Why are there so few indie FPS titles?
Many indies avoid creating shooters because they view them as the pinnacle of all that is wrong with triple-A games, not because of fear. First, any indie FPS out there will immediately be compared, graphically speaking, to lots of existing titles. This sets the content bar pretty high and starts to require a good number of diversely skilled people. Second, I think there is a fear of gamers just looking at an FPS and immediately thinking they know everything there is to know about it before even playing it. The structure of FPS games are so ingrained in FPS gamers’ collective unconscious to the point that players fear changes which breaks the norm will start to feel either weird or off putting. Third, many indie game companies are composed of very small teams compared to the number of people involved in triple A titles. Since indie game team sizes might be too small if the scope of their FPS game is vast, the task might just be too huge for the team and the budget. Many small developers are skeptical of creating an FPS because of gamers' addiction to having a Multiplayer mode these days. Lastly, many indies refuse to create FPS titles simply because there might be way more tech involved than what they would prefer to work on.
However, there are so many successful Indies who have already shown that their games are far more defined by content, rather than by tech. Indies don't necessarily have to create an FPS with ground-breaking realistic graphics and compete with other modern major FPS titles in order for their game to be good. I am saying that Indies can show gamers the potential innovation that can occur within the genre by simply using their imagination without being overly ambitious or too technical. If there are indie game developers who claim the FPS genre as the pinnacle of all that is wrong with triple-A games, then they should challenge themselves to find innovation within the genre. Wherever there’s a problem, lays an opportunity. I think solutions can be found in the past. We need to look at shooters from where they all started and work form there instead of iterating on what is currently popular or trending and dare to be different.
Gun Godz
An example of a game that breaks some FPS trends I've seen work well is a game called Gun Godz. It’s worth checking out especially if you haven't heard of it and just want to play something different. Gun Godz is a free old-school twitch style FPS created by developer Vlambeer. and stands out because its an FPS about gangster rap on Venus featuring an awesome soundtrack and a bunch of exciting levels to blast through. Speed-run, look for secrets and revel in destruction as you work your way through. It's a super straightforward game, reminiscent of Wolfenstein 3D and Doom. If Doom were created today, it would play like the following video shown below.
Okay, maybe this video was a bit eccentric but it gets the point across while also adding humor.
FPS Design Stagnation
Just to be clear, I am not saying Call of Duty or Battlefield games do well solely based on brand recognition because that would be ridiculous. I am also not saying these games are somehow bad and that nobody is making a "good" FPS game anymore. Lastly I am not saying this is why the genre is stagnant or blaming triple-A developers. Those games broke some trends at a time where arena shooters were highly popular. There's a reason those games are low-risk as it stand and there are many things they do well. On the other hand Indies can take much higher risk and try daring new things. However, the stagnation is rooted in the single player experience. It is rooted in the campaigns’ mission structure and story design which simply can’t be ignored. Overall, the stagnation is rooted in design.
Unfortunately, many game development companies in the FPS genre are avoiding creating FPS campaigns and story entirely. They feel the reason why is because FPS campaigns usually cost majority of the budget to create; roughly 75 percent. Players burn through the campaigns in and weekend and move on to the multiplayer where they find more of a challenge. One major issue I have had with many FPS campaigns is that they have become so linear and offer little to no player choice. As a result, there is no incentive for players to go back and play the campaigns again because they've experienced everything it had to offer. They move on to multiplayer because that is where they find more of a challenge.
Below is a list of specific design stagnant features commonly found many current modern fps games:
1.) Restrictive Levels
Let’s take a look at a game called Receiver. Receiver explores gun handling mechanics, randomized levels, and un-ordered storytelling as the player attempts to uncover a variety of secrets in a dangerous building complex. When I watched the Reciever gameplay, I realized this is not your typical FPS game control scheme where you hit "R" on the keyboard to reload? At first, I thought the game seemed like a pain to play but that was simply because I watched the gameplay. Once I actually played the game, I realized Reciever is about immersion, which I would not have experienced had I not played it.
What got me interested in Receiver is that the weapon itself becomes a character in the game. Your interaction with the tool becomes more intimate, you become more aware of it as you check for a chambered round, see bullets being loaded into the magazine, etc. It's kind of a brilliant take on one of the most basic elements of the genre and what the spirit of innovation is all about. You take something that has become cliche, something that has a universally accepted definition and then changing up its story. Now many FPS gamers might not find this gun mechanic appealing but this is what separates the game and makes it interesting.
