Big Maps in FPS (rant)

What the hell has happened to multiplayer in FPS games? I mean, I loved huge maps (5kmx5km) in Crysis with dynamic time of day and interesting terrain. You could spend a couple hours playing 1 game, clocking up heaps of kills, either by careful sniping, run-n-gun, teaming up with a buddy in a humvee, or ramming into a truckload of baddies with a tank. XD

Grr...
But ooh no...we now have these retardo developers making crappy-*** COD-like games that last for 15 minutes, get boring after 5, have no variety, and feel 'team-less'. Trigger-shooters already freaking died on PC back around 04/05. Get the message: Quake and Unreal Tournament are not much more fun if you update the graphics. Are you just lazy? You sound like you cannot even run a bath. And the only reason these uncreative are still popular is because of consoles...yeah thanks...your inferior memory has destroyed all the fun I had and the essence of FPS. L2usemouse+keyboard.

It's times like these I just want to do this!!!


I haven't got BF 4 yet and I feel like I'm going to be disappointed, just as much as I was with Crysis 3.
I've tried Planetside 2 but just wow...not even close.

It's not just the maps, but they have a multitude of weapons in many of the retardo-games...as many as 50...90% of which are useless or inferior. It's just not fun when you're packing on modifications onto a gun which is already easy to use, and anyway the modifications are useless because you can just hipfire-shotty someone to the face. It just seems like these guys ran of time to actually think about the game itself because they were too busy cleaning up the map designers' wet dreams...because its totally not derivative to make battlefields situated in a soviet factory, a missile silo, an airfield, or some burnt out hole in Iraq <sarcasm>.

I really had to vent this.

Don't. I heavily regret my purchase.

Hmm yeah I feel like the great fps titles have been taken over by consoles too much - BF is a great example.

A load of guys on the teamspeak keep banging on about ARMA III, apparently it's pretty good.

Arma (all of them) will do you well for large maps. And realism (it doesn't compare to the other software they produce, but training simulators turn out to be boring games).

While I can dig realism being fun at some times, if I'm shooting someone from just under a mile away all the time, I'll lose interest.

Please tell me you did not compare Quake to CoD.

They share similarities in the trigger-shooter genre.

I think we should compare two very similar games, namely Quake and CoD, to get a real idea of what a good game is.


Trololol.

Also GTA V is coming to PC so you can stop complaining about that now.

Not even close. The quick reflex one shot kill thing came from CS, not Quake. Most people who are not too familiar with Quake seem to think it's all about reflexes and aim and whatnot. That is not the case.

Err that's not what I was saying. CoD and Quake both share similarities on the way the game is played i.e small maps, run 'n' gun. Quake was not a bad game, it was good, but if they keep remaking the same stuff whats the point?

Source: I played Quake so much my eyes get sore when I see it now.

You're calling a genre of shooters dead and telling people to get over it while at the same time crying out for a genre of shooters that seems to be mostly dead.

And you somehow manage to both trash Quake and stroke the PC master race e-peen in the same post.

Then you should probably re-read the OP. I didn't trash Quake. It was a great game because it was fun, fast-paced and replayable. CoD 4 onwards tried to replicate this, but left out fun, good pace and replayability because it just doesn't work.

My argument:

1. Deathmatch shooters were getting overdone and the PC game industry dropped it.
2. Some of the most popular modern day PC shooters featured big maps and fun.
3. The only reason 1. is still going on is console.
4. The only reason 2 has been crushed and pissed on is console.

Blame Console

I personally don't see the similarities (other than the engines) at all. But I started playing Quake when the casual scene died out entirely, so I never got to experience that side of the game.

Source:

I used to find big maps better but honestly you just end up lost and spending a LONG time getting from A to B, only to get shot by a hidden sniper and have to start again.

Smaller maps are easier to refine and balance, and create more interesting layouts and game scenarios.

If planetside 2 has taught me anything, it's that FPS games aren't ready for big maps yet.
In that game's case, it's a team death match with some repetitive objectives thrown in, it gets old fast.

But on the topic of big map games, you know what I want to see? A hunger games-esque game.

And not like a movie tie-in, no. No story, just multiplayer.
Just think about it: a bunch of players are thrown into a huge map and are then released and told to kill each other, with the cornucopia in the middle for the more daring players. There could even be a spectator feature where they can sponsor the player and give them weapons and such. Maybe even include the survivalism aspect.

The entire concept is perfect for the medium, I'm surprised it hasn't already happened!

/offtopictangent

So...Rust?

Agreed though. If you actually play an FPS with a giant map you'll very quickly notice that you're doing nothing but travelling 90% of the time. When I played Planetside 2 (4.7 total hours), I got into a total of about three firefights, and even then it was half a dozen people at most. Everything else was visiting empty bases and driving/flying around. Mind you this was a long time ago, maybe they've fixed that somehow, but it still illustrates the problem.

From what I've been told, PS2's pretty much a dead game. On peak hours I think the most people I've seen was like, 600-ish (and the game supports a maximum of 6000.)
I wish I could've seen the game when it had that 6000 player game, surely that would've been more fun.

Doesnt work. I played Rust. The guy with sniper rifles kill people with bows. If you are at the top its easy tot stay there

Then don't put in guns.
Keep the weapons relatively simplistic, bows, throwing knives, stuff like that.

Rust was balanced terribly, but that doesn't mean the idea is inherently broken.