Latest topics
News Feed
third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
+18
eaustinn36
ApocalypseVVolf.
Desert Sleepy
MrKurt2012
FoundDa Kiwi
sgt zombie23
snowwolf1996
Jagdgeschwader
ztron
Made in Finland
KGBOOM
bman4782
El Mexi Can 915
WestHybrid 360
mboddz751
Meatshield718
DeadApe
Super Mega King
22 posters
Undead-Xbox :: Games :: Games Discussion
Page 3 of 4
Page 3 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-person_shooter
HOW THE FUCK IS THIS AN OPINION!?
HOW THE FUCK IS THIS AN OPINION!?
Last edited by FoundDa Kiwi on 5th January 2013, 12:44 am; edited 1 time in total
FoundDa Kiwi- Zombie Killer Of The Year
- Posts : 880
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_person_shooter
WestHybrid 360- Staff
- Posts : 586
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
If that isn't a textbook definition then you have textbook dumbfuckery.
WestHybrid 360- Staff
- Posts : 586
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
... and the aforementioned games are not (in the words of SMK) "pure TPS", I think we've established that much already, no?
What we had going on here with mboddz was beyond that point and about how he expressed himself more than about the TPS issue. I think we're done.
What we had going on here with mboddz was beyond that point and about how he expressed himself more than about the TPS issue. I think we're done.
Made in Finland- Definition Of Sarcasm
- Posts : 3698
MrKurt2012- Watermelon Head
- Posts : 1525
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
WestHybrid 360 wrote:textbook dumbfuckery.
You say that like you think its funny
sgt zombie23- Keeper Of The Chat
- Posts : 2126
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
Was there really just an argument over what a third person shooter was?
Jagdgeschwader- The Unknown Soldier
- Posts : 2455
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
Jagdgeschwader wrote:Was there really just an argument over what a third person shooter was?
yeah pretty normal day in the undead xbox
Super Mega King- Staff
- Posts : 2448
Great Wall of China: The Post.
WestHybrid 360 wrote:Dead Space. Third Person Shooter.
Grand Theft Auto. Third Person Shooter.
Saints Row. Third Person Shooter.
Resident Evil. Third Person Shooter.
WestHybrid 360 wrote:Game A has shooting. Game A also has a third person camera. Therfore Game A is a TPS. It may also be a fantasy, or an action adventure, but the underline fact of the matter is that it's still a God damned TP-fucking-S.
I wouldn't really agree with the guy who wrote that Wikipedia article's definition. I think "third person shooter" generally makes people think of games like Gears of War, Army of Two, etc. Games where you're generally rooted to the ground and use cover and proceed through thousands of slightly varied encounters using this simple formula.
If you make a deal to sell someone a four passenger car for only 1000 dollars, and they agree because that's such a steal, they're going to be furious if they show up later and encounter a golf cart.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car
A golf cart fits comfortably in their definition of "car", but it generally isn't referred to or thought of as such. So if you told someone Grand Theft Auto IV was a third person shooter (let's just say they live in a cabin and don't know about GTA), they might be disappointed when they pick it up and find that it's a free-roaming sandbox game where the missions have to be traveled to (and not directly from another mission or through a mission select screen) and aren't all based on shooting your way through constricted environments. Saying it like that makes it sound like they have bad taste, but I'm sure the point I'm trying to make is established, even if the example isn't good.
Basically, it's a bit deceptive and vague to label any game that plays in third person and has a gun and the ability to aim it a third person shooter. Not to mention it's also a bit of a disservice to games that actually have a bit more to them than stereotypical third person shooters. Now, onto a different topic.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I generally feel the same way as SMK about third person shooters, and even first person shooters. The formula is tired. I don't want anyone who does like them to think I'm shitting on them or anything, since so many people seem to be on edge right now, so please don't start getting ready to shit on me until you've reached the end.
