Moderator: JC Denton
by icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 00:31
by icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 01:45
by icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 01:46
by EightEyes » 12 Dec 2008 03:37
by icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 03:57
A title from the Outrun 2 family would be right at the top of my list of driving games.
There really hasn't been another driving game that captures that sense of responsiveness and finesse in the control of a vehicle to the same almost supernatural degree.
Aesthetically, it still stands alone, for what that's worth.
Incidentally, are you planning a single "driving" genre, or splitting it up somewhat?
I'd usually argue that one genre would cover them all, but it seems you've broken up what I'd consider the "shooter" genre (which I'm *much* less familiar with) into several more specific categories.
Is "genre" here defined by player activity, control conventions, camera position and/or some other factors?
Great to see Advance Wars under consideration, also. I'm not a genre-expert in turn-based strategy, either, but I'm a great admirer of the series.
by EightEyes » 12 Dec 2008 05:43
icycalm wrote:I did not break the shooting genre up. There's only one. I thought about breaking it up into horizontal and vertical, but the thing is that there are vertical games that play like horizontal ones and horizontal ones that play like verticals. So it would be a spurious distinction.
icycalm wrote:Like I said, it's not really under consideration: it's a given. I am just holding back on introducing it because I want to take the series from the beginning (Famicom Wars) and decide which should be the first installment to be inducted.
by taub » 12 Dec 2008 05:50
by icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 06:04
Thanks for the clarification. As a bit of an outsider to shooters, generally, I probably would have lumped "Vs. Shooting", "Shooting" and "Action Shooting (Side View)" in together, whereas the distinctions between them are probably blindingly apparent to many others on this forum.
icycalm wrote:Like I said, it's not really under consideration: it's a given. I am just holding back on introducing it because I want to take the series from the beginning (Famicom Wars) and decide which should be the first installment to be inducted.EightEyes wrote:So how on earth do you do that? :)
Should a groundbreaking game in a series take preference over a later, similar, but more polished or balanced entry? Is it the game that made an impact in its time that makes the list, or the one you'd recommend someone play today? In some series that distinction is obvious, and it's sometimes even the same game within a series.
EightEyes wrote:I don't know which "Wars" title I'd include.
by icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 06:08
taub wrote:the best online FPS
by JoshF » 12 Dec 2008 09:18
by taub » 12 Dec 2008 15:46
icycalm wrote:taub wrote:the best online FPS
Claims like this (by a new and unknown user no less!) without extensive justification showing that you are an expert on the subject, will get you banned in nanoseconds. Think very very carefully before posting again. Indeed, my advice right now would be not to.
by Bradford » 12 Dec 2008 17:31
by icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 18:07
taub wrote:Ask any Quake player what he likes about Quake 1, he will probably say the speed, smoothness and high skill.
The major points why this game is deeper (by your definition) than any other online FPS:
No weaponswitch delay. Usually you have one button for each weapon. Increases overall gamespeed and need for good reflexes.
The Movement speed is higher than in any other game,
also bunnyhopping and trickjumping are a whole skillset on their own, some people simply play the game for jumping around.
Learning and mastering the major weapons, from the simple 'point and click' weapon like the Lasergun, to the projectile weapons like grenade/rocket launcher and of course the nailguns.
Tactics. Quakeworld is usually all about spawnkills. Establising your domination on the map and then sucking the frags out of your opponent, meaning that the main game is fighting over who gets to kick the other dude in the nuts for the next minutes or so.
Also this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kT_WGrL3Fs
by icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 18:32
Bradford wrote:First, isn't taub way OT? Is this thread to debate (among other things) which games of all time belong in each categories, or only which games for which there is a five-star review on this site?
Bradford wrote:I thought it was the latter, in which case my only comment is that, once there are games to fill each category, that "FPS" could be split into "Tactical FPS" and "Arcade FPS."
by Bradford » 12 Dec 2008 19:45
by taub » 12 Dec 2008 19:56
icycalm wrote:So you are claiming that this is the only FPS in which you can assign weapons to specific buttons. Fucking retard.
by Bigode » 12 Dec 2008 20:05
icycalm wrote:I'd buy speed, but "smoothness" and "high skill" do not mean anything by themselves. What is smoothness? More frames per second? What does that matter in a PC game? If Counterstrike runs at a lower rate on your PC just buy a better graphics card. And "high skill", lol. What are you, an aspie?
by icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 20:35
Bradford wrote:I would define an "arcade FPS" as one where differences in player success correlate most closely with the player's reflexes and physical precision in manipulating the game's controls. It is obvious why you wouldn't want to use the term 'arcade' in this context, but I can't think of a substitute at the moment. People do also refer to these types of FPSs as "twitch-shooters," but I think that would be an even worse term for your purposes.
A "tactical FPS" is one where differences in player success correlate most closely with the player's strategic choices with respect to maneuvering, utilization of non-weapon tools, and coordination with teammates.
One controversial choice as a "videogame art" candidate would be Shadowrun (2007)
by Tain » 13 Dec 2008 00:49
Bigode wrote:In Quake, a good player will totally rape twenty fairly experienced players. In a duel, he will control the entire map, getting all the powerups, and will spawnrape the other player multiple times.
icycalm wrote:The only exception to this would be genres which I don't really play, of which there exist only two: rhythm and sports games.
by mees » 13 Dec 2008 01:02
by icycalm » 13 Dec 2008 01:02
Tain wrote:I think that even someone with little experience in the genre might be able to pick out beatmania IIDX from some surface-level glancing.
Tain wrote:Am I right in guessing that the rhythm genre is one of the least important because of its simplicity?
by Tain » 13 Dec 2008 01:11
icycalm wrote:Is beatmania IIDX to beatmania what Super Street Fighter II Turbo is to Sreet Fighter II? If so, the game that would go in the list, and which would be reviewed at length, would be beatmania. The revisions would also go on the list, but they wouldn't be extensively reviewed.
icycalm wrote:To explain to you why rhythm games are among the least important, I'd have to explain to you the goal, the purpose, of videogames. But I am saving this for another day.
by icycalm » 13 Dec 2008 01:25
mees wrote:I'm wondering if a roguelike will make it on the list since Tekki did.
mees wrote:On the one hand, they share the same key feature. On the other hand, one is an RPG, and one an action-based game. And, at the very least, they seem like some of the most complex RPGs to me in all other aspects as well, although I can't say I'm really an expert in any genre.