Superhot
GlitchspaceJust to be clear, I am not saying Call of Duty or Battlefield games do well solely based on brand recognition because that would be ridiculous. I am also not saying these games are somehow bad and that nobody is making a "good" FPS game anymore. Lastly I am not saying this is why the genre is stagnant or blaming triple-A developers. Those games broke some trends at a time where arena shooters were highly popular. There's a reason those games are low-risk as it stand and there are many things they do well. On the other hand Indies can take much higher risk and try daring new things. However, the stagnation is rooted in the single player experience. It is rooted in the campaigns’ mission structure and story design which simply can’t be ignored. Overall, the stagnation is rooted in design.
Unfortunately, many game development companies in the FPS genre are avoiding creating FPS campaigns and story entirely. They feel the reason why is because FPS campaigns usually cost majority of the budget to create; roughly 75 percent. Players burn through the campaigns in and weekend and move on to the multiplayer where they find more of a challenge. One major issue I have had with many FPS campaigns is that they have become so linear and offer little to no player choice. As a result, there is no incentive for players to go back and play the campaigns again because they've experienced everything it had to offer. They move on to multiplayer because that is where they find more of a challenge.
Below is a list of specific design stagnant features commonly found many current modern fps games:
1.) Restrictive Levels
Take a look at the FPS map design above over the different years. By restrictive level design, I mean things like blocked-off areas that never get accessed by players in the game or not being able to traverse backwards to previous areas, locations and or levels. Check out Total Biscuit’s video on Medal of Honor Warfighter. In the video, he shows the level where you are fighting in an African region. There is point in the level where you have to point a laser at a tall building full of bad guys so your allies can bomb it. Now walk a few steps ahead, like you are going towards the building, and you will discover that you instantly die. I'm not kidding! Yes, the game didn't let you go ahead. Its as if it were some sort of Dictatorship where you have to obey what the government says, because the plot in the game said that you had to destroy the building before proceeding. If players don't destroy it, then what happens? Does the game stop at that point? What if the game provided options for players to destroy the building in a different way, since many tried walking ahead? Too many Modern Military Shooters just take you from point A to point B, without allowing the player to make decisions as to which routes and paths they want to take. Which brings me to my next point.
2.) No Freedom & Player Choice
Freedom is another point that lacks in FPS's now-a-days. They provide no freedom for players to do what they want or to complete objectives their own way. This is why I am looking forward to the upcoming Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. For example, what if in Doom you wanted to go to the end of the level trying to kill all monsters, using the left way, but the game wanted you to go through the right way, not wanting you to get the secrets and everything else? What if as soon as you went to the left way you died? This counteracts what made Doom fun. Doom wasn’t just big, its levels were considered a maze as they offered passageways where players instantly encountered monsters, and tons of areas with hidden secrets or Easter eggs. What if players were offered difficult decisions in the campaign which altered the story? We have seen this work well with the Mass Effect series. For example, what if players had to decide whether to kill or rescue one life between two characters? This could potentially make the game more challenging. It would also provide a reason for players to play the campaign again and make different decisions than they did before in order to get a different outcome. Check out the nice video below by Daniel Floyd about Problems and Choices in game design in a format similar to Zero Punctuation.
3.) Infinite Ammunition
Sure it’s great to ask an NPC for ammunition when you are low, but if there is no limit to this mechanic; it becomes a problem because it takes away challenge. It prevents players from having to venture out into the level and find ammunition. In Doom you started the first level with the only two weapons at your disposal; a pistol and your bare hands. In Doom you have to find the ammo spread all over the map, because if you don't search for ammo, you will certainly not pass the level with your bare hands.
4.) Auto-Regenerating Health
Unfortunately, the health regeneration system is still being used in FPS games in such a way that it takes away challenge from the game. There are ways in which regenerating health can be challenging if there is some sort of limitation to it in place. However, it eliminates the need of finding health packs or med kits which helps adds a survival element to the gameplay experience. To make FPS games more challenging, tons of enemies are added on the screen to shoot. As a result, players find cover in order to wait 'till their health regenerates and shoot the enemies again. As this progressively happens, it decreases the challenge. While putting tons of enemies on the screen adds a certain degree of challenge, making health regeneration limited and difficult points where you can find medkits would make it challenging as well. That's what is lacking oin some FPS games today.