For example, Gears of War. It's just a clear cut third person shooter. For me, it's a total yawn-fest. You hide behind cover, pop up to shoot when the locusts show their faces, then proceed. I can't even finish the second one's campaign since the formula just bores me to tears. Sure, there are occasional turrets, and some special enemies, but in general it's just repetitive cover based shooting through tons of slightly different areas (this one has some concrete dividers midway through the field, as well as a burnt out car over closer to the locusts and a flower garden with unusually high walls on the right. And the next one... a large, durable crate on the right here, another flower garden a short run away near the center, some counters for the enemies to hide behind. And so on).
With a game like inFAMOUS or Uncharted, it's a bit more varied, uprooting you and allowing you to jump, throwing climbing into the mix, having more forgiving melee combat and faster running speed. The climbing addition alone makes the environments a lot more varied, as well as the ways you can proceed through them, and there's a lot less focus on cover shooting. Add to that a decent campaign and I can make it through it and enjoy myself. Same thing with Mass Effect 1 and 2. Shooting segments focus on using cover, but there's all the various abilities thrown in, some RPG elements (customizing your equipment, weapons and abilities), and plenty of story-oriented peaceful segments. I'm able to complete that without getting bored. Not to mention that Mass Effect will generally also give you a more entertaining reason to kill people, and more entertaining people to kill.
So that's basically why I'm not into third person shooters. A lot of this stuff changes drastically when you play multiplayer. For example, in Gears' multiplayer, there's more to it than just repeatedly waiting for your enemy to show their face and then shooting it. Human enemies are a lot more dynamic and unpredictable, making fighting them much more challenging and entertaining, and defeating them much more rewarding. Same thing applies to an FPS' multiplayer. And then there's of course plenty of modes featuring plenty of different objectives, and while it's still pretty much all about the shooting, it definitely feels distinctly different, for example, playing Halo's CTF mode and playing Halo's Slayer mode.
This still doesn't do it for me for any substantial amount of time now, though, since at this point I'm a lot more interested in playing through stories than just testing my skill repeatedly with no motivation beyond getting a victory that might get me some superfluous unlock. And I'm not particularly fond of games where you unlock genuinely superior equipment. Makes it even harder for beginners, makes it unbalanced. I understand it's to give motivation to keep playing, but I don't think it makes for a good experience. So yeah, I'm more interested in the story the game tells, which is often times kind of lackluster. I guess this is why I've also been spending a lot of time watching videos and movies lately, particularly series. I get to know characters, get various story arcs, and become invested over the extensive time spent watching. More satisfying for me than just popping some nobody bozo in the head.
And that's exactly why I bought Spec Ops based off SMK's review (it was also only 15 dollars, so not a huge risk). I haven't played a TPS in a substantial amount of time, so hopefully the formula won't be too bad, and I'd love to play a game with a solid story. And not some yawn inducing pixel shit with simplistic gameplay and a "quirky" sense of humor. Every other game seems to have a quirky sense of humor, I'm getting sick of all these games that "don't take themselves seriously". I can't get invested into a game if it's constantly throwing silly shit out there, which is why I hate the Saint's Row games. With it's story essentially worthless and it's gameplay not really noteworthy, I have zero reason to play it. Not every game has to be light-hearted, there's no shortage of those.
So yeah, that's about it. I know I'll get shit for the length here, but one of the main reasons to go to a forum is to read other people's opinions on something, respond to it and share yours. So whatever. And I know that having mentioned the length and that I'll get shit for the length, now the post following mine is sure to be one joking about the length.
Also, just to anyone in general, try to relax. Consider being friendly first, since you may have mistook someone's intent and incorrectly assumed they were insulting you, and it's a shame if something escalates into an argument over that. Good grief. A sizable portion of people on the site make jokes very often, so there's a good chance one is being made and you're just mistaking it for a personal attack. Just relax, this is a thread about games, not politics, nothing hinges on this, and you're not likely to change someone's opinion when so much of it is just personal taste. No need to be all vicious when presenting your perspectives.
