Riddick and Far Cry VS Half Life and Doom

[Kontra]

Something ive been thinking about lately...


Back in 2004 when everyone was waiting for the new HL and Doom. It was like nothing else even existed... But it turned out they both sucked and instead, it was two nonames where the real action was - swedish Starbreeze with Riddick, a console port; and german Crytek with Far Cry, originally a tech demo... Who knew? What they did was making the logical next step in FPS evolution - they both added some stealth and a killer AI to your standard shooter which is really all thats needed. But it didnt stick...

Looking back i guess HL and Doom got their victory after all. Everyone just cant wait for the next HL "episode" (not even a game but an episode) and Doom 4 is coming out soon. And they arent promising anything new, HL is just gonna continue the "story" (because what else is there to it?) and Doom is gonna bring back the "oldschool" or at least thats what they say...

Now, some people claim how these new games arent at all like the old ones. But is that really true?? Are they really that different? What im saying is: was this the victory of the new school or of the old school...?

Cause frankly when i play HL1 i see the same shit as in HL2. A bunch of gimmicks... Better AI and guns but the rest, the jumping bullshit and the puzzles, is the same fucking thing. As for Doom, sure D3 was different from the old one and everyone bitched about it. But now they say how theyre bringing back Doom as DOOM... They wont, but the thing is even if they did, it just doesnt cut it anymore. This is the 21 century ffs and i expect more from a shooter.

Dont get me wrong i like Doom and i play it oftentimes when im bored. But i play it for like 15 minutes and thats it. Theres no way im gonna spend the whole afternoon with it like i did with Riddick or Far Cry or F.E.A.R.... Cause theres just not much to it. You shoot some demons and thats about it. You know sometimes when my uncles kids come to visit i let em play some Doom and, they love it. The gfx are nice and the music is nice... Yeah Doom is a nice little game.

But lets be real here. Far Cry, Riddick, S.T.A.L.K.E.R.... The yesterdays newschool are the real oldschool thats not coming back. The hybrid shooters. Thats where its at, or at least it was. The old games were good sure, but they got better and in 2004/5, they peaked. But it didnt stick.

 

[Turtle-Zone 3000]

Cover shooters and Halo ruined the genre.

 

[thesoup]

Far Cry was absolutely beautiful back in the day, even on my shitty fx 5200.
Anyway, as far as single player is concerned, pseudo semi-shooters > pure shooters.

 

[Mr. Pink]

Riddick was badass and I hope Vin Diesel makes a new one.

I don't think it's happening though because The Last Witch Hunter flopped hard. He might not have the cash at hand.

Spoiler

Just kidding.

vin diesel is a trillionaire from the f&f films.

 

[Nekot-The-Brave]

Back in 2004 when everyone was waiting for the new HL and Doom. It was like nothing else even existed... But it turned out they both sucked

You say that, because *you* were disappointed.

Metacritic (yes, I'm using that as a basis) says otherwise.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/half-life-2

The game, Half-Life 2, received 81 positive reviews from across the world averaging to a score of 96.

The average user score is 9.2 with over 8200 user ratings and 1888 user reviews.

Doom 3 on the otherhand, got an average review score of 87
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/doom-3

77 positive reviews, and 6 mixed,

With a user rating average of 7.5 with 818 ratings and 269 user reviews.

From a collective standpoint, they did not both 'suck'.

 

[Mr. Pink]

Back in 2004 when everyone was waiting for the new HL and Doom. It was like nothing else even existed... But it turned out they both sucked

You say that, because *you* were disappointed.

Metacritic (yes, I'm using that as a basis) says otherwise.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/half-life-2

The game, Half-Life 2, received 81 positive reviews from across the world averaging to a score of 96.

The average user score is 9.2 with over 8200 user ratings and 1888 user reviews.

Doom 3 on the otherhand, got an average review score of 87
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/doom-3

77 positive reviews, and 6 mixed,

With a user rating average of 7.5 with 818 ratings and 269 user reviews.