5.) Scripted Sequences & Cut-Scenes
Too many scripted sequences and cut-scenes make players’ experience less fun because it takes them out of gameplay which is interactive. Instead, it forces them to watch a pre-rendered footage which is passive. Scripted sequences and cut-scenes are not entirely bad as they help illustrate the story. However, I feel majority of the story should be told through gameplay. As a result, players try to have fun, but the game just makes them feel patronized, bored, and restricted. Do gamers actually enjoy being bossed around by uncharismatic authority figures in their free time?
Imagine if Quake was created today with the design points numbered above...
The Bioshock series actually handled this system pretty well. The games in the series have multiple weapons, hidden rooms, scavenging, non-regenerating health, and intricate level designs. Instead of competing efficiently by experimenting with new design concepts, as it stands, FPS games are competing in an expensive graphical arms race. I'm not saying modern-day shooters are not pushing the envelope at all, however, one thing I have always found exciting about these shooters is how they push technological boundaries. For example, the audio in Battlefield 3, the texturing of Rage, the animation of Max Payne 3 and the destruction in Red Faction, to name just a few. It can also be inspiring to see the creative uses that the artists find for the technology. For example, the rendering of Gears of War 3 looked incredible through exceptional placement of textured lights, emissive billboards, screen-space god rays, and other similar techniques. Those features are used in many UE3 games, but rarely as well. I also still enjoy many multiplayer shooters -- the rules haven't changed much in 20 years, but the network performance and audiovisual presentation have improved greatly.
I am not against the advancement in videogame graphics however, I don't favor graphics over gameplay and for me a game has to first be fun before it looks pretty. It's the single-player experience that really grates me, as developers appear to be more interested in putting together a cinematic masterpiece rather than providing the player with decisions and challenges that alters their gameplay experience. For new players, I'm sure there is a certain novelty to tilting a thumb-stick and effortlessly moving through the attractive levels, and to pressing the trigger and hearing a loud noise in response. Unfortunately, this wears off quickly without any layered mechanics to provide some interesting context to these actions, or consequences for their results. Allowing the players to create mods and or create their own maps, rules, and match types helps break trends. Valve, for example, uses this tried-and-tested formula constantly, building on successful mods or prototypes for each of its games. Check out the simple weapon mods implemented in a match I played in Quake 3 Arena online some time ago in the following video below.
Mods
In this video above, I was having a ton of fun with weapon mods after playing some Quake 3 online. I'm was a bit rusty but I haven't had this much fun playing an fps online in a long time. I ended in 2nd place. I used a simple program called X-Padder which mapped my keyboard and mouse to my gamepad controller so that I could use the Xbox 360 controller to play Quake 3. The controls were extremely fluid and not too stiff like the console version. No camping, no "hand-holding" tutorials, no online harassment from players... just crazy over-the-top competitive action. This was simply pure fun.
With all of this said thus far, I am not trying to encourage indies to somehow be revolutionary and try to go out of their way proving big publishers wrong by fixing their flaws. Not at all! I will simply re-iterate that indies have the potential to make a good FPS game that doesn't follow current trends which expresses their imagination rather than trying to live up to today's "standards" or gamers' expectations. It wouldn't be wise for indies trying to make a game in order to prove to big studios that they somehow don't know how to make games. That would be an unfair perception of the whole "Indie Movement". Indies make games simply because they love games.
Receiver
What got me interested in Receiver is that the weapon itself becomes a character in the game. Your interaction with the tool becomes more intimate, you become more aware of it as you check for a chambered round, see bullets being loaded into the magazine, etc. It's kind of a brilliant take on one of the most basic elements of the genre and what the spirit of innovation is all about. You take something that has become cliche, something that has a universally accepted definition and then changing up its story. Now many FPS gamers might not find this gun mechanic appealing but this is what separates the game and makes it interesting.
Superhot
Check out Superhot, an independently developed first-person shooter game which utilizes time in a unique way that allows players to assess their situation prior to taking out enemies with guns and other weapons. The game was created by developer Superhot Team and originated as an entry in the 7 Day FPS Challenge of 2013. The game was a fresh take on the genre and mostly met with positive reception. Superhot has a unique art, setting the player in an environment using simple artistic elements limiting its colors to whites, blacks, and reds. This helps aid the player in focusing on key elements. Weapons have limited ammunition and requires the player to rely on taking out hostile attackers with melee kills while trying to get more ammo. What distinguishes Superhot the most I'd say is its time mechanic as described in the game's tagline, "Time Moves Only When You Move".