Desert Sleepy- Meerkat Maniac
- Posts : 2505
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
Don't feel ashamed, I don't trust the nutritional facts on my candy bar either. For all we know, they could be processed from demonic horse cocks that flap around spewing nonsensical wikipedia page article links which are totally unreliable and should be compensated for by equally as unreliable opinions. If you avoid hard facts and keep ducking around the point you may aswell go play in traffic and believe that speeding objects aren't dangerous.
This argument is bad, and you should all feel bad.
This argument is bad, and you should all feel bad.
ApocalypseVVolf.- Lykanthropos
- Posts : 1333
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
ApocalypseVVolf. wrote:Don't feel ashamed, I don't trust the nutritional facts on my candy bar either. For all we know, they could be processed from demonic horse cocks that flap around spewing nonsensical wikipedia page article links which are totally unreliable and should be compensated for by equally as unreliable opinions. If you avoid hard facts and keep ducking around the point you may aswell go play in traffic and believe that speeding objects aren't dangerous.
This argument is bad, and you should all feel bad.
Well, that's one take on it I suppose. But I explained the logic pretty thoroughly, and the wikipedia page is of course somebody's opinion on what constitutes a third person shooter. Why exactly is their opinion the right one, when it's exactly the opposite of a huge portion of other people's opinions? For it to be the right one, they'd probably have to at least be able to counter the measly couple of things I said.
Desert Sleepy- Meerkat Maniac
- Posts : 2505
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
I'm going to try to use a lame analogy to explain my point again. If you already understand my point, feel free to ignore this post.
- Spoiler:
- You guys ever have an annoying multiple choice test that asks you to select the best answer?
In videogame class it'd go like this:
Q: What genre do the Grand Theft Auto titles belong to?
A: Third person shooter
B: Arcade racer
C: Dating sim
D: Open-world action-adventure
And you might select A, or B, or C, because all of them are applicable. But none of them are the "best" answer. You'd argue to the teacher, "Well, right here in the video game textbook, it says this game is a third person shooter!" to which your teacher might respond, "Yeah, but it also says it has elements of an arcade racer or dating sim. It's much more appropriate and correct to call it an open-world action-adventure because that is a term that more aptly describes the game's content and focus."
On the inverse side...
Q: What genre does the Gears of Wars series of videogames fall under?
A: Third-person shooter
B: Action
C: Strategy
D: Survival horror
And you might select any one of those (though if you select D you get an automatic F). B could be an answer, as the game is an action game. C could be answer, as a level of strategy and thinking is involved (arguably) to plan your next move. However, A is the most appropriate answer, as it best describes the game's focus and content.
No one's really saying wikipedia is wrong, and no one's dodging any facts. It's about how you interpret facts. Yes, GTA has third person shooting elements, but it's not the best way to describe the game, so the game more aptly is NOT a third person shooter.
Also, I freely will link to it at any time, but wikipedia is not "hard hitting facts."
Super Mega King- Staff
- Posts : 2448
DeadApe- Master
- Posts : 6353
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
Okay, I see what you're trying to say here. But let's more justly reform this multiple choice test's answer.
Q: What genre do the Grand Theft Auto titles belong to?
A: It's a Third person arcade racing dating sim with open-world action-adventure. Nothing more, nothing less. The game involves all of these aspects, but should not be described by a single trait. All traits should be respected in sequential order, and no one trait should be singled out so you could call Spec-Ops: The Line a shitty third person shooter as a "joke", but then be confronted by someone who misinterpreted that joke because they did not understand that the buyer of that game was already dissatisfied with third-person shooters and was trying to properly explain his dividing of video games with different aspects. By not calling his third person shooting video game, an actual third person shooting game because he did not want to involve a third person shooting game he was satisfied with alongside one he was dissatisfied with.