From a collective standpoint, they did not both 'suck'.

I agree with your position, but don't bring review score into this.

Never judge by review score:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/bioshock-infinite

 

[Riskbreaker]

Now, some people claim how these new games arent at all like the old ones. But is that really true?? Are they really that different? What im saying is: was this the victory of the new school or of the old school...?

Cause frankly when i play HL1 i see the same shit as in HL2. A bunch of gimmicks... Better AI and guns but the rest, the jumping bullshit and the puzzles, is the same fucking thing. As for Doom, sure D3 was different from the old one and everyone bitched about it. But now they say how theyre bringing back Doom as DOOM... They wont, but the thing is even if they did, it just doesnt cut it anymore. This is the 21 century ffs and i expect more from a shooter.

Dont get me wrong i like Doom and i play it oftentimes when im bored. But i play it for like 15 minutes and thats it. Theres no way im gonna spend the whole afternoon with it like i did with Riddick or Far Cry or F.E.A.R.... Cause theres just not much to it. You shoot some demons and thats about it. You know sometimes when my uncles kids come to visit i let em play some Doom and, they love it. The gfx are nice and the music is nice... Yeah Doom is a nice little game.

The hell is this shit?
Were you, perchance, recently banned from GAF or some such place? Is this how you meat puppets sound when you're plugged out of your hiveminds?

 

[tormund]

"Millennial" needs to be added to the list of this forum's thread prefixes.

 

[<3sRichardSimmons]

Far Cry was a piece of shit with some of the most schizophrenic AI I've ever seen in an FPS.
It was absolutely stunning graphically for its time though.

 

[Excidium II]

lmao

 

[Multidirectional]

First Riddick game is really cool, didn't finish the second one. Far Cry.. I liked some things about it, finished it, but I don't think it was that great and I honestly prefer Crysis/Warhead. I fucking love first F.E.A.R. though, best slow-mo shooter after Max Payne 1/2.

 

[Angthoron]

I'm not entirely sure what OP's thesis statement is. Could it be summarized in a concise and clear fashion?

 

[Dayyālu]

Ehehe. You are a funny guy.

Back in 2004 when everyone was waiting for the new HL and Doom. It was like nothing else even existed... But it turned out they both sucked and instead, it was two nonames where the real action was - swedish Starbreeze with Riddick, a console port; and german Crytek with Far Cry, originally a tech demo... Who knew? What they did was making the logical next step in FPS evolution - they both added some stealth and a killer AI to your standard shooter which is really all thats needed. But it didnt stick...

Let's clear the point: Doom3 is not a Doom game. It's a mediocre second generation shooter (with second generation I mean post Half-Life, while "first gen" are the original Doom/Build Engine/even Quake1). It's pretty much in the same park of Quake2, even if Quake 2 had a far shittier *plot* (lo, plot in Quake2) and the graphics where worse. Mechanically, they have a lot in common: shitty design, limited combat, uncreative weapons.

It's cool to hate HL2 on the Dex, but HL2 was the peak of the "Second generation" shooter: the shooter with a coherent setting, but first and foremost gameplay-focused. HL2 had a shitton of gimmicks, most of them fun (vehicles, Gravity Gun, Antlions) to keep the gameplay varied. Enemy variety was nice, some some lacking areas, and map design was more than adequate. People who remember HL2 as a story focused game are retards or remember the shitty section of the Episodes, that tried to jam in your throat that Alyx thing. It's fun to remember how I wanted to shoot her while I painfully tried to keep alive the random team mates.

HL2 has a good AI. It's reactive and enemy-focused at the right places. FEAR has a better arena building, but HL2 has more enemy variety and better/more creative weapons, mostly thanks to the Gravity Gun shenanigans.

Riddick is a stealth game, primarily. Good for what it is. Far Cry is a glorified tech demo with pretty levels and good gunfight, nice gameplay for the sections in which you fight hitscan enemies or vehicles, and it utterly collapses when the Trigen are encountered. Aftewards, it's an endurance match. I do like the open-world feeling of the first maps, when they had time and money, ya know. Point is, FarCry is a "second gen" shooter, and a rater mediocre one mostly thanks to shitty non-human AI and lackluster levels from the midgame.