Glitchspace is a first person shooter video game that teaches programming. The game challenges players to navigate their way through a cyberspace world where the only villains are systematic glitches. The hope of this game is to offer people a chance to test their programming skills, but in a more entertaining way. This duo-motif program is in line with trending educational games like Koe, an RPG that improves players’ linguistic skills. In this glitch-filled world, players have boundless opportunities to exploit whatever is thrown at them. How people decide to manipulate the environment and the objects around them will ultimately distinguish their gaming experience. It doesn’t matter if the player is an amateur or a professional, because the game will present a great way to see just how far one’s comprehension of programming extends. This game was developed with Oculus Rift in mind, and is available on Windows, Linux and Mac OS X.
Upcoming FPS Games of 2016
Some gamers say that the end is near for the FPS genre, but I think otherwise because those creating FPS games are limiting them by trying to compete with what is current rather than creating a new FPS game based on their imagination. The FPS genre appears to be having a bad time but I wouldn’t call it a crisis. The lack of gameplay, story, and innovation has become a virus with the potential to infect the next FPS games to come. However, this seems to be the year for the FPS genre making its comeback and curing itself of this virus. Games like Battleborn, Overwatch and Lawbreakers look to stir things up in the multiplayer department. While on the flip side, games like Adrift, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, and No Man's Sky look to shake things up the the single player and or campaign component. Although many gamers have gotten to experience a taste of the multiplayer beta in Homefront: The Revolution, I highly look forward to its story as to how it will play out in its campaign. Doom 4 looks the shock audiences once again with its brutal over-the-top gameplay. Mirror's Edge: Catalyst should be well worth the wait, as this free-running game makes its return with missions, puzzles and races in a city that's free for players to explore. Dishonored 2 is planned to be released November 11 of this year. Space Hulk: Deathwing is another upcoming first-person shooter set in the Warhammer 40k Universe and from what I've seen so far, it looks amazing. Of course, I can't leave out Star Citizen which is an upcoming space sim with first-person combat, mining, exploration, a branching single-player and drop-in co-operative campaign all set within a massive multiplayer persistent universe.
Shadow Warrior 2
Shadow Warrior 2 looks to cure itself of this virus by not taking itself too serious and adding humor with it's "in-your-face" visceral gameplay action. The game utilizes a procedural damage system which allows players to cut and blow off enemy limbs and body parts. The environments in the game are more open than its predecessor, adding new mechanics such as climbing walls and double jumping to allow for more exploration. Players can revisit earlier missions to re-engage past enemies in order to upgrade their skills. Its level design is procedurally generated in some areas such as randomized enemy positions, terrain, buildings and weather conditions. Gamers will be overwhelmed with joy as the game features more than 70 different weapons which varies between firearms and blades. Killing enemies allows players to level up their weapons and augment their equipment.
What does the future hold for the FPS genre?
There is no perfect or simple answer as to where the FPS genre is going. In my humble opinion, the possibilities are limitless when they are created using our imagination. Ultimately, the future of what we call FPS is also in our hands; the gamers. My hope with this blog post was not necessarily to encourage big triple-A companies to break away from their on-going trends because that would be an extremely difficult task. Instead, it is my hope with this post to inform their audience to not overlook past FPS games merely because of graphics and label them old… but rather, to learn from them. Gamers have the potential to bring up the design stagnant points numbered above and open the eyes of the game companies that develop these games. It is also my hope with this post to get Indies thinking... to encourage Indies to see shooters in a different light and possibly make one themselves. Gun Godz, Receiver, Superhot, and Glitchspace are just examples. Indies can make a fun FPS contrary to the popular belief that their game needs to have realistic graphics, cut-scenes, or follow what is currently trending. Thanks for reading, and until next time.
Shadow Warrior 2
What does the future hold for the FPS genre?
There is no perfect or simple answer as to where the FPS genre is going. In my humble opinion, the possibilities are limitless when they are created using our imagination. Ultimately, the future of what we call FPS is also in our hands; the gamers. My hope with this blog post was not necessarily to encourage big triple-A companies to break away from their on-going trends because that would be an extremely difficult task. Instead, it is my hope with this post to inform their audience to not overlook past FPS games merely because of graphics and label them old… but rather, to learn from them. Gamers have the potential to bring up the design stagnant points numbered above and open the eyes of the game companies that develop these games. It is also my hope with this post to get Indies thinking... to encourage Indies to see shooters in a different light and possibly make one themselves. Gun Godz, Receiver, Superhot, and Glitchspace are just examples. Indies can make a fun FPS contrary to the popular belief that their game needs to have realistic graphics, cut-scenes, or follow what is currently trending. Thanks for reading, and until next time.
No comments:
Post a Comment