Which in turn was incorrect, as Spec-Ops: The Line is a third-person shooter, but should not be related with another game such as Grand Theft Auto (But by only their related in-game elements, such as third person shooting. In Spec-Ops: The Line, you are shooting in a third person perspective with weapons, as you are in Grand Theft Auto. All third-person games have different aspects that alter the third person based shooting experience. Such as arcade racing and dating sims that were mentioned earlier with Grand Theft Auto, to properly combine listed aspects to create an entirely new product of third-person shooting to be judged and divided between other video games (Which would make a good game good, and a bad game bad). There is no third person shooter on it's lonesome, as such a game would require other elements to be diverse from other games and be produced properly. As then we could call Spec-Ops: The Line the same game as Grand Theft Auto IV.
Grand Theft Auto IV is a third person arcade racing dating sim with open-world action-adventure. Whilst Spec-Ops : The Line is also a mix of aspects. But those I cannot list because I have not played it.
They're different shades of grey.
Last edited by ApocalypseVVolf. on 5th January 2013, 5:38 am; edited 1 time in total
ApocalypseVVolf.- Lykanthropos
- Posts : 1333
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
GottemSuper Mega King wrote:I'm going to try to use a lame analogy to explain my point again. If you already understand my point, feel free to ignore this post.
- Spoiler:
You guys ever have an annoying multiple choice test that asks you to select the best answer?
In videogame class it'd go like this:
Q: What genre do the Grand Theft Auto titles belong to?
A: Third person shooter
B: Arcade racer
C: Dating sim
D: Open-world action-adventure
And you might select A, or B, or C, because all of them are applicable. But none of them are the "best" answer. You'd argue to the teacher, "Well, right here in the video game textbook, it says this game is a third person shooter!" to which your teacher might respond, "Yeah, but it also says it has elements of an arcade racer or dating sim. It's much more appropriate and correct to call it an open-world action-adventure because that is a term that more aptly describes the game's content and focus."
On the inverse side...
Q: What genre does the Gears of Wars series of videogames fall under?
A: Third-person shooter
B: Action
C: Strategy
D: Survival horror
And you might select any one of those (though if you select D you get an automatic F). B could be an answer, as the game is an action game. C could be answer, as a level of strategy and thinking is involved (arguably) to plan your next move. However, A is the most appropriate answer, as it best describes the game's focus and content.
No one's really saying wikipedia is wrong, and no one's dodging any facts. It's about how you interpret facts. Yes, GTA has third person shooting elements, but it's not the best way to describe the game, so the game more aptly is NOT a third person shooter.
Also, I freely will link to it at any time, but wikipedia is not "hard hitting facts."
El Mexi Can 915- R.I.P Magicman
- Posts : 1174
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
Super Mega King wrote:I'm going to try to use a lame analogy to explain my point again. If you already understand my point, feel free to ignore this post.
- Spoiler:
You guys ever have an annoying multiple choice test that asks you to select the best answer?
In videogame class it'd go like this:
Q: What genre do the Grand Theft Auto titles belong to?
A: Third person shooter
B: Arcade racer
C: Dating sim
D: Open-world action-adventure
And you might select A, or B, or C, because all of them are applicable. But none of them are the "best" answer. You'd argue to the teacher, "Well, right here in the video game textbook, it says this game is a third person shooter!" to which your teacher might respond, "Yeah, but it also says it has elements of an arcade racer or dating sim. It's much more appropriate and correct to call it an open-world action-adventure because that is a term that more aptly describes the game's content and focus."
On the inverse side...
Q: What genre does the Gears of Wars series of videogames fall under?
A: Third-person shooter
B: Action
C: Strategy
D: Survival horror
And you might select any one of those (though if you select D you get an automatic F). B could be an answer, as the game is an action game. C could be answer, as a level of strategy and thinking is involved (arguably) to plan your next move. However, A is the most appropriate answer, as it best describes the game's focus and content.
No one's really saying wikipedia is wrong, and no one's dodging any facts. It's about how you interpret facts. Yes, GTA has third person shooting elements, but it's not the best way to describe the game, so the game more aptly is NOT a third person shooter.
