.
>>320801992
Because the majority of people like casual, pick up and go shooters.
/thread
Is it somehow less stagnant than any other genre these days? What genres are innovating?
>>320802142
Now tell us about your favorite genere, anon
>>320801992
because they're all cover based or multiplayer focused
Imagine an action oriented fast paced FPS with a lot of movement options and hordes of enemies
imagine a game like Vanquish but as an FPS instead of TPS
doesn't that seem like a lot more fun than this sit behind a wall and peek out sometimes to shoot gameplay?
>>320801992
It keeps selling no matter how good or how shitty it is.
People dont want to take time to get good when CoD and Halo are out there and any idiot can turn them on and be average at it. So the games have to be accessible, which means they lose their depth.
And with no depth there is less room to innovate.
Consoles killed the genre.
>>320803430
>And with no depth there is less room to innovate.
HAHAHAHA Halo was innovative with vehicle combat in FPS, you are probably some Quake faggot who still wants point n click arena shooters
Go ahead and explain how innovation can come from muh skillful game
>>320801992
Analog sticks
>>320803135
Good point, but i would say momentum-based platformers, open world RPGs, and social/dating sims are all at their creative height right now.
>>320803290
>>320801992
Mechanically static and too reliant on multiplayer. Those that do (begin) to explore new mechanics get shot down for weaker multiplayer.
SUPERHOT says hello
>>320801992
It's overused and the industry is inherently adverse to change. Everyone wants to follow the leader and the leaders don't want to rock the boat. It probably doesn't help that games that actually did try to innovate in the First Person space in the past like Breakdown and Mirrors Edge didn't sell well.
>>320804069
Fuuuuuuck I forgot all about this
Because something new might not sell well, Indie devs are saving gaming
>>320804069
what is this madness
>>320801992
ther eare a bunch but it comes down to
popularity
money
consoles
>>320805062
The most innovative FPS coming out in 2016
You can play the old ass prototype on your browser
https://superhotgame.com/play-prototype/
>>320805425
thanks for the tip.
console controls and console players cannot handle movement heavy skill based games
you will not be able to convince a publisher to make an fps that isn't console-first
consoles are why
you can't change how you move
>>320803684
>Halo was innovative with vehicle combat in FPS
I know you're trolling. But like 5% of me believes that you might actually believe that, and that is horrifying.
>>320806532
That seems like a cop-out. Movement tech doesn't change a game's approach to weapon variety, atmosphere, basic movement and interacting with sterile environemnts, etc.
>>320801992
Multiplayer.
>>320802497
It's not as limited as you think. I think it's possible to innovate in the genre like you can with any other genre.
>>320806785
Name another game that did it better
>>320806785
This is bait in itself.
Make an open world platformer.
>>320810268
...
>>320801992
Because if you go too far off the format, it becomes more difficult to cater to people that are very used to CoD or Halo controls. They're inherently more risky in a market that's already dominated.
Not that innovation/invention doesn't happen, but still.
-devs not giving the players what they want
-players still buying that shit
a good example is battlefield, all we want is bad company 3 and what we get is shit like bf4 and hardline, to make it clear i didn't bought any of this games. but i played bf3 although i thought it was shit compared to bad company 2