Looking back i guess HL and Doom got their victory after all. Everyone just cant wait for the next HL "episode" (not even a game but an episode) and Doom 4 is coming out soon. And they arent promising anything new, HL is just gonna continue the "story" (because what else is there to it?) and Doom is gonna bring back the "oldschool" or at least thats what they say...

There will be no new HL episode. The SP-focused, gameplay first approach that HL2 had has been dead for more than a decade, bar for smaller shooters (the Shadow Warrior remake and the Reset thingie, plus some indies). We will never have a traditional HL3 or Episode 3.

Now, some people claim how these new games arent at all like the old ones. But is that really true?? Are they really that different? What im saying is: was this the victory of the new school or of the old school...?

Stupid question because HL2, Far Cry and even, sigh, Doom3 are in the same design category.

This is the 21 century ffs and i expect more from a shooter.

I don't want to say that you are stupid, but this is a pretty damning thing to say. Doom still works like a charm, and for the modern view try Brutal Doom (or the inspired mods). Yeah, on the 'Dex is edgy to dislike BD and the fanbase is annoying as fuck, but it proves that the map building and the basic Doom gameplay can wipe the floor with cover shooters ("Fourth generation", as I like to call 'em)

But lets be real here. Far Cry, Riddick, S.T.A.L.K.E.R.... The yesterdays newschool are the real oldschool thats not coming back. The hybrid shooters. Thats where its at, or at least it was. The old games were good sure, but they got better and in 2004/5, they peaked. But it didnt stick.

Yep? Yer right? Traditional Second Gen shooters are dead? We now lack the skillsets and the market to get them out?

The sky is blue? You find water in water bottles? What's your point, saying that you like more two examples in the same goddamn generation of HL2 and Doom3? You are not making a comparison between regenerating health "slow" shooters (Halo, what I like to call "Third Gen") and cover shooters (CoD).

Dafuck are you even saying? Why I replied to you?

 

[J1M]

FPS genre declined because everyone knows peak gameplay was hit with Republic Commando.

 

[tormund]

Republic Commando had many traits of modern cinematic shooters, and it really shows its console origins in every possible way when compared with PC-first SW shooters that preceded it, but all that (and game's generally shittier elements, like timed section, bunch of sections with potentially infinitely spawning enemies...) is easier to swallow due to game's fun lite tactical element and its overall "coolness".

 

[sullynathan]

I have to retract my statement on Far Cry being good, it loses its way half way through with these retarded mutant monkeys and the AI is ridiculous. Doom 3 is just meh, I like Quake 4 more.
Codex gives STALKER way too much credit, I think someone here even called it the greatest FPS of all time. Ridiculous.
Half-Life 2 is better than all of these games.

Cover shooters and Halo ruined the genre.

What's the hate for cover shooters and how does this apply to the FPS genre? same for hate for Halo. It did its thing as a console shooter, even had some good PC ports.

 

[Lyric Suite]

It's pretty much in the same park of Quake2

 

[Kontra]

Dafuck are you even saying? Why I replied to you?

I didnt say the old games sucked, especially not teh holy Doom... Doom is okay, i love it. But in 2004 the FPS genre basically passed to the second level and onto newer, and better things... It doesnt mean Doom is all of a sudden bad or anything. But thats how the game goes, you have to move forward not backwards. Like i said i still play it but...

Stupid question because HL2, Far Cry and even, sigh, Doom3 are in the same design category.

This is the main thing, they arent the same. FC and Riddick did something new that hasnt been done before(to my knowledge at least). They fused elements from different genres into your standard FPS... HL2 and D3 stuck to the old ways.

D3 is different i agree but you shoot stuff(demons) in it, and in that regard its the same. Worse but the same.

As for HL its like they tried to do it, to fuse different elements but they failed and made gimmicks instead. You said it yourself HL2 had a shitton of gimmicks but it applies to the first game too...