Also, I freely will link to it at any time, but wikipedia is not "hard hitting facts."
MrKurt2012- Watermelon Head
- Posts : 1525
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
All this arguing over different camera angles?
- Spoiler:
- Yep, seems normal.
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
DeadApe wrote:I think this debate has only gone on for this long because the opposition has a personal problem with the OP. Otherwise I don't understand how you can't see your wrong.
Super Mega King --> Writes one extremely well thought out, completely rational response.
Everybody Else --> "NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE"
If you're referring to me at all, I do not have a problem with Super Mega King. Also, I would suggest that my response was equally as rational as Super's retorts. As opposed to your "NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE" assumption, along with the assumption that I am wrong, as my previous posts have been only trying to improve upon Super's statements, which are in multiple ways correct, therefore you have been calling Super wrong, then? If I offended any of you at all, it's only at the fault of me trying to properly explain my points.
You people may have a problem with me, but I do not let my judgement be clouded by hatred. Additionally, I have no bacon with any of you.
Last edited by ApocalypseVVolf. on 5th January 2013, 6:02 am; edited 1 time in total
ApocalypseVVolf.- Lykanthropos
- Posts : 1333
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
Just to summarize what I said earlier in a way that won't require a text wall, while GTAIV and such could technically be called a third person shooter, this is like calling a golf cart a car. Technically true, but deceptive. Nobody thinks "car" when they think about golf carts.
Desert Sleepy- Meerkat Maniac
- Posts : 2505
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
Apoc I wasn't really directing at you, I barely read yours because it was a run on paragraph. Sorry if it seemed like I aimed that at you (just posted after you is all). I deleted my post anyway because I really want no part in all the shit throwing in this thread.
DeadApe- Master
- Posts : 6353
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
Desert Sleepy wrote:Just to summarize what I said earlier in a way that won't require a text wall, while GTAIV and such could technically be called a third person shooter, this is like calling a golf cart a car. Technically true, but deceptive. Nobody thinks "car" when they think about golf carts.
But they do think transportation.
DeadApe wrote:run on paragraph
I tend to do that a lot.
A lot.
ApocalypseVVolf.- Lykanthropos
- Posts : 1333
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=6410868
MrKurt2012- Watermelon Head
- Posts : 1525
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
A: It's a Third person arcade racing dating sim with open-world action-adventure. Nothing more, nothing less. The game involves all of these aspects, but should not be described by a single trait. All traits should be respected in sequential order, and no one trait should be singled out so you could call Spec-Ops: The Line a shitty third person shooter as a "joke", but then be confronted by someone who misinterpreted that joke because they did not understand that the buyer of that game was already dissatisfied with third-person shooters and was trying to properly explain his dividing of video games with different aspects. By not calling his third person shooting video game, an actual third person shooting game because he did not want to involve a third person shooting game he was satisfied with alongside one he was dissatisfied with.
I feel like you've misinterpreted the events that have happened in this topic. My topic title does not call Spec Ops the Line a shitty game as a joke, it calls all third person shooters shitty games as a joke. And when I was confronted by someone who misinterpreted the joke, in one sentence I simply explained it was a joke. And that was the end of that thread of discussion (until you brought it up again). Also, please note that I DID recommend the game to people, and that at least one person has bought it because of that recommendation.
Your wording gets kind of confusing here but let me just say: at no point did I say that Spec Ops: The Line was not a third person shooter, and at no point did I say that GTA and etc were.
All third-person games have different aspects that alter the third person based shooting experience. Such as arcade racing and dating sims that were mentioned earlier with Grand Theft Auto, to properly combine listed aspects to create an entirely new product of third-person shooting to be judged and divided between other video games (Which would make a good game good, and a bad game bad). There is no third person shooter on it's lonesome, as such a game would require other elements to be diverse from other games and be produced properly. As then we could call Spec-Ops: The Line the same game as Grand Theft Auto IV.