The whole "gameplay" is chopped up into tiny little pieces... What you do is you enter a room and you shoot some people. Then you enter another room and solve some "puzzles"(you jump around). And these two elements never mix. You never get both at the same time. I guess that would be annoying if someone was shooting at you while you were jumping on crates. But thats the whole gameplay.

COmpare this with Riddick.

You enter a room and shoot some people but at the same time you can shoot the lights. Suddenly FPshooter turns into a FPsneaker... The guards turn on their flashlights and start hunting you. You climb on some boxes and start hunting them etc. its all in the same room at the same time. And if the box is high enough, you can drop down on a guard. Thats a jumping "puzzle" of sort but the genius is they combined it with the action part of the game by making Riddick jump on a guys head, instaed of a box as in HL. Genius...

The same with Far Cry. Youre in a gunfight but you can always pull back and hide in a bush. You dont load a separate map just so you could sneak...

It has a flow to it that HL lacks. With HL its always this stop-go stop-go kind of feel. Its just not proper gameplay.

And the biggest irony is with the whole "one level" thing... They did this by basically making cutscenes in first person. But for all that they chopped up gameplay into tiny pieces.
And its not like this continuous shit is some big achivement... Riddick has proper cutscenes and is no worse for it. Sure you can do it but, why bother? In the end, its just another gimmick.


I dont know maybe im talking bullshit but it seems to me the "old ways" are still here... You still have Doom like games... They just suck. And you have failed attempts at mixing genres; do i need to mention Bio-shit and DX Human Revulsion..?? But the other new(2004) kind of shooters is gone.

 

[Turtle-Zone 3000]

Cover shooters and Halo ruined the genre.

What's the hate for cover shooters and how does this apply to the FPS genre?

There was one point where it bled into FPSs.
You'd have these shooters where you're in first person and then you'd take cover in 3rd.
Along with this you had the implementation of regen and other consolitis which stayed.

I'm sure there was quite a bit of that in the '05 to '10 period.
I had quite a shock when I tried Rainbow Six Vegas after playing the earlier ones as a kid.

 

[sullynathan]

Cover shooters and Halo ruined the genre.

What's the hate for cover shooters and how does this apply to the FPS genre?

There was one point where it bled into FPSs.
You'd have these shooters where you're in first person and then you'd take cover in 3rd.
Along with this you had the implementation of regen and other consolitis which stayed.

I'm sure there was quite a bit of that in the '05 to '10 period.
I had quite a shock when I tried Rainbow Six Vegas after playing the earlier ones as a kid.

I don't know many shooters that do that except for the tom Clancy ones from that time. It must not have stuck well.

 

[Kontra]

Surprised to see so many Far Cry AI dislikes... Sorry to say this but maybe you guys just werent good enough... FC has the best AI out of all FPS games. They use trees as cover, they crawl walk, they lie down when you shot them with a sniper, they shoot at your last known position. Theyre unpredictable... Sometimes when you hole up in a room they try to enter it while lying down. Other times they enter and start shooting before they enter haha!

Basically they act the same as you would in their place(in a videogame). They also use vents, a traditional safe spot in games, but not so in FC. They crawl inside and shot you in the ass. I suggest you all play it again on the highest difficulty and see how far you can go... Remember FC mercs are highly trained so stay low and avoid contact if possible.

As for the mutants they were like haunts/zombies from Thief. They added some variety to the mix and they were S C A R Y... Not because of looks(they looked kinda goofy) or sound like in Thief but becasue of the AI behavior. You couldnt deal with them the same as with the mercs. They never went at you in a straight line, they always strafed left and right. Some, like the basic "ape" Trigent had some "traits" i havent seen before or since, like the ability to jump 20 meters in the air. In your standard shooter, when youre on some balcony and the enemy is down then they are down and they dont go up, unless there are stairs... Not so in FC. First time i saw one(in the treetops) he nearly killed me even though i was in an elevator going up... He jumped and slapped me like a bitch. I still remember the pounding on the elevator floor, below... It was horrifying.