Grand Theft Auto IV is a third person arcade racing dating sim with open-world action-adventure. Whilst Spec-Ops : The Line is also a mix of aspects. But those I cannot list because I have not played it.
They're different shades of grey.
It's actually MUCH simpler than that. Spec Ops: The Line, Gears of War, those kinds of games are all structured around and focused on the shooting. The game can be seen as a chain of different shooting segments strung together. In those games, for the most part, when you are not shooting, you are moving to the next area where you can shoot. That's why it's most appropriate to call those games "third-person shooters."
Grand Theft Auto is much more complicated, as there's no single defining aspect of the game. Or, actually, it's not nearly as complicated... because the way that games like GTA are described is "open world adventure games," but due to its third person shooting elements, it's most aptly described as "open world action adventure."
Let me reiterate: a game's DEFINING genre is the one in which the game is built around. In the "third person shooters" that I have described, these games are literally built around shooting segments --- segments where you engage an enemy by shooting at him. Games that I have described that are not third person shooters do NOT follow this genre.
It comes down to this. When someone asks you what kind of game Gears of War is, you tell them it's a third person shooter. When someone asks you what kind of game Grand Theft Auto is, you tell them it's an open world adventure game.
Super Mega King- Staff
- Posts : 2448
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
ApocalypseVVolf. wrote:Desert Sleepy wrote:Just to summarize what I said earlier in a way that won't require a text wall, while GTAIV and such could technically be called a third person shooter, this is like calling a golf cart a car. Technically true, but deceptive. Nobody thinks "car" when they think about golf carts.
But they do think transportation.
Transportation's real life equivalent in this metaphor is "Games". Yes, both are games, but that's a bit vague when trying to describe a game. If you want to sell GTA IV, you tell people it's a sandbox action-adventure game.
Desert Sleepy- Meerkat Maniac
- Posts : 2505
Re: third person shooters are shitty and if you like them then you're shitty
BTW to support this, if we are all throwing wikipedia pages around like they are objective facts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-person_shooter
"A third person shooter is a game structured around shooting,[1] and in which the player can see the avatar on-screen in a third-person view"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-person_shooter
"A third person shooter is a game structured around shooting,[1] and in which the player can see the avatar on-screen in a third-person view"
DeadApe- Master
- Posts : 6353
Page 3 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Similar topics
» Game list for those "Shitty PCs"
» Your GTAIV Character!
» 3rd Person Training
» They took out 3rd person cagematch
» HeartBeat Sensors in 3rd Person
» Your GTAIV Character!
» 3rd Person Training
» They took out 3rd person cagematch
» HeartBeat Sensors in 3rd Person
Undead-Xbox :: Games :: Games Discussion
Page 3 of 4
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
23rd February 2014, 7:04 pm by eaustinn36
» Eaustinn's Xbox360 Minecraft Server - General Rules / Information
5th November 2013, 8:19 pm by eaustinn36
» Eaustinn's Guide to a better RP (GTA)
5th November 2013, 7:57 pm by eaustinn36
» Posting will be disabled April 15th 2013
2nd November 2013, 1:09 am by eaustinn36
» Brace for it...
14th April 2013, 6:06 pm by Made in Finland
» Day-z official topic
14th April 2013, 2:11 pm by eaustinn36
» Flask & the Quack Crew play browser games!
4th April 2013, 2:44 pm by Meatshield718
» E-HOLE LAUNCHING MIDNIGHT!
3rd April 2013, 8:53 am by KZ Powned
» The Walking Dead (General Thread)
3rd April 2013, 8:49 am by KZ Powned
» Derailed II: An off topic topic blah blah post your naked pictures here.
1st April 2013, 3:48 pm by Made in Finland
» Dead VideoGame Society (Current Game: e-hole.net)
31st March 2013, 11:33 pm by Super Mega King
» GTA 4 Zombies night?
31st March 2013, 10:01 am by snowwolf1996