 

[sullynathan]

I didn't have a problem with killing the Far Cry enemies, all it takes is a headshot on humans. The AI is unnaturally responsive with really really good eyesight. This bled into crysis too. No, fuck the mutant one shot monkeys.

 

[Dayyālu]

As for HL its like they tried to do it, to fuse different elements but they failed and made gimmicks instead. You said it yourself HL2 had a shitton of gimmicks but it applies to the first game too...

Far less, though. HL2 variety in settings and situations is miles ahead from HL1. Sure, HL1 had Xen, but ... well... first person platforming? I prefer vehicles and cranes, danke.

The whole "gameplay" is chopped up into tiny little pieces...

They are called "Arenas" or "setpieces" and are the basics of most second-gen or later shooters. Remember Painkiller? Arena-corridor-arena-corridor. HL1 is a tad more complex, but you don't have the variety of Doom or Quake levels.

Compare this with Riddick.

Riddick is a good game, sure. But it's more of a mutant (eh) of stealth gameplay and somewhat adequate shooting sections. Ever heard of Thief, man? But Thief is not an FPS, it's merely first person. The skill-set needed for Thief and stealth games is different from the FPS one.

The same with Far Cry. Youre in a gunfight but you can always pull back and hide in a bush. You dont load a separate map just so you could sneak...

It has a flow to it that HL lacks. With HL its always this stop-go stop-go kind of feel. Its just not proper gameplay.

I don't follow. Far Cry has nice open levels. Are you suggesting that the Ubisoft formula (generic open world) is the best one? I simply don't get it. Far Cry has some open levels and Riddick has its own weird structure. The more I try to follow your point of view, the more it seems it's apples and oranges. I don't follow.

I dont know maybe im talking bullshit but it seems to me the "old ways" are still here... You still have Doom like games... They just suck. And you have failed attempts at mixing genres; do i need to mention Bio-shit and DX Human Revulsion..?? But the other new(2004) kind of shooters is gone.

Bioshock is a mutilated System Shock-like, only, well, mostly terrible. Its "genetics" are more on the side of Ultima Underworld than Doom, and it's noticeable. Never played Bioshock 2 or Infinite, though. Never played HR too, too consoley for my tastes (it's a cover shooter, gimme a break).

As for the mutants they were like haunts/zombies from Thief.

Then...then you played Thief! And why the heck you make a parallel between Riddick and HL2, then? wat

... like the basic "ape" Trigent had some "traits" i havent seen before or since, like the ability to jump 20 meters in the air.

Hail, Kontra. This is a Fiend.

Look at this thing, it needs some shotgun blasts

It's a Quake 1 enemy. It's, in function, identical to the Monkey Trigen as an FPS enemy, bar tech advances and the fact that Tech Trigen were as unfun to fight as they go (kill ya in two-three hits, jump like little shits, HP bloat, missile-like behaviour). And now you make me remember the Trigen AI of Far Cry, and how the dumb missile fucks killed themselves in the most amusing ways.

Budget limitations, I guess.

What you are trying to say, is that Riddick and Far Cry could have been the evolution of the FPS genre if they did not died like all their peers? Far Cry devolved in Crysis and the Generic Far Cry Game, ya know. They are still chugging 'em out, like Primal or something.

Your points are quite unclear. If you say you liked more Far Cry and Riddick than HL2, well, tastes! But consider they are still hybrids of Gen2 shooters, and the genre has been dead for 10 years.

Sorreh, "almost as bad". I got carried away. Not the place to redo the Eternal "Why Quake 2 is bad" routine. Kickass soundtrack, though.

 

[A user named cat]

I wasn't aware anyone played Far Cry beyond the introduction of the retardo monkeys. The game took a bigger nosedive than leaving Barcelona in Lionheart.

 

[Kontra]

I didn't have a problem with killing the Far Cry enemies, all it takes is a headshot on humans. The AI is unnaturally responsive with really really good eyesight.

Yeah headshots work but later they start wearing helmets. The AI is precise, true but they never ever cheat... They shoot when they see you and only then. So make sure that they dont... Thats why the stealth meter and the bushes are there. Wearing some armor over that t-shirt is a good idea too.

Riddick is a good game, sure. But it's more of a mutant (eh) of stealth gameplay and somewhat adequate shooting sections. Ever heard of Thief, man? But Thief is not an FPS, it's merely first person. The skill-set needed for Thief and stealth games is different from the FPS one.

Yeah i played Thief... Its funny that you say how its not FPS cause thats how i played it recently, like a straight up shooter with some stealth. What i did was i put on shuffle the soundtrack from the Predator, while playing it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXnAxydhZ8M&index=1&list=PLD1D52F3B782C88A1
just to give it that extra edge.

You should try it if you played Thief to death... Its really cool.

I don't follow. Far Cry has nice open levels. Are you suggesting that the Ubisoft formula (generic open world) is the best one? I simply don't get it. Far Cry has some open levels and Riddick has its own weird structure. The more I try to follow your point of view, the more it seems it's apples and oranges. I don't follow.

No when i say Far Cry i mean the first, NOT the rest... Theres only one, the rest are shit.

Whats my point, well im not really sure... What im saying is kinda convoluted, but the main point is that stealth is essential to a shooter... Cause the core FPS fantasy was never really just about shooting. Like when you watch all the action movies, the good ones at least like the Predator or Die Hard or Rambo, theres always an element of subterfuge to it... Not just shooting. And it makes sense cause its one guy against many, it makes sense that he would hide also. Thats the main thing a FPS is trying to emulate, in my mind. Cause you play just one guy.

Essentially all these movies and games are trying to emulate old kids games... Like Thief is trying to emulate basically hide and seek, and "youre it" when the guards catch you. And the shooter is emulating when the kids play "soldiers"; and there was always some hiding to it, it was never just the shooting. Because these games are fun and you cant go wrong with them, its what kids play when theres nothing else, no TVs or computers. I mean what else should they be emulating other than fun stuff like that? Its just common sense.

Im not saying they shouldve added stealth to Doom, cause theyre demons anyway so you just shoot them and maybe the tech wasnt there yet. But to me it seems really natural, like adding color to TV that eventually, you have to add some stealth to a FPS... Otherwise it lacks something.

After all its humans youre up against, you should be able to hide from them too.

So its not just taste, its really what they have to do, objectively.

And Far Cry and Riddick were the first to do it... But apparently also the last.

Really its stupid when you think about it. Riddick, an escaped convict and a murderer, can duck and hide. Jack Carver, an ex military tough guy and a goofball who runs around in a red hawaiian t-shirt, can duck and hide. But Gordon Freeman, a man of science, a thinking man, doesnt know how to? Hes the one who needs it the most ffs... Its just stupid. Its because Valve is still living in 1998 and they havent figured it out yet. You have to add some stealth.


Good AI is the second point because what you do in a FPS is you shoot some people so they better have some brain... Both Riddick and FC had that.

HL2 AI sucks (the first is better but not much) because again they do this gimmicky bullshit like when the Combine squad leader waves his fingers before shooting. And i get its some military signal like "spread out" or something that he says to his buddies but, by the time he finishes waving at me i already killed his buddies and now im holding a shotgun to his face. So his sticking to protocol didnt do him any good. Its there really only for show, but it doesnt do anything.

But thats Valves approach because HL is all about presentation.. Maybe thats obvious, but the approach is wrong at the core. The point is it should emulate that feel, not look like it.

Thats why DX HR stealth sucks - it looks like im hiding but im not... Its fake. When i played hide and seek it wasnt like that. I didnt have a camera behind my back, i had to peek. Thats the feel it should emulate but its not; it just looks like it. Or the takedowns, its the same thing. Im not feeling like im kicking their butts... Its just for show. While in Thief they mechanically got just right that feel, of whacking someone over the head, which is the main point.